#41  
Old 25th July 2011, 01:42 AM
pichorra pichorra is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsx! View Post
yeah better performance is irrelevant since project64's system requirements are already so low.
Meh. And about the Overclocking of Nintendo 64 Hardware? it can really help.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 25th July 2011, 08:29 AM
TheRealM TheRealM is offline
Project Supporter
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pichorra View Post
Oh my god. i see a lot of bumps and other things, but let's go where the point is.

A 64-bits of Project64 yes, can load heavy testures and things due the 2^64 memory blah blah... (as someone already told before)

64-bits applications have BETTER performance in some CPU, like CoreIx , Core2quad, Phenon, etc. Also it can solve things like the problem of a GPU with a large amount of memory really bug a 32-bits application, since the 4gb is the RAM and GPU RAM.

Linux have better emulation support due to be an server poited Operational System, so i think it will be "cool" in a linux port of Project64 :P

wut.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 25th July 2011, 08:49 AM
squall_leonhart's Avatar
squall_leonhart squall_leonhart is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,918
Default

You made M go "Wut"

Therefore your opinion is invalid.
__________________

CPU:Intel Xeon x5690 @ 4.2Ghz, Mainboard:Asus Rampage III Extreme, Memory:48GB Corsair Vengeance LP 1600
Video:EVGA Geforce GTX 1080 Founders Edition, NVidia Geforce GTX 1060 Founders Edition
Monitor:ROG PG279Q, BenQ BL2211, Sound:Creative XFI Titanium Fatal1ty Pro
SDD:Crucial MX300 275, Crucial MX300 525, Crucial MX300 1000
HDD:500GB Spinpoint F3, 1TB WD Black, 2TB WD Red, 1TB WD Black
Case:NZXT Phantom 820, PSU:Seasonic X-850, OS:Windows 7 SP1
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 25th July 2011, 11:33 AM
dsx_ dsx_ is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by squall_leonhart View Post
You made M go "Wut"

Therefore your opinion is invalid.
win.

Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 25th July 2011, 06:35 PM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,236
Default

That's not an easy thing to do XD.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 6th November 2011, 07:28 AM
Jennifer1691's Avatar
Jennifer1691 Jennifer1691 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 11
Red face idea

good idea but i don't really agree
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 6th November 2011, 06:53 PM
Natch's Avatar
Natch Natch is offline
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Nowhere near you.
Posts: 5,075
Default

you sound like a spam bawt >.>
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 7th November 2011, 12:29 AM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,236
Default

The only reason I've been collecting 64-bit software is for consistency with my very first test of my own copy of a 80x86-64 Windows OS.
  • Dependency Walker bitches every time you analyze a 32-bit PE image, assuming there is the usual case that it depends on Windows system run-times, which are all 64-bit if that was your install setting.
  • Windows default Task Manager bloats a "*32" at the end of each image name, but it's not like I use that anyway. I'm using a 64-bit task manager XD. There are a couple other ones out there that are way better.
  • Plugins or loading stuff into parent processes. There are no 64-bit N64 plugins I think? Partly because there are no 64-bit N64 emulators, but again, I'd like to shut Dependency Walker up for just the CPU type mismatch error while I'm working on mine. Internet Explorer and FireFox (I think there was some unofficial Google Chrome 64 bits.) 64-bit are about the same damn thing, if not worse, than 32-bit, if you're lucky, but the Java and Flash Player environments need a 64-bit browser to load.
Otherwise it's really just a matter of the type of software. It appears to be completely irrelevant, if not even worse than 32-bit, to have 64-bit MSN clients or the like, since all it does is bulk up file size and relations code with no function-specific-purpose benefit.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 7th November 2011, 12:37 AM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,236
Default

Heh, come to think of it, I'd like to see a 16-bit version XD, one of those older NE Windows executables (as opposed to PE, using 32- or 64-bit) or DOS emulators.

I'll just call it Fuck64, having been named because it was written for DOS, which means you guys are pretty much fucked.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 18th November 2011, 03:55 AM
Radox's Avatar
Radox Radox is offline
Project Supporter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9
Default

Once again, I figure I'll shamelessly advertise the guide I just wrote on editing the PJ64 executable LAA. It's not substitute for having it operate in 64-bits, but it does help with the texture pack thing you mentioned. Sorry if this is completely off-base, heh, just figured I'd throw it out there.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.