Cross-Comparison of 32-bit/64-bit kernel and 32-bit/64-bit application

Discussion in 'macOS' started by foxmachia, Aug 30, 2009.

  1. foxmachia macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2009
    #1
    Original Here

    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=10069338

    About 2.5% difference between kernels:

    64-bit SL/64-bit Geekbench--4,263
    32-bit SL/64-bit Geekbench--4,159
    (2.50% difference between 32-bit and 64-bit kernels)

    64-bit SL/32-bit Geekbench--3,910
    32-bit SL/32-bit Geekbench--3,809
    (2.65% difference between 32-bit and 64-bit kernels)

    Not much advantage to booting 64-bit kernel.

    For applications the difference is larger, there is 9% difference between 32-bit Geekbench and 64-bit Geekbench.

    64-bit SL/64-bit Geekbench--4,263
    64-bit SL/32-bit Geekbench--3,910
    (9.0% difference between 32-bit and 64-bit apps)

    32-bit SL/64-bit Geekbench--4,159
    32-bit SL/32-bit Geekbench--3,809
    (9.2% difference between 32-bit and 64-bit apps)

    The 32-bit Snow Leopard kernel can run both 32-bit and 64-bit apps. The biggest bang for the buck is running 64-bit applications.
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    So, basically you get nothing from 64-bit kernel?
     
  3. foxmachia thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2009
    #3
    I cannot say that. Comparing 64-bit SL/64-bit App and 32-bit SL/32-bit App (aka. Leopard in most cases), there is a 11.1% performance boost, which matches Apple's marketing data. Adding Open CL, if some apps implement it, the result will be more promising.
     
  4. uaecasher macrumors 65816

    uaecasher

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Location:
    Stillwater, OK
    #4
    I think the only reason is that you need 64-bit kernel is that apps will be able to address more than 32Gigs, hmm you got an application that needs more than 32 gigs?
     
  5. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #5
    I meant from kernel. 2% is almost nothing and for some people, 64-bit kernel ruined everything. Yes, 64-bit apps are a lot faster.

    Would that make my Text Edit faster :D
     
  6. rpp3po macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2003
    Location:
    Germany
    #6
    The results have to be taken with a grain of salt! Geekbench does neither report raw results like instructions per second nor does it publish how the Geekbench "score" is calculated. In the domain of professional computing nobody would care about a "score" like that.

    It could be the case that Geekbench adds a premium offset for 64 bit code on the estimation that 64 bit can process more data, which isn't exactly true: just bigger numbers and that's a fundamental difference. At most 10% of applications, if at all, can exploit that.
     
  7. iBug2 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2005
    #7
    If you work with scientific apps, 64 bit is much much faster, sometimes more than twice as fast. But I doubt anyone in this forum works with those.
     
  8. Amdahl macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    #8
    It is also helpful at the treasury department, where they are always working with trillion+ levels of debt, and lots of fuzzy math.
     
  9. iBug2 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2005
    #9
    I was being serious.
     

Share This Page