News Microsoft puts back first 64-bit Windows

if your so not happy with MS and there work, show it where it hurts them and make the move. I hate people who blame all wrong doings on microsoft just because it's made it big. I think thats just jealousy tbh. if your not happy with there products, make the move to some other OS, there are plenty of them out there. But people won't do that because it involves learning an intirelly different OS, and you won't be able to use your old habits. Microsoft have had dificulties releasing patches/code on time but that is because they have literally thousands of programers writing a single peice of software. Think about the lines of comunication between 10,000 people...

I never liked MS but it's no reason to blame them for everything I don't like in the world.

 

32bit...pffft

if 64bit is a marketing gimmick then y is AMD winning with the FX chips?? i mean the FX-53 is a 2.4ghz and at 1ghz below the 3.4 EE its still beats it. same with all amd chips, lower clock and fsb and they still keep up and beat intel. 64bit was a move by AMD for the gaming and server segment which will use it more. the AMD is half the FSB, half the cache and below clockspeed yet r faster??

srry of topic, 64bit is for hear and now, AMD is a gaming CPU and 64bit is for gamers

 

64-bit programs are only faster because the chips are optimised for 64-bits. There are work-arounds for addressing more than 4GBs of memory on a 32-bit platform. Sure, using 64-bits instead of 32-bits increases performance as any scaling will, but if there were two identical RnD teams with identical budgets, one producing a 64-bit chip and the other producing a 32-bit chip, I doubt there would be any real benifits of the 64-bit chip.

Hence, a marketing gimmick - "this chip has twice the bits of that chip, it must be twice as good". Just like the pentium 4's massive clock speeds.

 

wtf of course 64bit processors are optimised for 64bit, thats the whole ****ing point
there are workarounds for addressing >4gig of ram but a workaround will never be as good as fixing the original problem, in this case only being able to address 32bits
it would be a marketing gimmick if they just said "twice as many bits so it must be better" and there was no actual performance increase
but there is a performance increase, hence not a gimmick

 

There is a lot more that comes with the Athlon64 then just the extra 32 bits.

Hypertransport for example opens up the interface between the processor and motherboard from 3200MB/s (K7 Athlon 32-bits) to 12,800MB/s (K8 Athlon64)
Hypertransport is also a full-duplex bus, lowering latency.

Athlon64 CPUs also have on-board memory controllers that lower latency to memory. And with 128-bit controllers on both the 939, and 940 packages you get a further performance increase.

There is also the enhanced virus protection built right into the chip that works with Windows XP (SP2)

If it was just an extra 32-bits then a 2.2ghz A64 wouldn't run any faster in 32-bit applications then a 2.2ghz K7 (Athlon 32-bits) CPU.

The Windows XP 64-bit beta has been out since the launch of the Athlon64 CPUs in September of last year. You can even download a trial version that is good for a whole year before it expires.

It is really a shame that a windows compatible 64-bit CPU (Opteron) has been out for more then a year without a full 64-bit windows operating system that can utilize it.

 

I'm curious about this new feature, seems very odd to include something like this in a processor. Is this an early implimentation of TCPA-like technology? Had a google, but didn't find anything, any links on the subject?

 

As a journalist I have to have on opinion, that's my job. I'd hardly call this "blaming Microsoft for everything I don't like in the world". If I did that Bill Gates would be responsible for Gwen Stefani not being sat on my lap as I type, damn him!

 

It has to do with buffer overflow errors. I am not an expert, but this is how I understand it:
Some virus's would overflow a buffer in order to fill another area of memory, or to disable a part of windows security.
Normaly a processor would not do anything about this, but the Athlon64 will stop a buffer from overflowing, and also notify windows, so it can fix the problem. Stoping a virus before it can kick into action.
There is more on it here:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Weblets/0,,7832_11104_11105,00.html

 

I suggest you go back to a 286 running DOS. Then you might appriciate the gimmick.


For a real answer to the question - think of the data as water running through pipes in your computer. A 64bit pipe is twice as big as a 32bit pipe and therefore - theoretically can deliver twice as much water (data) at a given time.

So all things being equal a 64bit computer is about twice as fast as a 32bit computer. Furthermore due to IC design, it will run on the same power or less. Sooo - going to 64bit does not cause the heat problems associated with doubling the clock speed (overclocking) and increasing performance in that fashion.

Also as someone else mentioned it lets you then address an ungodly amount of memory that in a few years will seem trivial.

 

the only work arounds needed are during INIT - after the system is set-up, its a 64bit flat model. You doubt the benifits? Well I suggest you go back to 16bit or 8bit computing then. 64bit is no more of a gimmick than 32bit.

 

Grrr. I was anticipating getting XP64 for christmas. Jerksoft!

 

Erm, actually no, it means it can handle 64bit word lengths, therefore, process numbers that require words longer than 32 bits in less cycles

 

Um yes - that is why I said specifically - "all other things being equal". Which is meant to show that in the real world this won't be the exact case but this is approx the performance boost you can expect.

 

Oh wait - i think now i see what you are suggesting. Correct me if I am wrong, but you are saying a 64bit processor will not add 2+2 any faster than a 32 bit processor , but say 3F67 5672 4376h + 6529 9052 7472h would be processed faster - is that your intended meaning?

 

My point exactly.

There are a lot of people that look here for computer related info, we try to keep our facts right for them, thats why i corrected you

To some up, only some of the more challenging (for now) software will run faster on a 64bit cpu, as opposed to a 32bit cpu with the same ipc and clock speed, memory bandwidth etc...

 

Well this is where the idea of 64bit optimization comes in - to make full use of every clock cycle. Granted, it is not a simple thing to do with x86, but that is why Intel developed IA-64.

After 64bit is popular, they will phase in EFI, and after that its a small jump into IA-64. 2006 is the begining of the end for real mode.