The software market (applications) has not caught up with 64bit yet so why should they be in a hurry. Took Microsoft a long time to get 64bit OS out after 64 bit CPU's where first released.
I think it would be a long wait!
Maybe October 2012 http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-8-win8-msft-wi...
128-bit processors could become prevalent when 16 exbibytes of addressable memory is no longer enough (128-bit processors would allow memory addressing for 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 bytes (~340.3 undecillion bytes or 281,474,976,710,656 yobibytes)). That amount greatly exceeds the total data stored on Earth today (2010), which has been estimated to be around 1.2 zettabytes (over 270 bytes) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/128-bit
This is what happens when "marketing" departments take over technical information. 32 / 64 "bit" on a CPU just refers to the maximum size of its internal address registers, typically the largest amount of memory addressable. A CPU with "32" bit sized registers is incapable of understanding a 33 bit or larger memory address and must instead use some sort of page mapping technique to address memory (PAE anyone). A 64 "bit" sized register is capable of address an incredibly large number.
18446744073709551616 to be precise (2^64) which equals 2,097,152 Terabytes.
Considering the size of this number, we won't be moving to anything bigger then "64 bit" anytime in the next few decades if not century.
That being said, CPU's also use different sized "bits" for different calculations. There exists an 80 bit floating point calculation often used in mathematics or physics. That has recently been replaced by a 128 bit floating point calculation due to increased precision required. These large numbers are requires because your not using them to address memory and are instead using them to count molecules, or calculate the speed of an electron relative to the speed of light and derive its potential mass energy. That type of stuff requires very large very precise numbers, and thus you have special calculations just for them.
The you have the memory interface bandwidth. A single SD/DDR/DDR2/DDR3 DIMM chip has 64-bit memory interface. Each cycle transfers 64-bits to the CPU. If a CPU supports dual channel configuration, then you can have two channels of 64-bits sending to the 128-bit memory controller on the CPU. Internally the CPU may have 256 or 512 bit interfaces to its L2 cache memory.
As you can see there are many different "bits" in reference to a CPU, the industry standard is to reference the one dealing with the largest amount of directly addressable memory. In this case "64-bit" CPU's will be around a very very ~very~ long time. There will be no "128-bit" CPU's being produced as it would be just a marketing term.
We're barely using more than 36-bits currently. That is 64GB. Even if we used double, 128GB that is only 37-bits. To put it in a different perspective the time needed to load up a 64-bit address space at 1000GB/s is 7 months. A 6970 only has bandwidth of 170GB/s. As for 128-bit floating point registers, those have been around for awhile now. AVX has 256-bit registers. They're typically used to perform instructions on 2 64-bit or 4 32-bit pieces of data in parallel.
Most people who aren't computer experts are still confused about whether they should go 32 or 64 bit. Regular users who don't play games or encode and do not use even more than 2 GB of RAM are still buying 32 bit Windows everyday.
Until we need more than 100 gigs of RAM, 128 bit is pointless for the home user. Microsoft will not waste time on a commercial 128 bit OS in this decade. 64 bit hasn't been around long. Took them 5 years to convert XP code to use it. They even still sell 32 bit only CPUs, like the low power Atom architecture for HTPCs, Nettops, Netbooks, and ATMs. I do not think CPU manufacturers or OS designers would even know what to do with 128 bit instructions at this time.
Until they start selling computers with enough storage space to hold the entire world's video and music collection, there is no need yet. Unless they come out with something 100 times better than Bluray... it would be a useless proposition for home users to be even be thinking about 128 bit in this decade.
Also, even though 64 bit Windows and Mac OS have been out for more than 5 years... more than half the applications people use day to day are still 32 bit. Think about that before imagining what 128 bit can do when half the developers still are trying to take advantage of 64 bit and don't yet.
I think I must agree that I was a DUMB to think that a Win 8 with true 128-bit is really going to come up in next year or two. From what I hv got from you guys, it looks like this is still more then 4-5 years away.
I saw this heading but did not read it completely. I should hv.