Vista 64Bit

[(FPC) Bacon 0]

Hi to all,

I'm getting a new pc soon but i'm wondering if it will played on vista 64Bit or would i be better sticking to 32Bit to play the game?

Bacon

[Royceybaby 0]

Well unless it's been fixed recently, there is a problem with ATI 64bit Vista drivers.

There is a thread in this forum "Vista Black Load Screen"

My friend is successfully running Vista64 and a Nvidia7600GT with no graphical glitches, so if you have an Nvidia Graphic Card you may be ok.

Hope that helps,

Royce

[(FPC) Bacon 0]

Thanks i will be getting nvidia cards 8800gts in SLI mode.

Bacon

[InsaneDruid 0]

Arma ist quite the only game that has massive (and I mean massive) problems with vista.

I have Vista64Bit and XP64bit (for I have 4Gigs Ram, so a 32Bit OS would not fit anymore), and ARMA is unplayable under Vista.

Answer from the devs and the official forums "ARMA is not designed for vista" (whell thats true for all the other, older games, too, that don't bitch that much under vista).

You will get stuttering up to a complete stand still+Crash after about 10 mins, unless you are limiting memory usage to something under 512MB (-maxmem command), still there is (less frequent) stuttering remaining.

Last Patch did not work at all under Vista(64), unless Sony released a exe with a downgraded "copy protection" (i would call it "play protection and harassment for legal buyers and a lough for copykids").

(sys is a 3GHz C2D, 4Gigs PC800 Ram, 8800GTS)

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Arma ist quite the only game that has massive (and I mean massive) problems with vista.

That´s utter nonsense. There is a huge list of games that are not running with Vista or crash or have deficits of any kind. Be it Far Cry, BF 1942, AOE 3, CS Source, Ghost Recon AW, Gothic 3, Prey, etc...

Drivers seem to be a big issue with Vista and Starforce 3 does actually kill Vista unpatched.

Pointing fingers on BIS WHO ACTUALLY STATED MANY TIMES that Arma is not supported by Vista is just stupid.

Vista has so many flaws and bugs and is so unsupported by driver manufacturers at this point that you should be running off to blame MS and the manufacturers of your videocard or soundboard, but not developers who stated from the beginning that Arman is not Vista-compatible.

There are guys here who have Vista and run Arma perfectly, so maybe you´d be better served by better drivers for your hardware in question or simply create an XP partition for stability gaimg until Vista gets supported and/or fixed by MS and driver manufacturers.

[memnoch 0]

I'm going out on a limb here suggesting he meant "isn't" and not "ist", which isn't even a word or at least an English one. In that case he's quite right.

[sobrek 0]

Thanks i will be getting nvidia cards 8800gts in SLI mode.

Bacon

I have a single 8800GTS and have massive problems running ArmA under Vista 64bit excatly as InsaneDruid said.

Thats why I still have a XP partition.

Also, that Vista shows about 10% less performance on my machine.

[SWAT_BigBear 0]

Hi to all,

I'm getting a new pc soon but i'm wondering if it will played on vista 64Bit or would i be better sticking to 32Bit to play the game?

Bacon

Yes to 64bit (not everyone can say this though).

I have to use the -maxmem=512 tweak.

SLI is really nice, but not stable, so I have it disabled in it's profile for now.

If you get the upgrade version of Vista Ulimate64, it should also come with the 32bit cd....so you can try both.

[(FPC) Bacon 0]

Will prob have dual boot XP and Vista 64.

Bacon

[silent knight 0]

My system, as assembled from new by me, consists of Vista premium (64), abit AB9 motherboard, gainward 8800 gts 320 gold sample, e6600 cpu (running at 2.8ghz) 320 gb hard drive and 2gb ram.

Ive updated all drivers, running all Arma updates, using the 'maxim mem = 512' fix, been conservative with my video settings; res@1400x900 (monitors natural res, 19" WS), most settings at normal or high (half n half) and i can get 40 -50 FPS quite happily, for hours on end. it might drop to 30 on big on open maps, but it barely jdders and im ok with it. cant deny it took at bit sifting through this forum to find fixes n tips, but arma quite happily runs on vista in my eyes. it just needs a little patience.

And on a side note, im very happy with vista, as are all my previous games, including BF2142. i wouldnt go back to XP, ever.

Im sure that helped in no way what so ever

[frogg 0]

I have Vista64Bit and XP64bit (for I have 4Gigs Ram, so a 32Bit OS would not fit anymore), and ARMA is unplayable under Vista.

Uhhh, you have applications that use more than 2gb memory?

You running a terminal server or something? lol

The 4gb "limit" (and I use the term loosely) generally doesn't apply to home (non-server) PC's.

Quote[/b] ]In the 32-bit Windows world, each application has its own “virtual†4GB memory space. (This means that each application functions as if it has a flat 4GB of memory, and the system's memory manager keeps track of memory mapping, which applications are using which memory, page file management, and so on.)

This 4GB space is evenly divided into two parts, with 2GB dedicated for kernel usage, and 2GB left for application usage. Each application gets its own 2GB, but all applications have to share the same 2GB kernel space.

This can cause problems in Terminal Server environments. On Terminal Servers with a lot of users running a lot of applications, quite a bit of information from all the users has to be crammed into the shared 2GB of kernel memory. In fact, this is why no Windows 2000-based Terminal Server can support more than about 200 users—the 2GB of kernel memory gets full—even if the server has 16GB of memory and eight 3GHz processors. This is simply an architectural limitation of 32-bit Windows.

Source - This article explains it in more detail