• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

P4 with EMT64

I saw a post that they are selling them in England too. I think they want to liquidate all of their current 32 bit chips first.

We are talking Billions in lost profit, if the 64 take off with tone of 32's in stock.

 
Because 64 Bit is not a requirement for modern processing and its not benificial for users and even for ethusiasts such as ourselves. No reason it at all, the basic user does not give a crap if the processor can do 64 Bit or not, it just matters if it is fast and optimised. 64 Bit is not optimised and so far is no faster then 32 Bit. As a matter of fact benchmarks show that its slower in XP 64 bit eddtion from what I have seen. At the current time, we are not limited by the CPU's resgister size like we was when the 4 bit in the nibbler and untill then, the benifits will be nill.

I am saying, 32 bit processors have a couple years of life in them.
 
yeah, longhorn is still gonna be in 32 bit, that will give another 4-6 years for the next one, but i was just wondering since i'm shopping for intel chip now (my job require me to use Intel c++ compiler and AMD wont work well)
 
Originally posted by: ethen
yeah, longhorn is still gonna be in 32 bit, that will give another 4-6 years for the next one, but i was just wondering since i'm shopping for intel chip now (my job require me to use Intel c++ compiler and AMD wont work well)
Click to expand...
are you sure that amd's won't work well? it should work just fine.. for common instruction sets (mmx, sse, etc..) the call is the same for intel and amd.. so long as the operating system knows what id to send to the processor, one should work no different than the other.. assuming that the code doesn't use sse3 or 3dnow.
unless there's another issue that i'm missing here?
 
i keep getting execution failed on some segment of operation, after i got on my intel system at work it runs fine
 
Originally posted by: ethen
i keep getting execution failed on some segment of operation, after i got on my intel system at work it runs fine
Click to expand...
what amd processor are you using? if you're not using the 64.. what math libraries did you install? if you installed p4.. then that's probably the source of your error. axp has no sse2.
if you have an athlon 64.. then i have no clue.. but icc will compile for amd processors. so, i would take it up with intel.
 
Originally posted by: Shenkoa
Because 64 Bit is not a requirement for modern processing and its not benificial for users and even for ethusiasts such as ourselves. No reason it at all, the basic user does not give a crap if the processor can do 64 Bit or not, it just matters if it is fast and optimised. 64 Bit is not optimised and so far is no faster then 32 Bit. As a matter of fact benchmarks show that its slower in XP 64 bit eddtion from what I have seen. At the current time, we are not limited by the CPU's resgister size like we was when the 4 bit in the nibbler and untill then, the benifits will be nill.

I am saying, 32 bit processors have a couple years of life in them.
Click to expand...



No, current benchmarks show winxp 64 bit to be a good 10%+ faster then xp 32 bit in various apps. The ONLY thing it is slower in is games, and that is ati/nvidia's fault for not updating their 64 bit drivers regularly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top