Originally posted by: Markfw900
Intel decided it was the future, so shouldn;t you ?
Originally posted by: calam63
will we start going towards 64 bit computing? how does it compete with 32 bit processors today?
Do you need any applications that can take true advantage of a 64-bit environment? If not, I'd wait. At least until the 64-bit version of XP comes out.Originally posted by: calam63
will we start going towards 64 bit computing? how does it compete with 32 bit processors today?
Originally posted by: Ahriman
A 64-bit processor is only going to run a program as fast as the operating system will let it. There isn't really a reason to spend all that money on a 64 bit processor right now because
1) There is no viable 64-bit OS on the market
2) The projected release date for a 64-bit OS isn't until 2007
3) By 2007 a 64-bit processor will be really really cheap
In response to the guy who said that a 64-bit processor runs 32-bit apps faster I can only say one thing... retard. It's called a bottleneck, and there is no getting around it.
Originally posted by: Ahriman
A 64-bit processor is only going to run a program as fast as the operating system will let it. There isn't really a reason to spend all that money on a 64 bit processor right now because
1) There is no viable 64-bit OS on the market
2) The projected release date for a 64-bit OS isn't until 2007
3) By 2007 a 64-bit processor will be really really cheap
In response to the guy who said that a 64-bit processor runs 32-bit apps faster I can only say one thing... retard. It's called a bottleneck, and there is no getting around it.
2)Unix has been 64-bit capable in different versions for a long timeOriginally posted by: Chaotic42
Originally posted by: Ahriman
A 64-bit processor is only going to run a program as fast as the operating system will let it. There isn't really a reason to spend all that money on a 64 bit processor right now because
1) There is no viable 64-bit OS on the market
2) The projected release date for a 64-bit OS isn't until 2007
3) By 2007 a 64-bit processor will be really really cheap
In response to the guy who said that a 64-bit processor runs 32-bit apps faster I can only say one thing... retard. It's called a bottleneck, and there is no getting around it.
1)There are numerous 64-bit OSes on the market. Even Windows has a 64-bit release.
I was referring to thisOriginally posted by: drag
The Alpha NT OS did run on a 64bit chip, but wasn't 64 bit itself. It was still 32 bit.
They were proccess of porting it to 64bit when the w2k/NT alpha project got canned. They had gotten it to boot up in 64bit mode, but that was about it.
Originally posted by: Chaotic42
I was referring to thisOriginally posted by: drag
The Alpha NT OS did run on a 64bit chip, but wasn't 64 bit itself. It was still 32 bit.
They were proccess of porting it to 64bit when the w2k/NT alpha project got canned. They had gotten it to boot up in 64bit mode, but that was about it.
It's not all that memorable anyway.Originally posted by: drag
Ya I just realised I forgot about ia64 as soon I posted it.
Originally posted by: Chaotic42
Originally posted by: Ahriman
A 64-bit processor is only going to run a program as fast as the operating system will let it. There isn't really a reason to spend all that money on a 64 bit processor right now because
1) There is no viable 64-bit OS on the market
2) The projected release date for a 64-bit OS isn't until 2007
3) By 2007 a 64-bit processor will be really really cheap
In response to the guy who said that a 64-bit processor runs 32-bit apps faster I can only say one thing... retard. It's called a bottleneck, and there is no getting around it.
1)There are numerous 64-bit OSes on the market. Even Windows has a 64-bit release.
2)Unix has been 64-bit capable in different versions for a long time
3)Yes, that's true
Oh, and where did anyone say that a 64-bit processor runs 32-bit programs faster?
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Read The Friendly Articles. There have been several A64 articles on the AnandTech website.
Is 64-bitness in itself worth paying for? Not really. But since the A64 processors are faster and cost less, they are the best buy right now for most users.
I think that Ahriman thinks he meant that the A64 would run 32-bit apps faster because of it's 64-bit capabilities.Originally posted by: Algere
AFAIK Dave didn't directly say 32-bit but I guess you can assume he might've and I agree with him if that's what he meant. Being the reason why I have a A64 now(see sig).