Adobe CS5 and EFI 32/64

JesterJJZ

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Jul 21, 2004
2,406
751
Here's a question. Will the 64bit move by Adobe offer anything if it's run on EFI32? Will I notice improvements even on my 2006 1,1?
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
It can utilize +3GB of RAM. You can still get the full performance of 64-bit app when running 32-bit kernel. I don't get the 64-bit kernel stuff, it's not faster really and if it is, it isn't much
 

robbieduncan

Moderator emeritus
Jul 24, 2002
24,488
11
London
Well yeah, that's why the 64 bit kernal stuff is confusing me. What is it exactly about the 64 bit kernal that makes it better?
For standard desktop users it isn't better (at least yet). That's why if you buy a brand-new Mac Pro today with OSX client (not OSX server) it'll boot the 32-bit kernel.
 

bozz2006

macrumors 68030
Aug 24, 2007
2,530
0
Minnesota
It'll make everything faster when programs get so big that they congest each other. Think of it as moving from a 2 lane highway to a ten lane highway. Right now there is hardly enough traffic to make a 2 lane highway congested, but soon enough there will be, making being on a ten lane highway beneficial. But as of right now, it won't do much for you.
 

Cindori

macrumors 68040
Jan 17, 2008
3,523
367
Sweden
32 Bit OSX (kernel, EFI, same ****) can still run 64-bit apps. Correct me if I'm wrong but OSX is not yet powerful enough to benefit from 64-bit (or rather: not be saturated by 32-bit)
 

lloyd709

macrumors 6502
Jan 10, 2008
312
0
Here's a question. Will the 64bit move by Adobe offer anything if it's run on EFI32? Will I notice improvements even on my 2006 1,1?
I was wondering the same thing - more specifically though, will CS5 be able to address more than 4 Gig of memory on my 2006 1,1 MacPro?
 

TheStrudel

macrumors 65816
Jan 5, 2008
1,133
1
As I understood it (and I suggest you read John Siracusa's articles about OS X on arstechnica, as he explains a lot in a very easy-to-read fashion), the point of a 64-bit kernel is to run 64-bit kernel extensions and allow the kernel to address more than 4 GB of RAM, and is part of a general modernization of OS X. You don't need it and won't need it for quite some time, but upgrading it now allows the transition to be more painless in the future.

The same could be said of Snow Leopard in general. It's way more forward thinking than not and most of its technologies have not been used in any shipping software, but allows future software to be anywhere from 2 to 10 times faster on the same hardware.

Right now, there's no need for 64-bit goodness in the kernel, but keep in mind, 128k of RAM seemed like plenty for the original Macintosh until it was halfway through development.

CS5 and any other software will still be great without a 64-bit kernel. Don't worry about it. I don't think it'll be an issue for about 5 years. Two at the very least.

The software can definitely address more than 3 GB of RAM even if the kernel is only 32-bit. That's not the cause of the RAM limitation. The kernel's only doing kernel business and kernel extensions, which is almost always lower-level stuff that does not have much overhead or much relation to the end-user GUI actions aside from drivers, etc.
 

lloyd709

macrumors 6502
Jan 10, 2008
312
0
beto2k7 wrote "no" in answer to my question whether CS5 can address more than 4 GB of RAM on my 2006 1.1 Mac Pro. However, a number of posts here seems to imply that that the 64 bit thing is of little relevance. Well it is of very big relevance if it means that by not having it I'm only limited to 4GB of RAM with Photoshop.

So with all due respect to beto2k7 can anyone confirm that this is correct (that CS5 will not be able to address more than 4 GB of RAM on my 2006 1.1 Mac Pro) - because it will be the one and only reason why I would want/need to upgrade.
 

Infrared

macrumors 68000
Mar 28, 2007
1,680
56
Some programs already perform (slightly) better when the 64-bit
kernel is running:

http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-Performance.html

I think it might be worth noting that you get more in 64-bit mode
than just a larger address space. For OS X you get NX stack and
heap protection. There are more registers - that can mean more
efficient code. There is an extended instruction set.
 

Pressure

macrumors 68040
May 30, 2006
3,906
230
Denmark
I wouldn't worry much about it. Mac OS X supports "Physical Address Extension” 36-bit memory addressing, so even your Mac Pro 1,1 can address 64GB of ram. Although any individual application is still limited to a 4GB limit. Unlike Windows, however, in Mac OS X the given application has access to the full 4GB of ram.

So unless you do anything really demanding the 32-bit running Mac Pro's should be fine for quite some time.

CS5 should, finally, be ported to Cocoa 64-bit (from Carbon), so it can access more ram and resources.
 

iamcheerful

macrumors 6502
Oct 3, 2008
259
0
Some programs already perform (slightly) better when the 64-bit
kernel is running:

http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-Performance.html

I think it might be worth noting that you get more in 64-bit mode
than just a larger address space. For OS X you get NX stack and
heap protection. There are more registers - that can mean more
efficient code. There is an extended instruction set.
Adding to what you mentioned (well, this is just a very quick overview from Lloyd Chambers) ...

Tests of photographic applications show that the gains of booting with the 64-bit kernel can be substantial, keeping in mind that a 30% gain via hardware often costs several thousand dollars more. Why not get a good chunk of that for about $25?

Your 64-bit programs (if any) will run fine on a 32-bit kernel, gaining the benefits of 64-bit-ness. But they won’t see full performance that way.
source: http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-64bit.html
 

Dr.Pants

macrumors 65816
Jan 8, 2009
1,181
2
So with all due respect to beto2k7 can anyone confirm that this is correct (that CS5 will not be able to address more than 4 GB of RAM on my 2006 1.1 Mac Pro) - because it will be the one and only reason why I would want/need to upgrade.
You'll be fine. If the application in CS5 is 64-bit, then it will be able to address more RAM then your machine can hold. And it seems like CS5 has to head for 64-bit.

What these people have been talking about is the 64-bit kernel which doesn't need to be 64-bit - you can address more RAM with a 32-bit kernel thanks to Physical Address Extension as Pressure noted.
 

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,718
2
CS5 should, finally, be ported to Cocoa 64-bit (from Carbon), so it can access more ram and resources.
That's what Adobe claims. ;)

How heavy is CS with floating point calculations (I'd think not that much, but I could be missing something, as I don't use that software)?
 

lloyd709

macrumors 6502
Jan 10, 2008
312
0
You'll be fine. If the application in CS5 is 64-bit, then it will be able to address more RAM then your machine can hold. And it seems like CS5 has to head for 64-bit.

What these people have been talking about is the 64-bit kernel which doesn't need to be 64-bit - you can address more RAM with a 32-bit kernel thanks to Physical Address Extension as Pressure noted.
Sorry, but there still seems to be some confusion here still. To quote Pressure - "any individual application is still limited to a 4GB limit" but you state that CS5 (I'm assuming you mean the single Photoshop application) will be able to address all my RAM.

So which is it guys? Will CS5 be able to use more than 4GB of RAM on my 1.1 Mac Pro or not? We could have a vote on it!!
 

lloyd709

macrumors 6502
Jan 10, 2008
312
0
Yes. Up to 64GB anyway (limit of 36 bit addressing, as Pressure has already mentioned).
Sorry, but Pressure also said, to quote "any individual application is still limited to a 4GB limit". So by saying "as Pressure has already mentioned" gives me doubts.
 

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,718
2
Sorry, but Pressure also said, to quote "any individual application is still limited to a 4GB limit". So by saying "as Pressure has already mentioned" gives me doubts.
The 4GB application limit would be under K32, not K64 from what I can tell (OS X's memory management).

The 36bit addressing patch crap makes understanding the details a damn mess IMO (no idea if there's issues with it = doesn't work as expected). :rolleyes: :(
 

TheStrudel

macrumors 65816
Jan 5, 2008
1,133
1
I was given to understand that as long as the app itself was 64-bit, it could use more than 4 GB of RAM regardless of whether you booted K32 or K64. At least, this was the understanding I got from the ArsTechnica articles.

Regrettably, I don't have the latest version of FCS, which (I think?) had either Motion or Color as a 64-bit app, or I'd test that right now. I was holding out for the next FCS 8 and will buy CS5 as soon as I can.

If somebody can settle this definitively, preferably with a reference, that'd be great. Alternatively, a screenshot showing a 64-bit app using more than 4 GB of RAM with K32 booted.
 

Infrared

macrumors 68000
Mar 28, 2007
1,680
56
Regrettably, I don't have the latest version of FCS, which (I think?) had either Motion or Color as a 64-bit app, or I'd test that right now. I was holding out for the next FCS 8 and will buy CS5 as soon as I can.
In FCS 3, FCP, Motion, Color, Soundtrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro
and Compressor are 32-bit apps.
 

TheStrudel

macrumors 65816
Jan 5, 2008
1,133
1
Yeah, I remember again why I was going to wait for the next release.

For a company trying to get moving on 64-bit,  sure hasn't been moving real fast.

Anyway, I fully expect CS5 to blow me away just based on what they've demo'd so far and the speed increases we're bound to see.
 

JesterJJZ

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Jul 21, 2004
2,406
751
So what's the verdict? We're getting conflicting answers. Will CS5 on my MacPro 1,1 see and use more than 4GB of RAM even in EFI 32bit?