You are not the first one and definitly not the last one. Not know is the answer. Arma can handle everything in 32bit. So tell me 1 good reason why the devs should fuck up the engiine and go 64bit with 2 engines(for devs that are 2) with bug fixing for both(each one has its own bugs) and maybe ruin the 64bit engine completely? Tell me please 1 good reason.

2016 now, may be not? Why? Because for BIS it is work, not? Hobby?

Good reason? Bugs from flashpoint and arma 2? May be looking to the other games?

Core i7, 16 Gb RAM, nv980ti, SSD for this? and 32 bit? You fu..ng serious?

Yes i am. 64 bit means its a complete new engine. Its not just saying hey now the engine is 64bit. The other thing is it doesnt matte. 64bit gives you the opportunity to use 1TB of RAM. Arma could already use up to 3.5GB and uses at normal just 2GB. I would say you go and ask someone what the difference between 32bit and 64bit is. And spoiler alert: its not 2x faster.

BTW the windows you use has a 32bit part of the system. So you want bugs to be fixed... why for f. Sake you want to create new bugs? Thats not logic.

I think 64 bit engine would resolve many issues, BUT IT WILL NOT HAPPEN WITH A3. As @MASTER sayed, it need whole new engine, game runs very smooth since last updates, and @Triada, if you want some guide, i can try to help you.

The server runs on x86 as well, which is bad. He process itself usually runs quite high in its maximum utilisation of 2047MB (as malloc describes anyway). Not to mention the recent build is full of memory crashes for dedicated servers...
X64 processing is always going to be better and faster.

It's just not going to be feasible with Arma3.

People i dont know. You guys hopefully use wikipedia and know what a Large Memmory Aware Flag is. The engine is soft coded on 2047MB (launcher says more but ok). the memmory crashes with out of memmory are getting fixed and even the mighty x64 wont help when arma wants 1.6 EB (Exa Byte) of RAM. And no x64 is not always better. Yes it can utilize more RAM but no its doesnt really make your CPU faster because 32bit is just filled with 0 and if a program uses only 32bit variable because of performance then you just have exactly the same Situation like you have now. The only thing is x64 would use more RAM for the exact same tasks (not more usefull but just more RAM). x64 is not the lord and savior. The actual problem is who will invest time(that is needed for bugfixing in the 32 bit engine) to compile and then debug a 64bit engine? That request is similar to hey guys screw arma 3 and start from scratch.
I hope you guys understand what i mean.

Edit: @TutSi if you look closely the only 2 things getting better are : more possible RAM for the engine (didnt found a reason why but its possible maybe good for servers) and 64bit variables for scripts (pretty nice for example for Life servers since values more than 16 Million are possible.)

For all guys who want to use more RAM on Arma 3 : Ram disk -> copy ARMA enjoy highspeed loadingtimes.

http://www.bistudio.com/blog/breaking-the-32-bit-barrier

Similar questions will always arise. Fans of game buy the personal computer with high characteristics and receive not justified result. The reason of falling of FPS in game isn't solved. Falling of FPS happens not unambiguously, doesn't depend on setting up video of game. You can begin game at FPS 100, and in 30 minutes or 2 hours to receive FPS 20-30, or simply black screen with FPS 1-3.
I began game was 2-16GB RAM, and I receive FPS 1-3 time with a current as if I had 256 MB RAM.
The reason - Arma 32bit, a bad choice of CPU\GPU\RAM\VRAM.....?
The answer isn't present. As the answer isn't present, there will be different questions.
Sometimes our questions sound as severe criticism. But we continue to hope and we play Arma3)))