This is bullshit. Do you know what "running a program at 64bit" means? No? Thought not.

Calling a CPU 8,16,32 or 64 bit is mostly a meaningless PR excercise. There are multiple different parts of a chip which might use different numbers of bits. The data path to memory might have one number of bits, the address path another, the registers yet another, the instruction set might have specific instructions for dealing with particular bit widths etc.

Few CPU's are 100% one bit width. A typical example is the M68000 family (the current incarnation is the Motorola ColdFire, the CPU used in some Palm devices). The M68000 had a 16 bit datapath, 24 address lines and 32 bit internal registers. The 68020 and newer had a 32 bit datapath, 32 address lines and 32 bit internal registers.

However even for the older M68k, the instruction set supported a full set of 32 bit instructions, so all software written for it instantly started taking advantage of the 32 bit datapath once moved to a fully 32 bit CPU.

One typical way a 64 bit architecture could speed up 32 bit programs would be simply by increasing the width of the data path, potentially significantly increasing memory bandwidth (= how quick you can get things to and from RAM).

Another would be by modularising the ALU's (the units doing arithmetic), so that two arithmetic instructions can be run in parallel if they're only operating on 32 bits.

As for running 32 bit software on a 64 bit machine, most architectures that have made the switch demonstrates you are wrong. The _only_ thing that have an impact on this is whether the old instruction set is still supported. The x86 family is the best proof of this. It started out with 16 bit and 8/16 bit CPU's (8 bit datapath and 16 bit internally), and moved to 32 bit without breaking binary compatibility. Just as AMD is keeping binary compatibility in their 64bit CPU's WITHOUT emulation.

The only reason for using emulation in some architectures is to simplify the chip core, not because it is somehow impossible, or even difficult, to make a 64bit CPU that will 32 bith code.

Since you brought up the Commodore 64, I'd like to point out that you can buy a 16 bit CPU for the C64. It still have no problem running 8 bit programs :)

If you're running any current PC you are running on a 32 bit CPU that will run 16 bit software. There's absolutely no reason why a 64 bit CPU can't run 32bit software without emulation. It is just a matter of whether it supports a 32bit instruction set, which quite a few 64 bit CPU's do.

no matter what mac haters will always be that, haters. and they always come out in threads like this.

as I have said, bashing mac is like bashing someone elses car. hater crap.

highschool stuff. ;)

use both. i do. but id sure like a g5

:)

Exactly!

Nice
but still a mac

put a sack of shit in a box, it's still a sack of shit

why do Mac owners always have to prove their system is worthy??? nothing against macs... I think they are kinda neat.. but its just funny to see how they always try to prove this... over and over....

its alllllmost... and I did say almost... as bad as trying to sell off that idea about that new neon ...yeah it may be fast.. but its still a neon...:winkwink:

If pentium came out with a new chip or line etc PC and everyone else alike would post here about it.

Mac releases G5 and its not worthy of a post on this board?

:winkwink:

The G5 looks like a nice piece of hardware. I might buy one.

But it's not the fastest.

An unbiased (unlike Apple) source:

http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/

Greg most mac guys have chips on their shoulders, its like a religion to me....

I also notice those who are devoted the most test to talk with a lisp, dress very keenly, and enjoy Liza Minelli and Barabra Steisand albums...

Wonder whats up with that? :1orglaugh

I bought and sold used Macs for a large Mac used dealer. So i know the product and how good it is . Also how it keeps its value. The reason Apple will never grow is they are not competitive in pricing and the avg person looks at price. Also apple is very cheap with what they give for the money 512mb for a $3000 machine. Henry Ford said "want to be successful in business, give a man the most for his dollar not the least. " Apple will never really grow any real market share until they adopt this philosophy.
I can go to my local custom builder and get a knock my socks off system for about $2000. Also if I have a problem he is all over it.

hey i use a mac and i listen to eminem and 2pac

yeah, but if amd and intel brought out a new system and blatantly weaved a web of lies about it, the PC followers would tear them apart. not so with the general mac crowd. for the most part, they believe in it so much that there is - as that article stated - nothing you can do to convince them otherwise. jobs could release a firewire 800 log in a plastic bag and some of them would think it's the best thing since bread and butter.

i don't hear too many pc people say "you're a complete waste of life fucktard" when someone says the pc isn't worthy or not fast enough. no reason to attach someone's character about factual items of computer hardware. the fanatcism of some mac people is crazy.

you guys aren't that way, thank god :)

i still think macs are very cool devices, and if i can get over the utter disappointment of what mac did, might buy one. apple made some very courageous claims, some very blatantly incorrect claims, and some very unlikely scenarios (as to them being the first to release things such as 2ghz 64bit machine... amd should be shipping before the g5 hits the market, and is already shipping the 1.8).

although now that the g5 is basically a stripped down opteron... well, yeah :)


as far as 64 vs 32... that's kinda what i was getting at, that the hardware in the opteron is built such that it can run 32bit processes without the need of a software-type emulator, wether that be by the nature they are building the 64bit architechture, or they leave the 32bit capable stuff (or perhaps hardware-based translators) in the chip.

I think you would be referred to as a "top"


really nothing against macs at all.. they are cute... and have neat colors... and make great video editing suites... we actually have one in our office... but it is in the closet... hmmm... is this a coincidence???????

:winkwink:

i think all guys who use macs should stop sending traffic to siccash
hehe

From someone that owns Macs and PCs....

ME

Apple products rule over all else. I actually enjoy working on the Mac but cannot say the same for my Windows machine.

I cannot wait to get my G5.

Mitch

I've been a mac user since 1987 with the IIgs. I'm still a mac user. I've used PC's at friends houses' and at school. The hardware doesn't bother me but the OS pretty much sucks. I could get a good look at a t-bone steak by sticking my head up a bull's ass, but i'd rather take the butcher's word for it. At least %80 of creative professionals use macs. The magazine's you read are most likely done on the mac. The TV shows, it goes on and on. PC's are fine for everyday users but if you want to get work done without the hassel of a bullshit OS the mac is the choice. And if it wasn't for apple home computing wouldn't be where it is today, thats a fact.

Just remember, no matter how fast the proccessor, still more than half of the software available isn't compatible with macs. Doesn't matter how fast...If you can't use it?

If you aren't a 12 year old or a graphics pro, it really doesn't matter.

go buy a playstation genius.

Remember that the average person using a pc isn't a graphic pro. That's first. 90% of all users are on windows. BTW, we aren't on a dos OS anymore...DUH!!!

I really am not trying to be insulting. It's just the real truth. Sorry if you can't handle that.

:1orglaugh

Offer me facts then, not opinions. Tell me all the important programs and functionality that you can have on your PC that I can't get on my mac.

pffft @ macs

Will it play Doom 3?

I have both platforms and have used both for a long time. For the dollar anbd for the amount of software available I still can't see justifying the expense of a Mac if you had to go one or the other. It used to be for my recording studio it HAD to be a Mac too but nowadays with how well Cubase works on the PC platform and dedicated systems you can get with Nuendo and such.

So is there any point to all my babble? Ummm... buy my Ebook? lol

WHat happened to the good ol' Apple //c?