64-bit or 32-bit: When will it matter?

I read recently that MS expects the number of deployments of XP64 bit to be
in the millions in the first year.
Secondly, that MS will be aggressively moving apps it markets over to 64bit.
IE 64 bit is the future, it is here in h/w and the s/w is coming.

S/W vendors that do not move across quickly will get lost in the rush so
expect some new Big Names. H/W vendors that do not provide 64 bit drivers
promptly will be in the shyte. The good thing about the AMD 64 bit
implementation is the ability to run 32 bit systems. The bad thing about it
is the ability to run 32 bit systems.

If you need a system Now then buy what you can Now. The old formular of 1
step down from the best has always worked well for me IE a Winchester 3500
on an SLI motherboard would be a good bet. (There used to be 1 very sharp
price increment between fastest and 2nd fastet).

The "best" system now tends to last the longest into the future - so long as
the componentry is good.

- Tim


"aether" wrote in message
ups.com...
Building a computer from scratch. It'll be built for someone who'll use
it for alot of things, but tilted in the 'gaming' direction. Should
whether the processor is 64-bit or 32-bit matter? If not, when? If so,
how so? In other words, should I go AMD or Intel? I understand AMD is
slightly faster for games, but what I'm more interested in is the
long-term utility of the 64-bit processor. By the time 64-bit
programming is mainstream, will whatever processor I purchase be
obsolete? I'd like for the computer to be functional for at least two
years, if not alittle longer. If I went 32-bit (Intel), would it
assuredly be obsolete, whereas with AMD not so much?

Well, congratulations guys, you've succeeded in making me somewhat
cautious again. No matter, I must get this computer built. I've been
through this before. It seems hesitation only brings other, better
things on the horizon. If you wait, you wait forever.

Besides, I've a feeling real utilization of the 64-bit CPU won't take
place until 2007. At that time, if I'm still breathing air, I'll simply
upgrade the CPU, as I intend on buying one of the better boards
available.

In any event, could anyone clarify what 'Support Intel EM64T' means?
Compatibility with a 64-bit OS and software? This is surely more
'future proof' than Intel CPUs currently out that don't 'Support Intel
EM64T' -- right?

"Ed" wrote in message
...
On 1 Mar 2005 23:23:34 -0800, "aether"
wrote:

Well, congratulations guys, you've succeeded in making me somewhat
cautious again. No matter, I must get this computer built. I've been
through this before. It seems hesitation only brings other, better
things on the horizon. If you wait, you wait forever.

Besides, I've a feeling real utilization of the 64-bit CPU won't take
place until 2007. At that time, if I'm still breathing air, I'll simply
upgrade the CPU, as I intend on buying one of the better boards
available.

In any event, could anyone clarify what 'Support Intel EM64T' means?
Compatibility with a 64-bit OS and software? This is surely more
'future proof' than Intel CPUs currently out that don't 'Support Intel
EM64T' -- right?


I would sure hope so, since EM64T is just a copy of AMD's x86-64.
When you boot up with a 64-bit OS you can mix-and-match 64-bit and
32-bit applications, running in legacy mode (32-bit apps running under a
32-bit OS) they remain fully compatible with today's existing 32-bit
applications and operating systems.

Ed


I am not sure about the Intel offerings, but the AMD 64bit chips do not
experience performance degradation when executing 32bit code. If the new
Xeon/P4 chips will be anything like the Itanum implimenations, you can
expect horrific 32bit performance. ( 32cpu cycles to execute 1 32bit
instruction, as opposed to the native 64bit RISC implimenation where its
nearly a 1:1 ration of clock cycle to instruction execution for native 64bit
code).

I have been working with the 64bit Itanium 2 systems from HP ( entry,
midlevel, and superdomes) ... i like the systems, but not a fan of the lack
of 32bit performance, since nearly every 64bit app has 32bit code in it
somewhere. I have been working with 2003 enterprise IA64 and Datacenter
IA64. Havent been able to play with the enterprise linux platforms yet.

- NuTs

"NuTCrAcKeR" wrote in message
...

"Ed" wrote in message
...
On 1 Mar 2005 23:23:34 -0800, "aether"
wrote:

Well, congratulations guys, you've succeeded in making me somewhat
cautious again. No matter, I must get this computer built. I've been
through this before. It seems hesitation only brings other, better
things on the horizon. If you wait, you wait forever.

Besides, I've a feeling real utilization of the 64-bit CPU won't take
place until 2007. At that time, if I'm still breathing air, I'll simply
upgrade the CPU, as I intend on buying one of the better boards
available.

In any event, could anyone clarify what 'Support Intel EM64T' means?
Compatibility with a 64-bit OS and software? This is surely more
'future proof' than Intel CPUs currently out that don't 'Support Intel
EM64T' -- right?


I would sure hope so, since EM64T is just a copy of AMD's x86-64.
When you boot up with a 64-bit OS you can mix-and-match 64-bit and
32-bit applications, running in legacy mode (32-bit apps running under
a
32-bit OS) they remain fully compatible with today's existing 32-bit
applications and operating systems.

Ed


I am not sure about the Intel offerings, but the AMD 64bit chips do not
experience performance degradation when executing 32bit code. If the new
Xeon/P4 chips will be anything like the Itanum implimenations, you can
expect horrific 32bit performance. ( 32cpu cycles to execute 1 32bit
instruction, as opposed to the native 64bit RISC implimenation where its
nearly a 1:1 ration of clock cycle to instruction execution for native
64bit code).

I have been working with the 64bit Itanium 2 systems from HP ( entry,
midlevel, and superdomes) ... i like the systems, but not a fan of the
lack of 32bit performance, since nearly every 64bit app has 32bit code
in it somewhere. I have been working with 2003 enterprise IA64 and
Datacenter IA64. Havent been able to play with the enterprise linux
platforms yet.
Dead right.
I have a couple of 64bit systems, because of having a single large
application, which needs over 8GB of 'flat' memory space. Since we had the
source, it was relatively easy to generate this as a 64bit application,
but at the same time I have dozens of 32bit applications. With the AMD64,
I can run a 32bit copy of XP, as a 'virtual OS', inside a 64bit Linux, and
get performance in this that is as good as a native 32 bit processor!.
Intel are launching their third vesion of 64bit procssor, and for some
things the processors are superb, but the performance in 32 bit, is a real
'killer' for 90% of users.

Best Wishes

"Roger Hamlett" wrote in message
...

Dead right.
I have a couple of 64bit systems, because of having a single large
application, which needs over 8GB of 'flat' memory space. Since we had the
source, it was relatively easy to generate this as a 64bit application,
but at the same time I have dozens of 32bit applications. With the AMD64,
I can run a 32bit copy of XP, as a 'virtual OS', inside a 64bit Linux, and
get performance in this that is as good as a native 32 bit processor!.
Intel are launching their third vesion of 64bit procssor, and for some
things the processors are superb, but the performance in 32 bit, is a real
'killer' for 90% of users.

Don't confuse the Itanium processors, which are 64-bit processors, with
the new 64-bit Pentium processors, which are 32-bit processors that also
perform 64-bit operations natively. Itanium processors do not perform 32-bit
operations as quickly as they perform 64-bit operations. 32-bit processors
with 64-bit extensions should be essentially equally fast at both (depending
upon how you measure).

DS

Could anyone tell me if this motherboard
(http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/Produc...uctCode=240159)
supports dual channel memory? I know it doesn't support DDR2, but what
of regular dual channel DDR-400? I checked the official site of the
board
(http://www.abit-usa.com/products/mb/...es=1&model=262),
and it states it features 'dual DDR 400 memory support'. I'm thinking
that's what it means, but I have to double-check with the pros.

aether wrote:
Could anyone tell me if this motherboard
(http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/Produc...uctCode=240159)
supports dual channel memory? I know it doesn't support DDR2, but what
of regular dual channel DDR-400? I checked the official site of the
board
(http://www.abit-usa.com/products/mb/...es=1&model=262),
and it states it features 'dual DDR 400 memory support'. I'm thinking
that's what it means, but I have to double-check with the pros.

All socket 939 boards support Dual Channel.

Thats the reason they aren't socket 754.

Ben
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

Ben Pope wrote:
aether wrote:
Could anyone tell me if this motherboard

(http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/Produc...uctCode=240159)
supports dual channel memory? I know it doesn't support DDR2, but
what
of regular dual channel DDR-400? I checked the official site of the
board

(http://www.abit-usa.com/products/mb/...es=1&model=262),
and it states it features 'dual DDR 400 memory support'. I'm
thinking
that's what it means, but I have to double-check with the pros.

All socket 939 boards support Dual Channel.

Thats the reason they aren't socket 754.

Ben
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...


Gotcha. Thanks!

Don't look now, but I've got another question.

Will this memory
(http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/Produc...tCode=80097-20)
function on this motherboard
(http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/Produc...uctCode=240159)?

The reason I ask, is that it states for the memory on the Zipzoom site
that:

*Note 1: HyperX is high performance memory and may not be compatible
with your computer. Please check your system specifications to ensure
compatibility.
*Note 2: Kingston's HyperX kits are designed and tested to meet dual
channel architecture requirements such as those found on chipsets and
motherboards like NVidia's Nforce2, and Intel's Canterwood and
Springdale."

I'm hazarding a guess, but I think if it works on an Nforce2
motherboard, it'll work on an Nforce4 board. Again, just making sure.

Remove the question mark at the end of the second link.

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/Produc...uctCode=240159

It's the AN8 nForce4 motherboard.