64-bit operating syestem

[mith]

ok,i know that the next operating system is going to be fully 64-bit operating system......but since i really have no idea what that meanz,,am asking .....how does it benefit to have a 64-bit operating system from a 32-bit ,,what could we do now that we couldn't before??

does the system run faster or something....

i read that it addresses more memory? what does that mean,,i need more memory?? not sure,...so could someone explain in simple terms?

 

[gr8tfly]

Intel's summary of 64-bit architecture:

64-bit flat virtual address space
64-bit pointers
64-bit wide general purpose registers
64-bit integer support

plus the larger memory addressing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM64T has more details.

10.4.8 supports 64-bit applications now. Leopard will interally take advantage of 64-bit, if machine is capable (backwards compatible with 32-bit machines)

Not sure that answers your question, but it's not just for more RAM.

The Core 2 Duo has quite a few other improvements that increase effeciency, in addition to the 64-bit part. The cache, for instance is much larger. Intel has a lot of easily accessible info.

 

[mith]

Intel's summary of 64-bit architecture:

64-bit flat virtual address space
64-bit pointers
64-bit wide general purpose registers
64-bit integer support

plus the larger memory addressing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM64T has more details.

10.4.8 supports 64-bit applications now. Leopard will interally take advantage of 64-bit, if machine is capable (backwards compatible with 32-bit machines)

Not sure that answers your question, but it's not just for more RAM.

thx for the reply but aside from the technical mambo jambo,,,i just wanna know what will the user see? when u say leopard will take advantage of it....like makes for more effective system??will 64-bit applications be faster?? would i be able to tell the difference between a 32-bit app and 64 -bit>>?......and also can we just keep going up...i imagine sometime in the furtue we will have 132-bit? or something ......original question......what does the user see,,,aside form what's going on under the hood.

 

[gr8tfly]

Efficient = faster. 64-bit "enabled" apps will be faster. Leopard will be faster running on 64-bit processors than it would on 32, at same clock speed. I don't have specifics on how much.

The G5 processor over the G4 had some of the same differences (64 vs. 32bit). IMHO this is why there's such excitement over the Core 2 Duo MacBooks - it's like the G5 we never had [in Powerbooks].

 

[ChrisA]

ok,i know that the next operating system is going to be fully 64-bit operating system......but since i really have no idea what that meanz,,am asking .....how does it benefit to have a 64-bit operating system from a 32-bit ,,what could we do now that we couldn't before??

does the system run faster or something....

i read that it addresses more memory? what does that mean,,i need more memory?? not sure,...so could someone explain in simple terms?

The 64 bit system can address more memory. 32-bits means the last memory location is at 4GB. With 64 bits the last is at 4GB squared - a VERY large number. The current C2D Macs have a physical limit of 3GB even if they are "64-bit" but that limit is only for physical RAM, virtual memory is basically unlimited.

The best answer is that the 64 bit OS can potentially do more at the same time even if no one of those things runs faster.

The new C2D processors have other advances than just being "64-bits" that will help. But you asked about the OS. From the OS point of view, it's "more things at once".

TRIVIA QUESTION: Who can name the first OS to be "More than 32 bits"?
I know two from the year 1964. There a 40+ year history here.

 

[gr8tfly]

TRIVIA QUESTION: Who can name the first OS to be "More than 32 bits"?
I know two from the year 1964. There a 40+ year history here.

Think that might be a trick question. I don't remember the OS names, but I believe they used to have VERY large instructions (sorta remembering even longer than 32-bits), but that was to try and get more done per cycle, and didn't have to do with addressing space.

 

[mith]

thx

thx to u both now am gettin a better understanding ,,,if anyone else has anything to add.....go right ahead

so 64-bit processor+ 64-bit os + 64 bit applications...addresses more memory is faster and u can run more stuff at same time...basically right? if so den i understand

 

[gr8tfly]

Yep.

 

[ChrisA]

Iin the furtue we will have 132-bit? or something ......original question......what does the user see,,,aside form what's going on under the hood.

You can answer that question by applying a bit of theory. At some point you have a big number and have no need to write any more zeroes on the end. For example assume a minimal storage device that used only one atom to store each bit. Now build a storage device so big that it takes uses every atom in the universe. It is hard to argue anything larger could ever be built. Other upper limits can be based of energy needed to run a system. Always hit a couple hundred bits as an upper limit.

Sun Microsystems argues in a paper about their ZFS file system, it is a 128 bit system that if the minimum amount of waste heat created to flip a bit was just one photon then filling the whole file system with data would boil off all of the Earth's oceans.

There is a strong argument that the human race has not yet generated enough data fill a 64-bit memory. -- I disagree with that one. I think it is to close to call

By these arguments it would be silly to build address spaces that could not ever be filled. The current 64 and 128 bit systems at a limit where it would be pontless to go past.