64bit vs 32bit

Which is better/faster? And if you have 64bit does it make even current 32bit programs and windows faster?

64 bit: going to be the way things are

speed wise, there isn’t a difference on 32 bit code [32bit code is possibly slower, it depends on the chip how much, as of yet intel has not had satisfactory 32 bit code performance on any of their 64 bit chips]

code compiled for 64 bit athlon and properly optimized might be a lot faster, because the 64 bit chip has a lot more registers and other useful things

that said, the main benefit I see of going to 64bit [for me at least] is that the system is no longer limited to 4Gb of memory, however, it appears each application still will be.

I haven’t been able to play with any 64 bit systems though, and haven’t done much research on them [so take my words with some salt]

32-bit apps can only address 4GB of memory but 64-bit ones can address practically infinite Ram. The limitation is getting the Ram boards onto the system. The biggest dimm I’ve seen is 8GB.

The switch from 16-bit to 32-bit was enormously important; the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit may not be noticed for many years by many people.

If, today, you have a need to address more than 2 gigabytes of RAM in one machine, then 64-bit might be very important to you. If, today, you had an enormous need to process integer quantities larger than 2 billion in a single instruction, then it might be important.

If not, then 32-bit hardware is considerably cheaper and blindingly fast.

When your requirements actually outgrow a 32-bit system, then’s the time to buy 64-bit; but only then. After all, if you buy right-now “you’re on the bleeding edge.” There’s a lot of blood on that edge, and a lot of wasted money. In a few years, when 64-bit becomes more mainstream, that equipment will be many times cheaper. Buy it then, if at all.

32-bit apps can only address 4GB of memory but 64-bit ones can address practically infinite Ram. The limitation is getting the Ram boards onto the system. The biggest dimm I’ve seen is 8GB.[/quote]


[registration required, or disable javascript]

shoud’ve included my link

it does seem weird a 32 bit reg is being used as an offset for 64 bit native applications [even on 32 bit machines that is the behavior]

I guess I misintrepreted the following:

Windows XP SP2 will allow applications to address up to 4GB on x86-64 systems.

64 bits can address… well:
18446744073709551616 bytes
[16 petabytes?, is that 16 million terrabytes? am I confused?]

32-bit apps can only address 4GB of memory but 64-bit ones can address practically infinite Ram. The limitation is getting the Ram boards onto the system. The biggest dimm I’ve seen is 8GB.[/quote]

it does seem weird a 32 bit reg is being used as an offset for 64 bit native applications [even on 32 bit machines that is the behavior][/quote]

Not sure what you mean there. As I understand the situation, there is no true 64 bit system. Apple will make the first transition, well that’s what they claim, to a true 64 bit system with everything including the OS 64 bit when Tiger comes out next year. And it will be backwards compatible with 32 bit apps so it will hopefully be a seamless transition.

From what I read, M$ seem to be having trouble making 64 bit drivers for devices or something:

win xp 64

From that link, I’m not sure why they bothered releasing it.

I guess I misintrepreted the following:

[quote]Windows XP SP2 will allow applications to address up to 4GB on x86-64 systems.
[/quote]

How did you misinterpret? I think that although in theory 32 bit systems could address 4GB, some were limited to 2GB (I think Blender can only address 2GB Ram).

It’s 16 exabytes of Ram but like I said, you can’t get near that much physical Ram onto a system anyway so it’s practically infinite.

The whole deal is that 32 bit systems today are limited to 4GB Ram.
64 bit systems are limited to 16 exabytes of Ram.
The transition means that apps can address more ram so programs can handle larger memory allocations faster and this makes memory intensive things like digital video processing better.
It won’t make things double the speed as some people think. It’s mainly to overcome the Ram limit.

I am thinking about building my own comp. I’m thinking about getting a AMD 64 bit processor. I can’t afford a AMD64FX but I can get a AMD64. 64bits processors can run on a 32bit mother board right? Are there any 64 bit mobos out yet? What about the OS. Can run a 64bit on win XP?

I don’t believe you can run a 64 bit chip on a 32 bit mobo

there are motherboard capable of 64 bit chips [even x86 ones], and particulary for other chips [as in, non-intel] there have been 64 bit systems for some time

windows xp 64 bit isn’t out yet [will it ever be?], but xp service pack 2 takes advantage of some 64 bit features. for full 64 bit support, use linux [or buy a mac g5 when tiger comes out, or use a cool system that is neither of the two]

Really, i always thought you could run a 64bit chip on a 32bit Mobo. I didn’t think they made 64 bit motherboards.

http://shopping.kelkoo.co.uk/b/a/ss_amd_64_bit_motherboard.html

Don’t know how you would run a 64 bit processor on a 32 bit mobo.

It’s supposed to be coming out in the first half of 2005. Similar to Apple’s March 2005 supposed release date. Maybe there’s a competition to see who’ll be first… after Linux of course.

Yeah, lets wait and see how good 64 bit Windows will be before there’s any sarcastic remarks %|.

Yeah, lets wait and see how good 64 bit Windows will be before there’s any sarcastic remarks %|.[/quote]
I hadn’t intended that to be a sarcastic remark, yours seems more so to me

[I hadn’t intended to imply that xp 64 bit would suck, though it is kinda hard to doubt it will given microsoft’s current record, it will have to be a new release of windows to fully realize the changes, also drivers will probably take a similar period of time]

[yes, I realize this doesn’t further the discussion]

Right, as if Irix never did any 64 bits computers (and Blender never ran on those either…)…

Martin

Right, as if Irix never did any 64 bits computers (and Blender never ran on those either…)…

Martin[/quote]

Ah yes, how often do we forget lil’ old Irix ;). I wondered why people weren’t so hot about the Linux and Irix 64s. I would have thought it fairly essential that 32 bit support was included. Maybe most people compile stuff for Linux anyway so they probably thought it would be less of an issue.