Which you going to run it on and why? Will it run better in 64 bits do you think? I have 4 gb so that means I would gain about .5 gb more memory under 64 bit. I have both OS's installed.

I think I'll try out 64 bit but I hope there are some optimizations for that.

I have a 64bit Win7 installed, so I'll run it on that. I hope it won't run (much) slower than in a 32-bit system.

I just bought 7 ultimate 64 the other day and am loving it, idk why i didn't get it sooner.

Dude you should get it.

I upgraded my computer from 32 bit win XP to 64 bit win 7 about 3 weeks ago(not as hard as I thought it would be :D).I must say what a huge improvement :eek:.

I've been playing Rise of Mankind-A New Dawn for a while and all I can say is that I hope Civ V runs as good as that mod does now that I am in 64 bit win 7.

I (unfortunately) still have Vista 64. I can assure you that the extra few GBs help immensely, in my experience. Especially with things like video editing and compression.

I don't understand why some people believe that 64-bit slows down programs. I think the fault lies in the RAM, not the addressing system. Having DDR3 memory does add a bit of latency... (Even some DDR2 modules are fairly slow too.)

EDIT: I meant I unfortunately still have Vista. I love 64-bit.

If you are getting a new computer, and it's not 64bit, you are wasting your money.

Win 7 64bit.

So...Win7 32bit won't run CiV?

It makes little sense to run a 32 bit OS if your hardware is capable of doing x64 (and it's rare to find hardware nowadays that can't). You don't lose anything, and you gain a lot if the software you are using is designed for 64 bit systems. It isn't like 5-6 years ago when 64 bit Windows was a pain to deal with because no manufacturer had the drivers for it.

So, in short, there's no reason NOT to nowadays.

So...Win7 32bit won't run CiV?

Yes, it will run perfectly on Win 7 32bit provided your hardware and drivers are sufficient.

Which you going to run it on and why? Will it run better in 64 bits do you think? I have 4 gb so that means I would gain about .5 gb more memory under 64 bit. I have both OS's installed.

You will need a 64-bit CPU firstly. I would definitely buy the 64-bit version for sure. I wouldn't even mess with 32-bit as it is going slowly out the door, and 64-bit windows will run most all 32-bit programs (as long as they have any needed 64-bit drivers updated. not many programs need drivers though)

also, you may want to upgrade memory and you won't be able to use it in 32-bit windows. then you'll need to rebuy windows again.

I think I'll try out 64 bit but I hope there are some optimizations for that.

Yes, Civilization V has both 64-bit and 32-bit versions included in the game. I would imagine the 64-bit would take better advantage of multi-threading and should give a little performance boost over 32-bit.

also, DX10.1 and DX11 should also give better performance as they support mutli-threading on the video card (GPU)

also, Microsoft have improved their Windows Hardware Quality Labs (WHQL) certifications to require all drivers to have 32-bit, as well as, 64-bit support.

Yes, Civilization V has both 64-bit and 32-bit versions included in the game.

No, it doesn't. There's no 64 bit client at release.

I suspect there will never be one.

No, it doesn't. There's no 64 bit client at release.

I suspect there will never be one.

Its already been stated that they are looking into releasing one even though it won't happen at release.

Its already been stated that they are looking into releasing one even though it won't happen at release.

I know what they've stated, I just don't think it's going to happen.

64-bit gives a 32-bit program that is large address aware (like Civ 4 BTS and I am sure Civ 5 will be) the full 4 GB that is addressable.

This is why I recommend Win 7 x64 for my Mod. Anything less and it is very hard to play it.

I know what they've stated, I just don't think it's going to happen.

true story

Its already been stated that they are looking into releasing one even though it won't happen at release.

There is little financial incentive to bother with the creation of a 64bit client. Most users still use a 32bit platform due to unawarness of the capabilities of contemporary hardware / software and the limitations of that platform or simply due to inability to afford an upgrade to what they're using.

I would wager that a great deal of Civilization players actually use less powerful hardware than what one would consider 'bleeding edge.' So once development on the core client is complete I would place money on the developer moving on to bug fixes, expansions or DLC content.

I want a 64bit client as well. I think that should be the new standard for software in general, particularly in gaming, but I have to agree with others who say it isn't something we're likely to see given the financial realities of the industry.

Its already been stated that they are looking into releasing one even though it won't happen at release.

Yeah, they'll probably "look into it" for several years before finally announcing it's not going to happen. ;)

Yeah, they'll probably "look into it" for several years before finally announcing it's not going to happen. ;)

This sux. I read early this summer that 64-bit would be supported. I hope they do, but if it's anything like Real Player back when XP 64-bit was in beta, well it's still not happening, although they still keep saying they are working on it, right! It's been over 5 years and three operating systems, and still no 64-bit support. and it's just a music player.

at least they ported a DX9 version and multi-threaded the game, but it should be fairly easy to port as it is much more structured and modularized. But it will take lots of money, and if there isn't a big improvement on playability, it may not go through.

But, I agree on that if 64-bit isn't supported from the get-go, then it's not likely to support it at all.

........ Most users still use a 32bit platform due to unawarness of the capabilities of contemporary hardware / software and the limitations of that platform or simply due to inability to afford an upgrade to what they're using...........

Stats from Steam:

OS:
Windows XP 32 bit 31.49%
Windows 7 64 bit 29.62%
Windows Vista 32 bit 13.22%
Windows 7 12.82%
Windows Vista 64 bit 6.81%
MacOS 10.6.3 64 bit 4.13%
MacOS 10.5.8 64 bit 0.65%
Windows XP 64 bit 0.59%
Windows 2003 64 bit 0.28%
MacOS 10.6.4 64 bit 0.22%
Other 0.17%

Total 42.3% of Steam users currently have 64bit OS and that number is growing.

By far the most people use whatever OS they get together with their computer. Looking at myself, I only actually bought two Windows versions: 3.0 (yes, .0, not .1) and W7 x64. All other versions came bundled with new machines (and re-used on newer boxes that weren't pre-built). It seems that a large majority of computers are now sold with W7 x64, so it's just a matter of time until that will be the relevant standard for gaming machines. Vista could have sped this up, but it was so bad that it really delayed things. :)

Most users still use a 32bit platform due to unawarness of the capabilities of contemporary hardware / software and the limitations of that platform or simply due to inability to afford an upgrade to what they're using.



Stats from Steam:

OS:
Windows XP 32 bit 31.49%
Windows 7 64 bit 29.62%
Windows Vista 32 bit 13.22%
Windows 7 12.82%
Windows Vista 64 bit 6.81%
MacOS 10.6.3 64 bit 4.13%
MacOS 10.5.8 64 bit 0.65%
Windows XP 64 bit 0.59%
Windows 2003 64 bit 0.28%
MacOS 10.6.4 64 bit 0.22%
Other 0.17%

Total 42.3% of Steam users currently have 64bit OS and that number is growing.

Auncien, 42% is pretty high (almost a full half) so I would not eliminate the possibility.

Most of the time there's little reason to use 32-bit if you have 64-bit capable hardware (and the only current computers that don't have 64-bit capable hardware are netbooks), but not always. For example, 64-bit Windows requires drivers to be signed. There are some stubborn developers (such as TI) that don't bother to get their drivers signed. Additionally, I have Sandboxie, and the 64-bit version is less secure because of Microsoft's Kernel protection (which can be circumvented easily, but the Sandboxie developer won't do it because it would make him a bad guy). 64-bit Sandboxie can't guarantee that a sandboxed process is truly isolated but 32-bit Sandboxie can.

64 Bit is the future, so it would be foolish not to get it.