Guild Wars 2

Nowadays most PC’s are 64 bit why are you ignoring this?
I will never buy the Expansion without the 64 bit client!!

Because 32 bit can run on 64 bit.
But 64 bit game cannot run at all on 32 bit windows.
So as long they do not need more than 2-4 GB memory, why choose the extra work of having to maintain two version of the same game.

Because a proper 64bit client will run much better on a 64bit machine and why are you even arguing this when this is standard for almost all games now.

Their new target audience runs the game on toasters and doesn’t need a good computer to stare at the latest gemstore nonsense.

At this point I don’t expect DX11 or 12, or 64bit.

I’m not an IT expert, but maybe it is because of the age.
Remember Guild Wars 2 is running an over 10 years old engine that as only been modyfied…maybe it is simply incapable to do this? (Pls correct me if I’m talking bs ^^")

It will be hard for them to make such changes, but worth it for Guild Wars 2 longevity.

Sir Meta.3402:

Because 32 bit can run on 64 bit.
But 64 bit game cannot run at all on 32 bit windows.
So as long they do not need more than 2-4 GB memory, why choose the extra work of having to maintain two version of the same game.

cuz of native multithreading and better technology
u cant call ur pc a gaming pc if u have a 32 bit system

The following changes need to happen to GW2 for it to be ‘competitive’ down the road

1. 64bit client support so that the application can poll more then 3.25GB of ram
2. API upgrade to support multithreaded rendering
3. better GPU vRAM usage utilization
4. more vector math done at the GPU rather then CPU (AKA Character model limit settings)

Until these things are done, the game is going to be in 2010. No matter how ‘pretty’ it looks. And as new content gets added its just going to keep on getting slower and slower.

sirsquishy.8531:

The following changes need to happen to GW2 for it to be ‘competitive’ down the road

1. 64bit client support so that the application can poll more then 3.25GB of ram
2. API upgrade to support multithreaded rendering
3. better GPU vRAM usage utilization
4. more vector math done at the GPU rather then CPU (AKA Character model limit settings)

Until these things are done, the game is going to be in 2010. No matter how ‘pretty’ it looks. And as new content gets added its just going to keep on getting slower and slower.

Agree with all those things for the time being ram speed seem to be a bandaid solution for fps even more so than cpu clockspeed.

It probably won’t happen until GW3.. Too many people hanging onto dinosaur computers, same reason it took OS’s so long. Catering to the weakest link.

Extreme.8350:

sirsquishy.8531:

The following changes need to happen to GW2 for it to be ‘competitive’ down the road

1. 64bit client support so that the application can poll more then 3.25GB of ram
2. API upgrade to support multithreaded rendering
3. better GPU vRAM usage utilization
4. more vector math done at the GPU rather then CPU (AKA Character model limit settings)

Until these things are done, the game is going to be in 2010. No matter how ‘pretty’ it looks. And as new content gets added its just going to keep on getting slower and slower.

Agree with all those things for the time being ram speed seem to be a bandaid solution for fps even more so than cpu clockspeed.

RAM Speeds (Lowest CL on the highest speed possible for your OC)
Highest Single core IPC (4790K stock is the FASTEST cpu, period)
Fastest PCIE bridge (Version 3)

Is what makes FPS faster

Hammersmash Ureface.2650:

It probably won’t happen until GW3.. Too many people hanging onto dinosaur computers, same reason it took OS’s so long. Catering to the weakest link.

yea, your reasoning is flawed.

1. They do not need to ‘dump’ the 32bit client to introduce a 64bit client
2. Same goes for the API, Going DX12 does not have to remove support for DX9

its about $$$ and nothing else.

sirsquishy.8531:

Extreme.8350:

sirsquishy.8531:

The following changes need to happen to GW2 for it to be ‘competitive’ down the road

1. 64bit client support so that the application can poll more then 3.25GB of ram
2. API upgrade to support multithreaded rendering
3. better GPU vRAM usage utilization
4. more vector math done at the GPU rather then CPU (AKA Character model limit settings)

Until these things are done, the game is going to be in 2010. No matter how ‘pretty’ it looks. And as new content gets added its just going to keep on getting slower and slower.

Agree with all those things for the time being ram speed seem to be a bandaid solution for fps even more so than cpu clockspeed.

RAM Speeds (Lowest CL on the highest speed possible for your OC)
Highest Single core IPC (4790K stock is the FASTEST cpu, period)
Fastest PCIE bridge (Version 3)

Is what makes FPS faster

I upgraded from 12 to 24gb ram about 4 months ago and i got a huge fps boost.
It dosent use more than 3gb ram but the ram speed in trippel channel did help.
Maybe not on better chipsets but i can play this on high settings with 80-120 fps.

Extreme.8350:

sirsquishy.8531:

Extreme.8350:

sirsquishy.8531:

The following changes need to happen to GW2 for it to be ‘competitive’ down the road

1. 64bit client support so that the application can poll more then 3.25GB of ram
2. API upgrade to support multithreaded rendering
3. better GPU vRAM usage utilization
4. more vector math done at the GPU rather then CPU (AKA Character model limit settings)

Until these things are done, the game is going to be in 2010. No matter how ‘pretty’ it looks. And as new content gets added its just going to keep on getting slower and slower.

Agree with all those things for the time being ram speed seem to be a bandaid solution for fps even more so than cpu clockspeed.

RAM Speeds (Lowest CL on the highest speed possible for your OC)
Highest Single core IPC (4790K stock is the FASTEST cpu, period)
Fastest PCIE bridge (Version 3)

Is what makes FPS faster

I upgraded from 12 to 24gb ram about 4 months ago and i got a huge fps boost.
It dosent use more than 3gb ram but the ram speed in trippel channel did help.
Maybe not on better chipsets but i can play this on high settings with 80-120 fps.

Speed Increase from a RAM upgrade will depend on the old Memory configuration.

Going from Dual channel to Triple channel is really a 8-18% increase depending on the application though. More so its the size of each DIMM. 12GB could be a 8GB and 4GB chip, meaning that only 4GB was in Dual channel while the last 4GB on that 8GB module is in single channel mode. That can account for the performance increase.

Also going from a higher CAS Latency to a smaller CL will do more as well. Such as dropping from CL11 down to CL9 will give a pretty decent speed increase. On top of the channel change as well.

so tons of reasons why the memory upgrade could help.

Well I don’t buy the age excuse WOW is old too and has a 64 bit option and WOW is Fisher Price graphics, this game needs updating far worse than WOW did.

Hey Sir Squishy How is your ram increasing your FPS so much? Video is the hog, are you using onboard graphics?
I can see memory decreasing load times like an SSD drive but not video performance.

64bit handles larger data sets, say ray tracing or monstrous numbers of combatants, many times more efficiently. Thus a 64 bit game is able to have much bigger battles with better graphics regardless of the GPU.

Tkosh.1923:

Well I don’t buy the age excuse WOW is old too and has a 64 bit option and WOW is Fisher Price graphics, this game needs updating far worse than WOW did.

Yet GW2 is a far more beautiful game than WoW could ever hope to be.

Still, engine upgrade is inevitable for the longevity of the game, plus the performance gains from DX12 and 64Bit system would be much appreciated by a lot for people.

sirsquishy.8531:

RAM Speeds (Lowest CL on the highest speed possible for your OC)
Highest Single core IPC (4790K stock is the FASTEST cpu, period)
Fastest PCIE bridge (Version 3)

Is what makes FPS faster

OT: none of this will give you a noticeable performance boost in real world usage.
RAM never limits anything graphic wise.
Even the 4 year old 2xxx Intels deliver enough performance. It’s always the GPU power that limits first.
There is no difference between pcie 2.0 and 3.0 because you never have such a huge data transfer in simple games. 2.0 bandwidth is more than enough not to limit your fps.

Don’t spend too much money on fancy CPU or RAM. It’s still the GPU you wanna care about most.

“I’m not an IT expert, but maybe it is because of the age.
Remember Guild Wars 2 is running an over 10 years old engine that as only been modyfied…maybe it is simply incapable to do this? (Pls correct me if I’m talking bs ^^”)"

Order date: 10/5/2012
That is my PREORDER 79$ purchase date so this game is only 3 years old not ten. So WOW is much much older and was updated so many times in so many ways. And WOW will run on a toaster this game needs an I3 Duo core and I bet that cpu is under tremendous strain to run it.

Tkosh.1923:

“I’m not an IT expert, but maybe it is because of the age.
Remember Guild Wars 2 is running an over 10 years old engine that as only been modyfied…maybe it is simply incapable to do this? (Pls correct me if I’m talking bs ^^”)"

Order date: 10/5/2012
That is my PREORDER 79$ purchase date so this game is only 3 years old not ten. So WOW is much much older and was updated so many times in so many ways. And WOW will run on a toaster this game needs an I3 Duo core and I bet that cpu is under tremendous strain to run it.

Engine age is not the same as the age of the game. ArenaNet started develop Guild Wars 2 between Nightfall and Eye of the North (https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Guild_Wars_2 – “It has been in development since 2006”). So engine have more or less 9 years.

Entenkommando.5208:

sirsquishy.8531:

RAM Speeds (Lowest CL on the highest speed possible for your OC)
Highest Single core IPC (4790K stock is the FASTEST cpu, period)
Fastest PCIE bridge (Version 3)

Is what makes FPS faster

OT: none of this will give you a noticeable performance boost in real world usage.
RAM never limits anything graphic wise.
Even the 4 year old 2xxx Intels deliver enough performance. It’s always the GPU power that limits first.
There is no difference between pcie 2.0 and 3.0 because you never have such a huge data transfer in simple games. 2.0 bandwidth is more than enough not to limit your fps.

Don’t spend too much money on fancy CPU or RAM. It’s still the GPU you wanna care about most.

u call me a idiot? im speaking from exp i upgraded
from 3×4gb to 6×4gb 8cas trippel channel ram and the FPS boost in gw2 was significant
u know theory and practise dosent always add up
about datatransfer i did run a memory testing tool from bios a while ago
it shows my memory transfer rate is 9,6mb/s
its quite possible “this simple game” could use that.

More available RAM for the game should mean more graphic assets that aren’t in the card’s memory can be cached in system memory rather than needing to be fetched off the disk. Also if you haven’t noticed, the number of players around you raises the amount of memory being used.

Of all the things promised to be in Guild Wars 2 when it shipped; an x64 client was not one of them. What was promised, but we still don’t have nor will ANet even acknowledge, is DX10 support.
I was there when she (Gaile Gray) was asked about both DX 10 and a 64 bit client. She confirmed that Guild Wars 2 would support DX10, but she did not know anything about if there was going to be a 64 bit client.
It irks me no end that we are stuck with DX9c and even worse that we are stuck with a 32 bit (x86) client that won’t even distribute itself (some what) evenly across all available cores.. Shoot, even Guild Wars would take advantage of multi-core systems better than Guild Wars 2 does.

Entenkommando.5208:

sirsquishy.8531:

RAM Speeds (Lowest CL on the highest speed possible for your OC)
Highest Single core IPC (4790K stock is the FASTEST cpu, period)
Fastest PCIE bridge (Version 3)

Is what makes FPS faster

OT: none of this will give you a noticeable performance boost in real world usage.
RAM never limits anything graphic wise.
Even the 4 year old 2xxx Intels deliver enough performance. It’s always the GPU power that limits first.
There is no difference between pcie 2.0 and 3.0 because you never have such a huge data transfer in simple games. 2.0 bandwidth is more than enough not to limit your fps.

Don’t spend too much money on fancy CPU or RAM. It’s still the GPU you wanna care about most.

Sorry, you are just wrong.

for GW2 its CPU that limits the performance. GW2 will run on a GTX480 or a HD7790 at 1080P and yield 80-110FPS easily if the CPU has fast enough IPC per core.

Kendra Nightwind.8734:

Of all the things promised to be in Guild Wars 2 when it shipped; an x64 client was not one of them. What was promised, but we still don’t have nor will ANet even acknowledge, is DX10 support.
I was there when she (Gaile Gray) was asked about both DX 10 and a 64 bit client. She confirmed that Guild Wars 2 would support DX10, but she did not know anything about if there was going to be a 64 bit client.
It irks me no end that we are stuck with DX9c and even worse that we are stuck with a 32 bit (x86) client that won’t even distribute itself (some what) evenly across all available cores.. Shoot, even Guild Wars would take advantage of multi-core systems better than Guild Wars 2 does.

Today I would vote for DX12. Win10 is almost here and will be a free upgrade for most of the users here (Unless you are still on XP/Vista), and that brings DX12 support to the table. And cards that run DX10 and 11 can support a lot of DX12. Really they just need to multithread the rendering and do more of the vector math in the GPU for character dynamic content(that is what kills the CPU for performance when you are near a zerg) and that would ‘fix’ most of the issues with the engine. That is until they do another series of Bolt-ons lol

Tkosh.1923:

Hey Sir Squishy How is your ram increasing your FPS so much? Video is the hog, are you using onboard graphics?
I can see memory decreasing load times like an SSD drive but not video performance.

I think you miss directed this to me.

But, RAM will make a difference over all depending on what the starting configuration is compared to your upgrade configuration. Mainly in channels. Single channel vs Dual channel is a 50% increase to 100% since the RAM’s speed is nearly double by having matching sticks. Triple channel is about an 18% increase over Dual channel, and quad channel is about another 18%. But the application may not see such increases depending on how it accesses memory pages.

GW2 uses GPU to a certain extent. The issue is that GW2 cares more about how fast your CPU can execute instructions more then how much graphical power your GPU has. For an example, an FX8350 with a GTX970 will perform slower then a i7-4790K and a gtx970. Even if the FX8350 and 4790K are clocked at the same speed. And that’s because the FX8350 executes code slower then the 4790K(we are talking a CPU from 2012 vs a CPU from 2015 mind you as well, but its just an example).

I’m not convinced 64-bit would make such a big difference here. Sure you gain performance because your syscalls don’t have to pass through the WoW3264 interop layer, but you’re also losing some performance elsewhere because your pointers are now twice the size, which increases the byte size of your code and the likelihood of RAM cache misses when you run it.

Not to mention that the graphics card driver has no choice to be 64-bits on 64-bit Windows, so all the stuff that happens between the CPU and the GPU, which is non-negligible for a computer game, is already 64-bit.

Don’t get me wrong if they can make a 64-bit client then cool I want one, but let’s say that if they have to make a choice between 64-bit and Vulkan or DirectX12 I hope they don’t pick the former. With all the problems their engine has, I don’t think 64-bit is THAT big of a deal.

Sir Meta.3402:

Because 32 bit can run on 64 bit.
But 64 bit game cannot run at all on 32 bit windows.
So as long they do not need more than 2-4 GB memory, why choose the extra work of having to maintain two version of the same game.

many program have both a 32 and 64 bit option. You get to pick which one to DL.

Also graphics card optimization would be nice.

Entenkommando.5208:

I’m not an IT expert, but maybe it is because of the age.
Remember Guild Wars 2 is running an over 10 years old engine that as only been modyfied…maybe it is simply incapable to do this? (Pls correct me if I’m talking bs ^^")

This is pretty close to the truth. GW2 is a modified version of the GW1 engine. It’s old enough that it just isn’t capable of running DX11/12 or 64bit.

Tkosh.1923:

Well I don’t buy the age excuse WOW is old too and has a 64 bit option and WOW is Fisher Price graphics, this game needs updating far worse than WOW did.

The graphics style for WoW is irrelevant. When WoW overhauled their graphics a couple years ago they had to update/rebuild a LOT of the engine. I would guess they rebuilt the entire thing.

For GW2 to support 64bit or DX12 they would need to rebuild the game with an entirely new engine. I wouldn’t expect that to ever happen, if it does happen it won’t be for another 5 years or so.

I like the game as is, but I think a good multithreaded game would be very benificial to a considerable part of the player base. preferably with a 64 bit engine and a directx 12 with only DX 11 instructions would be nice. problem is they would cut all computers older then 4 years from the playerbase. and while you all might have pure gold on your table, some ppl play with old iron and they might be abel to afford the box(ed game) but not the box(ed computer)

Game requirements makes a slight hint about POSSIBLE RISING minimum requirements.

PaxTheGreatOne.9472:

I like the game as is, but I think a good multithreaded game would be very benificial to a considerable part of the player base. preferably with a 64 bit engine and a directx 12 with only DX 11 instructions would be nice. problem is they would cut all computers older then 4 years from the playerbase. and while you all might have pure gold on your table, some ppl play with old iron and they might be abel to afford the box(ed game) but not the box(ed computer)

Game requirements makes a slight hint about POSSIBLE RISING minimum requirements.

getting a DX11 or a DX12 card is not expensive. you can pay 109~ for a 360X and that would perform well for this game (80-100FPS). Going to DX11+ will just make every CPU perform better. So old iron boxed users should see an inprovement as well.

yeah, with such a cpu bound game, you’d think they’d do something like DX11+ & 64bit to help the performance.

A 64-bit client means being able to access more memory, which means large world boss fights and probably WvW wont result in out-of-memory errors. I have to drop the graphics settings (from everything maxed out) during Teq otherwise i’ll get an OoM error. It’s been discussed before many times but the devs that have responded have just said unfortunately the game wasnt designed for handling a huge number of players (cant find which OoM error it was mentioned in)

It may be an issue of money, no monthly fee. Maybe we could crowd-source it?

Mircrosoft is pushing Windows 10 as hard as possible, by giving a free update for Windows 7 and 8 computers. So yeah, DX12 is the future.

they could try to emulate 64 and have the choice of 32bit or 64bit. the extra ram would help a ton. the graphics would look far more intense in true 64 bit dx11 though. but expect many laptop tears because true 64 dx11 is a resource hog.

Dx12 will eventually be a huge deal though, because then the amd based video cards will be on equal footing as nvidia but more cost effective.

it’s a big deal, but not mainstream news yet, that’s a revolution ready to happen :p

https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2015/05/12/amd-enables-incredible-directx-12-performance-in-new-3dmark-api-overhead-feature-test

sirsquishy.8531:

Extreme.8350:

sirsquishy.8531:

Extreme.8350:

sirsquishy.8531:

The following changes need to happen to GW2 for it to be ‘competitive’ down the road

1. 64bit client support so that the application can poll more then 3.25GB of ram
2. API upgrade to support multithreaded rendering
3. better GPU vRAM usage utilization
4. more vector math done at the GPU rather then CPU (AKA Character model limit settings)

Until these things are done, the game is going to be in 2010. No matter how ‘pretty’ it looks. And as new content gets added its just going to keep on getting slower and slower.

Agree with all those things for the time being ram speed seem to be a bandaid solution for fps even more so than cpu clockspeed.

RAM Speeds (Lowest CL on the highest speed possible for your OC)
Highest Single core IPC (4790K stock is the FASTEST cpu, period)
Fastest PCIE bridge (Version 3)

Is what makes FPS faster

I upgraded from 12 to 24gb ram about 4 months ago and i got a huge fps boost.
It dosent use more than 3gb ram but the ram speed in trippel channel did help.
Maybe not on better chipsets but i can play this on high settings with 80-120 fps.

Speed Increase from a RAM upgrade will depend on the old Memory configuration.

Going from Dual channel to Triple channel is really a 8-18% increase depending on the application though. More so its the size of each DIMM. 12GB could be a 8GB and 4GB chip, meaning that only 4GB was in Dual channel while the last 4GB on that 8GB module is in single channel mode. That can account for the performance increase.

Also going from a higher CAS Latency to a smaller CL will do more as well. Such as dropping from CL11 down to CL9 will give a pretty decent speed increase. On top of the channel change as well.

so tons of reasons why the memory upgrade could help.

Now explain that in English lol.I understood 1% of what you said

moiraine.2753:

sirsquishy.8531:

I upgraded from 12 to 24gb ram about 4 months ago and i got a huge fps boost.
It dosent use more than 3gb ram but the ram speed in trippel channel did help.
Maybe not on better chipsets but i can play this on high settings with 80-120 fps.

Speed Increase from a RAM upgrade will depend on the old Memory configuration.

Going from Dual channel to Triple channel is really a 8-18% increase depending on the application though. More so its the size of each DIMM. 12GB could be a 8GB and 4GB chip, meaning that only 4GB was in Dual channel while the last 4GB on that 8GB module is in single channel mode. That can account for the performance increase.

Also going from a higher CAS Latency to a smaller CL will do more as well. Such as dropping from CL11 down to CL9 will give a pretty decent speed increase. On top of the channel change as well.

so tons of reasons why the memory upgrade could help.

Now explain that in English lol.I understood 1% of what you said[/quote]

Hmm…the more memory sticks a computer can access at the same time the faster it’ll get and having memory sticks with the same amount of memory on them is better than different.

Latency is the measure of how slowly the memory does it’s job. The lower the number the better.

It would be great to see the 64bit client for Guild Wars 2. I really want to play this game on ultra graphic settings without to have some “OutOfMemory”-Crashes

Btw… do not forget about DirectX11 and DirectX12 for better performance…. DirectX 12 is the future!

In theory GW2 should benefit greatly on DX12. MMOs are normally very CPU-bound and have to account for many variables, especially player-counts. DX12s main emphasis is on the CPU anyway. Though I doubt we’d get any huge increases to performance on a 64-bit client but nonetheless, this day and age, I see no reason to continue to support obsolete technology when it really is not necessary. 64-bit PCs are not expensive and hard to obtain and are overall much more beneficial if everyone used it; cuts out useless legacy development. Leave archaic software and hardware to businesses and professional nonentertainment use.

64bit would address the Character limit setting. If your system can handle the high setting performance wise, having a 64bit client would eliminate the OOM crashses from GW2.exe.

DX11,12, or Mantle would address the CPU bound issues IF it was coded correctly. Currently there is a lot of player based vector math drawn up on the CPU that could be broken down into more threads or split between CPU/GPU more. Thats why the more players on the screen the lower the performance, also same when you enter combat with other players on the screen. All that dynamic content (calculating other players movements/skills for your client) kills the CPU.

Ricky.4706:

they could try to emulate 64 and have the choice of 32bit or 64bit. the extra ram would help a ton. the graphics would look far more intense in true 64 bit dx11 though. but expect many laptop tears because true 64 dx11 is a resource hog.

Dx12 will eventually be a huge deal though, because then the amd based video cards will be on equal footing as nvidia but more cost effective.

it’s a big deal, but not mainstream news yet, that’s a revolution ready to happen :p

https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2015/05/12/amd-enables-incredible-directx-12-performance-in-new-3dmark-api-overhead-feature-test

There is no ‘emulating’ 64bit. The only option for that under 32bit is to enable PAE. Which still limits each application thread to a 32bit memory space. It just means the core application that enables PAE can live in a 64bit memory space. But operationally its still 32bit and still has 32bit limits.

going 64bit requires a rewrite, which costs money and that is why we dont have it yet.

Torsailr.8456:

Hmm…the more memory sticks a computer can access at the same time the faster it’ll get and having memory sticks with the same amount of memory on them is better than different.

Latency is the measure of how slowly the memory does it’s job. The lower the number the better.

not the more memory sticks, the more memory channels. If you populate 2 memory sticks per channel you incur a latency cost. Ideally you want 1 stick per channel so that you remove that latency.

The memory sticks themselves have a CAS rating, the lower that rating, and the tighter their timings, the faster that ram will perform. Hence CL11 is slower then CL9 at 1600mhz.

I made good money converting 32bit to 64bit as a professional. It can be hard or easy depending on the original code.

GW2 is built on the GW1 codebase, which is a decade old. I suspect the task is very non trivial. There is no huge economic benefit to such an expensive task.

Would 64bit and Dx12 be good? Yup. Will it happen? No.

Maybe ANet should try a Kick start fund to pay for the conversion?

Would be long time that we get this. Every modern computer can choose how he is running things. Low machines running 32 Bit and DX9 and powermachines 64 BIT with DX12. That should not really a big problem.

Miriam.2506:

Would be long time that we get this. Every modern computer can choose how he is running things. Low machines running 32 Bit and DX9 and powermachines 64 BIT with DX12. That should not really a big problem.

Its a problem for me cuz my pc can run max dx 11 and there is almost none dx 12 games so it should be a big problem…

Extreme.8350:

Miriam.2506:

Would be long time that we get this. Every modern computer can choose how he is running things. Low machines running 32 Bit and DX9 and powermachines 64 BIT with DX12. That should not really a big problem.

Its a problem for me cuz my pc can run max dx 11 and there is almost none dx 12 games so it should be a big problem…

DX11 cards can support a lot of the DX12 API. There are already benches with the CPU load aspect on DX12 using DX11 based cards. So no, its not really a problem.

sirsquishy.8531:

Extreme.8350:

Miriam.2506:

Would be long time that we get this. Every modern computer can choose how he is running things. Low machines running 32 Bit and DX9 and powermachines 64 BIT with DX12. That should not really a big problem.

Its a problem for me cuz my pc can run max dx 11 and there is almost none dx 12 games so it should be a big problem…

DX11 cards can support a lot of the DX12 API. There are already benches with the CPU load aspect on DX12 using DX11 based cards. So no, its not really a problem.

Thats interesting but im not touching win10 in its current state. mostly cuz of bugs but also cuz of the weird privacy policy.
I have a friend who uinstalled after a plethora of bluescreens.

Kendra Nightwind.8734:

Of all the things promised to be in Guild Wars 2 when it shipped; an x64 client was not one of them. What was promised, but we still don’t have nor will ANet even acknowledge, is DX10 support.
I was there when she (Gaile Gray) was asked about both DX 10 and a 64 bit client. She confirmed that Guild Wars 2 would support DX10, but she did not know anything about if there was going to be a 64 bit client.
It irks me no end that we are stuck with DX9c and even worse that we are stuck with a 32 bit (x86) client that won’t even distribute itself (some what) evenly across all available cores.. Shoot, even Guild Wars would take advantage of multi-core systems better than Guild Wars 2 does.

The original post itself was necroed recently by by Gaile when called out: No promise was made. What ANet did promise early on was an attempt to create a DX10 client. It was made, but it was extremely buggy and unfamiliar to most of the developers working with it, and had several major issues, so they stopped supporting development.

They fulfilled their end of the bargain, but I believe it’s something that should really be considered. They could do a lot more with the game by opening these doors up and ultimately just improve performance across the board. The game itself is already very well-optimized for the platform it runs on. Imagine the glory of it on a DX12 64-bit client O.O