Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Games on windows 7 64-bit

Last response: in Video Games
Share
November 15, 2009 12:32:44 PM

What do people think of the new Dell/Alienware Area 51? Sounds ludicrously powerful:

Microsoft Operating System
Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium 64bit- English

1.8GB NVIDIA® GeForce™ GTX260 graphics card

Memory
6GB 1066MHz (3x2GB) Tri Channel Memory

Hard Drive
640 GB Serial ATA non Raid (7200 Rpm)


But would all applications/games etc work on the 64-bit windows?

xmrb2003x

More about : games windows bit

November 15, 2009 2:40:23 PM

I've been gaming on 64 bit since Dec 2007 (Vista, now W7) and have never found any problems at all. You cannot run 32 bit drivers on a 64 bit system, but you can run 32 bit programs no problem so you should be fine. I believe there are one or two games that use a 16 bit installer (which won't work) but then you're going back to a handful released pre-XP.

Do you have a particular list of games/apps you're worried about? Anything modern will work, but if you've got a favourite old school one that you're worried about, post it up and someone's sure to have tried it before.

As for Alienware - why pay extra for pre-built when you can spec and build one yourself with just the right mix of parts for you? :) 
November 15, 2009 3:17:54 PM

xmrb2003x said:
What do people think of the new Dell/Alienware Area 51? Sounds ludicrously powerful:

Microsoft Operating System
Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium 64bit- English

1.8GB NVIDIA® GeForce™ GTX260 graphics card

Memory
6GB 1066MHz (3x2GB) Tri Channel Memory

Hard Drive
640 GB Serial ATA non Raid (7200 Rpm)


But would all applications/games etc work on the 64-bit windows?

Ludicrously powerful? Hardly. The only thing ludicrous about it is the price and pairing 1.8 GB's of ram with the GTX 260.


Confused Stu doesn't seem so confused about 64 bit / 31 bit compatibility though.
Related resources
November 16, 2009 9:01:59 AM

It should work fine but some of the really old programs might not be compatible.
November 16, 2009 11:41:41 AM

I have problems playing battlefield series of games as punk buster doesn't run on windows 7. Could be a configuration problem, but I just switch over to my xp partition to play in that case.
November 16, 2009 1:59:42 PM

I have been using Win7 64bit since the RC hit the street, pretty much all my main computer does is game and I have had 0 issues with it so far. I also run win 7 64bit RC on my laptop and game and work with it and have also seen no problems. I did have some audio driver issus with my laptop but 15 minutes on the net forum crawling solved my issues.

Win 7 is a solid OS.

As for buying a Alienware I tend to agree you will get more bang for your buck building your own. However don't be afraid of getting one if you have the money. I used to build my own but recently it has become more convient to spec it and have it delievered to my door in a week all done and fully covered under a waranty. I have the money to buy whatever I want but not the time to put it together. My last purchase was a Dell XPS super desktop it is very well put together and runs flawlessely, no complaints.
November 16, 2009 3:13:23 PM

Went from XP 32 to Vista 64 to Win7 64 RC and so far its been playing all the games I've installed ever since, there are only 2 games I own that have issues. One is BF2, which uppon installation, I get a prompt that its not compatible with Win7, and Aion, which has a memory leak issue that NC refuses to fix. I can live w/o playing BF2 since I have better FPS games installed (TF2, CoD4, CoDWoW) but for Aion, having a sub and not able to play w/o constant C2D is inexcusable and calls for instant cancelation of subs. Other than those 2 issues, Win7 is a very good and stable OS on my system. Will buy licence when RC expires for sure.
November 18, 2009 3:57:03 PM

Thx guys that sounds very promising. I suppose you can't expect all old software to work.

I must admit I'm pretty out of touch with pc hardware these days, I can't be bothered keeping up lol. But I know it's alot more tricky to build your own pc nowadays with power supplies, 12v rails etc. , plus all the usual memory types and motherboards I wouldn't fancy taking it on. So I guess I have to plump for a prebuilt one.

Just wondered though why you think the alienware isn't that powerful? I'm not sure of the actual processor speed but I assume they would have the i7, I need to check with them the exact specs (not showing on Dell's site for some reason). I'm sure it's the i7 and the graphics card which bump up the price mainly.

xmrb2003x
November 18, 2009 4:01:09 PM

"Ludicrously powerful? Hardly. The only thing ludicrous about it is the price and pairing 1.8 GB's of ram with the GTX 260".

Sorry what do you mean by that, why is that a bad thing (me having a duh moment lol)?

xmrb2003x
November 18, 2009 7:34:47 PM

The GTX260 is a decent card (mid range these days) but will never use 1.8 GB's in any game. The default capacity of 768 MB's is far more efficient and will run neck and neck with the 1.8 GB model.

The price comment is simply that Alienware is notorious for having a very poor price to performance ratio. You can build a PC with the same specs for typically a grand or two less than they sell it for.
November 20, 2009 12:59:21 PM

The GTX260 is overpriced and under powered. Not taking away from what is (a nice card) but personally I would not buy one.

The main thing with buying a prebuilt system is the quality of components inside. Manufacturers do not make a lot of money per PC when they sell them if they use above mid-grade parts. Meaning, you are getting a GTX260, but the one you will get will be whichever one Dell can get the best deal on--they are not spending hours pricing out each component to find you the absolute best card you can to fit your budget.

As TheViper said, you could select components and build your own machine for *much* less money than from a manufacturer. If you are unsure about parts, just post up in the homebuilt systems forum for advice, you will have at least 2 responses by the end of the day--I assure you.

Another note about the 1.8Gb card--typically card manufacturers will slap an extra RAM chip on the card and sell it for more because it will sell for more. You follow? It isn't necessary (and often time the card with less memory will actually perform faster). It is mostly just to sell more cards, because "bigger is better" seems to apply to everything in the mind of the consumer.

The machine is not ludicrously powerful, it is rather "middle of the road"...or at least the specs you listed were. Could you give some more information on the rest of the system? I suspect the card is of cheap origin, as will be the motherboard, and power supply.

I have been gaming on x64 platforms for quite some time (WinXP Pro 64, Vista Ultimate 64, and now Win7 Ultimate 64) and the only "issues" I have ever had were based on Steam having poor support for launching games. Until Steam's more recent updates I had some issues launching games in 1920x1080 resolution--but it has since been fixed. If you use Steam for gaming (www.steampowered.com) you know what I'm talking about, lol, they aren't always known for having their ducks in a row.

Hope some of this helps.

Cheers!
November 22, 2009 11:06:23 AM

I have had absolutely no problem playing games on Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit and I have installed about 15-20 different ones. The only problem was getting drivers to work before the official release but now I have very few general problems. Referring to the GTX 260, I own one and love it! When I bought it it was only about $15 more than an ATI 4650 and I love all the support NVIDIA hasL: accelerated graphics in Adobe CS4.

As far as that Alienware...I am disappointed in the price, obviously. It's also ridiculously ugly. Even if I had the money to waste on that I certainly would not. Going along with what dirtdiver said, I would much rather build my own for probably 1/3 the price and pick exactly what parts I want for exactly how much I want. That way, through reviews and such, I know what to expect from each individual part and I can pimp it up where I want it pimped up. I don't need 12GB of ram (have 4GB at 2000Mhz instead of their 1066) and I wanted a much better audio card than they offer for audio recording and production. Also......Intel Core i7 = awesome yet overpriced (funny trend). I own the i5 and it is amazing!!!!! And paying a few hundred more to have it overclocked?!?! I gotta admit I laughed out loud when I read that.

I think if anyone is going to get something that powerful, know what they're doing, and use it to its full potential, they should customize their own. Otherwise go for it!
November 23, 2009 11:04:46 AM

B-rad said:
I think if anyone is going to get something that powerful, know what they're doing, and use it to its full potential, they should customize their own. Otherwise go for it!


QFT - This should be the web site banner, lol.

(You use the i5, you do audio production--why not get the i7 for 80 or 90 more and get hyperthreading? Might help with encoding etc :sol:  )

I also very much agree with the 4 gigs of 2000mhz over 12 gigs of 1066mhz, that is something I will never understand. Why do manufacturers still think "more is better"??? Especially in a gaming PC, there is little need for more than 4 gigs. I prefer high speed memory rather than just simply having more cheap memory. The same could probably be said for hard drives as well...I would rather have a smaller (640gig) faster hard drive than a 1TB+ slower drive that I have no idea which model it actually is.
December 14, 2009 11:14:24 AM

Well it is kind of too late now. I would be happy to get more power but buying what I did was a big leap for me. Came from an Acer TravelMate 2300. Hahaha. Previous ventures of mine indicated I would always go for an AMD dual-core because they are cheaper and almost as good as Intel, but when it finally came down to it, I wanted a PC that would really last (both in functionality and power/speed) and not be uselessly weak in 5 years. Also, having a mechanical hard drive is a HUGE bog-down for my system - 5.9 in windows 7 rating compared to avg 7.5 of the rest of my machine. I would go for RAID but I think I may just jump to solid-state perhaps in a few months when prices drop a bit more. Must save up some money anyway.

December 14, 2009 12:21:52 PM

Solid state drives are certainly the definition of speed! Price/performance hasn't really caught up with their speed and "cool" factor yet...I would hold off a bit (unless you intend to use it as a boot drive only). You can find a 64-120 gig SSD for under $200. Don't expect it to be-all end-all, but it will certainly be a very nice boot drive and store a few programs for you :) 
December 14, 2009 7:17:45 PM

Yeah I am definitely going to wait. A couple days ago i read a long article somewhere where the three different storage technologies were tested in many different applications and tests etc. It gave tons of info about how deleting something does not really delete it in a solid-state, just marks the sector as writeable. So, it takes much longer to write over a sector like that (especially with Samsung's storage technology). Their testing was done with all the drives at that "full" state to capitalize on the real-world effect it had. Conclusion was that the Intel storage tech. was the most consistent throughout all the tests, with Samsung as #2, and Indilinx as #3 only because they haven't really finalize their wipe tool. Article was not brand new but I learned a lot.

I though about getting a small boot drive like that but i think I will need at least 160GB to put the important stuff on. It will be a while though.
December 14, 2009 7:39:43 PM

Iam running windows 7 64 and iam having problems with Crysis,i cannot apply any settings without it crashing.Ive not really had any other problems other than Dirt 2 not running that will in crossfire,it seems to run better on a single card,iam running two 4870`s so i know that the cards are up to it,but i think thats more to do with crossfire that windows 7. As for Alienware,i have to agree with most on here,highly over priced,your better off building your own.
May 25, 2010 3:46:17 AM

Confused Stu said:
I've been gaming on 64 bit since Dec 2007 (Vista, now W7) and have never found any problems at all. You cannot run 32 bit drivers on a 64 bit system, but you can run 32 bit programs no problem so you should be fine. I believe there are one or two games that use a 16 bit installer (which won't work) but then you're going back to a handful released pre-XP.

Do you have a particular list of games/apps you're worried about? Anything modern will work, but if you've got a favourite old school one that you're worried about, post it up and someone's sure to have tried it before.

As for Alienware - why pay extra for pre-built when you can spec and build one yourself with just the right mix of parts for you? :) 


If that is true, then why I can't install Far Cry PC-CD Rom(Full game) 32-bit into my new Laptop ASUS G73JH with Windows 7 64-bit OS? Any suggestions?
June 6, 2011 10:50:42 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
!