What advantages does 64bit have over 32bit? I can't see many advantages, other than to make 32bit hardware incompatible with 64bit operating systems and programs, almost forcing you to buy an entire new system if you want to use the operating system (vista). Why would I want to spend $1,000 and end up with almost exactly the same functionality of the computer I had before?
Yes, its true 64bit cpu's offer more ram, however 4gb is more than enough ram for the average gamer, and most 64bit motherboard I see only support 4gb, the 32bit maximum. Thats because it can only support a certian amount of eletricity to power the ram. So even 64bit systems are still limitted almost as 32bit systems are. Ontop of that, most gamers don't mess with the pagefile. So they'll be having 4gb of ram, and only 2gb is the max they'll ever use with pagefile, leaving 2.75gb of ram thats never been touched thanks to pagefile. I ran the "next operating system", and it used 400mb ram, with 200mb allocated to running the most useless services that I would ever need.
64bit allows apps to use more than 2gig on 32bit systems, however I've never seen an app use more than 1.5gig of memory. With programming, i'm quite certian they could remove that limit. The 4gb limit can go MUCH higher. http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/syst [...] AEdrv.mspx , It is clear that the 4gb limit everyone is complaining about is an IMPOSED limit. So your buying 64bit cpu's to remove this artificial barrier?
What else would 64bit cpu's offer? Anyone want to explain?
Well if it's a real 64bit CPU then you get a performance increase on certain types of applications. Hack job's basically give the same results as in 32bit. Given the recent trends in memory pricing and vista's hunger for RAM I'd say that average system's will have 4gig's + of RAM this time next year.
Wow, I think your way out in your estimate, I think by next year, most people will not have more than 2 gb's of ram in there system and windows vista still uses pagefile by default. Remember that most of the system I see out there (64bit), only support up to 4gb of ram due to the eletricity requirements to power the ram, so your not even getting the benefits of 64bit compared to 32bit comps without PAE.
Only a handful of people here are using a 64bit OS anyway, the vast majority of users are still on a 32bit OS.
The "64bitness" of a CPU is just an architectural feature among many others, the pressure to upgrade is'nt due to 64bit apps & OS, it is because CPUs that can handle 64bit code are just faster than their predecessors.
windows xp = (16kb x 16) x (16 x 16) x (16 x 16) x (16 x 16) = 4gb
windows xp with PAE = (16kb x 16) x (16 x 16) x (16 x 16) x (16 x 16) x 16 = 64gb
Ram is out of the equation, if MS wanted to, they could add PAE to windows xp, but of course they won't. They already have PAE for there 32bit server products.
Most boards now support 4 gb of ram. But there are also boards that support 8 gb of ram. There is only going to be more of these boards by next year. Making 4 gb boards the minority. So just like k8man said around this time next year their will be lots of systems with 4 gb. Also 32-bit has troubles with 4 gb. It can only efficiently use 2-3 gb i think.
Most boards now support 4 gb of ram. But there are also boards that support 8 gb of ram. There is only going to be more of these boards by next year. Making 4 gb boards the minority. So just like k8man said around this time next year their will be lots of systems with 4 gb. Also 32-bit has troubles with 4 gb. It can only efficiently use 2-3 gb i think.
Totally untrue, there are servers out there running stable with PAE. Windows xp just isn't programmed or programmed NOT to handle more than 4gb, and more than 2gb an app.
Totally untrue, there are servers out there running stable with PAE. Windows xp just isn't programmed or programmed NOT to handle more than 4gb, and more than 2gb an app.
"# In computing, Physical Address Extension (PAE) allows for up to 64 gigabytes of memory to be used in 32 bit systems, given appropriate operating system support. PAE is provided by Intel Pentium Pro and above CPUs (including all Pentium-series processors except the original Pentium and the Pentium MMX), as well as by some compatible processors such as those from AMD. The CPUID flag PAE is assigned for the purpose of identifying CPUs with this capability. "
Totally untrue, there are servers out there running stable with PAE. Windows xp just isn't programmed or programmed NOT to handle more than 4gb, and more than 2gb an app.
"# In computing, Physical Address Extension (PAE) allows for up to 64 gigabytes of memory to be used in 32 bit systems, given appropriate operating system support. PAE is provided by Intel Pentium Pro and above CPUs (including all Pentium-series processors except the original Pentium and the Pentium MMX), as well as by some compatible processors such as those from AMD. The CPUID flag PAE is assigned for the purpose of identifying CPUs with this capability. "
Wikipedia seems to be wrong, as its possible to support 128gb of ram with PAE, not 64gb. And its currently not possible to have that much ram using 1 power outlet.
The performance difference between athlon 64 3200+ and athlon xp 3200+ aren't to big, plus the price difference is huge.
"Aren't too big" ? I want some of what you are smoking ! The difference between the two uarch is striking ! Even with a 200MHz advantage over a 2GHz Venice, the 2.2GHz Barton just can't touch its A64 counterpart.
Socket A has been dead and buried quite a while ago, the few leftover remaining are now twice as expensive as the current CPUs as you can see Here and Here
As I have been explaining earlier, the "64bitness" of a CPU is'nt a factor, it is all about the improvements that were made over the previous generation. The K8 uarch can peform more work per clock than what the K7 was capable of and the newer manufacturing process allows the K8 to achieve much higher operating frequency, further increasing the gap between the old and the new.
Thats becouse those OS have PAE witch allows it to do that. And I dont really care Im never going to probly use Windows Server 2003 SP1, Datacenter Edition. Im just going to use a home usage OS like win 2k, win XP, win vista. And they dont have PAE (Well I dont know about Vista but its 64 bit so I wont have to worry about 4 gb limitations). I dont feel like arguing any more dont have the time and I dont think anything anyone sais will change your mind so im going to bed.
Thats becouse those OS have PAE witch allows it to do that. And I dont really care Im never going to probly use Windows Server 2003 SP1, Datacenter Edition. Im just going to use a home usage OS like win 2k, win XP, win vista. And they dont have PAE (Well I dont know about Vista but its 64 bit so I wont have to worry about 4 gb limitations). I dont feel like arguing any more dont have the time and I dont think anything anyone sais will change your mind so im going to bed.
So your buying a 64bit system because MS purposely put the 4gb limit on windows xp. Your 64bit motherboard prob doesn't support more than 4gb of ram, so the ram issue is not one to begin with.
The first athlon 64 that came out performed roughly the same as the athlon xp barton. The k8 is based off the k7 architecture.
The first athlon 64 that came out performed roughly the same as the athlon xp barton. The k8 is based off the k7 architecture.
O Rly ? I tought those two were completely unrelated ! [/sarcasm]
Do you really think that someone who have been posting here since 2001 would'nt know that for a fact ?
Thing is, the improvements the K8 got over the K7 are tremendous, at no point in time did they "performed roughly the same", the K7 was outclassed as the K8 is a much wider uarch which is capable of more IPC and reaching higher operating frequencies, the ODMC is just the cherry on top.
I held on to my Mobile Barton 2500+ which was OC'ed to 2.6GHz up until December '05, I know what the AXP was capable of but even at that speed, it was easely outclassed by 2.2GHz A64 running stock.
So your buying a 64bit system because MS purposely put the 4gb limit on windows xp. Your 64bit motherboard prob doesn't support more than 4gb of ram, so the ram issue is not one to begin with.
There are plenty of motherboards that support 8 gb of ram. Here are a bunch http://www.pricegrabber.com/search [...] r-/start=0 And in the future there will only be more especially after vista. I wonder if you really are smoking something.
First of all, the word tremendous to you means a 10% performance difference. The word big performance means a 5% performance difference and I am sure that if athlon 64 didn't support 64bit, it would still show the same performance increases.
Ohh i see, everyone buys parts online and not from Dell, gateway, or levono. Tell me if DELL is going to have 8gb supported motherboards, I think not. And they could clearly add PAE to 32bit systems on windows xp by just an update. The pentium PRO supported PAE.
