Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is Core Duo 64-Bit?

64X Infiniband anyone?

..this link is for those people who are going crazy attempting to make up
their mind on what system to buy.

It don't matter anymore.

The bus architectures, cpu architectures and memory bottlenecks since
processing broke into 64bitness are going by the wayside..you can now
buy cheap (under 800 bucks) 64-bit processing at Walmart.

Application speed?

What are you attempting to do..run games? Or compute scientific problems
that have never been solved?

Here is an interim solution, the TopSpin Infiniband cards and their support
for 64X Infiniband access:

http://www.topspin.com/solutions/pdf/HPApplicationNote.pdf

All the processing chips I mentioned earlier, (coreduo issues not withstanding)
will eventually wash out. The Cell Processor is JUST NOT READY FOR PRIMETIME YET. Jobs realized this...and got us something to replace the
notebooks Moto screwed up.

What are we then waiting for?

NEW OS research, higher resource hardware/software combos..perhaps even
some "optical computing chips" (for threadswitched systems right Scott McNeally?). Along with Sun's 128-bit server OS (or the AIX one right IBM?)..
we may yet see Apple turn the industry around. Some are predicting IBM is
going to change everything again with the Cell. Others hope for Sun, or the
"return of one of the seven dwarfs"?

Gee..maybe thats Disney ..right Steve?

Sony needs an optical chip..so does Samsung. The overseas people could
step forward with good Linux boxes and new technology..IF they have their
confidence back...BeOS came up too short too quick.

Gee..maybe Core Duo is actually 128-bit..just runs 16-bit for Mr. Gates.

WW

<--no don't touch that
 
qubex said:
Intel "hid" the 64-bit EM64T extensions to the Pentium4 for quite some time, mainly because they weren't yet ready for prime-time. It makes sense for them to integrate the capabilities into chips for testing and evaluation purposes prior to "rolling out" the feature officially.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you are confusing this with Hyperthreading. Intel didn't actually integrate EMT64 (AMD64) into their CPU's until the 2mb prescott (revision E) and the Nocona Xeon about two years ago.. There was no implemention of this in any of their cpu's (disabled or enabled) Prior
 
wms121 said:
Gee..maybe Core Duo is actually 128-bit..just runs 16-bit for Mr. Gates.
Click to expand...

It is. At least, the SSE3 vector engine is... (And in Core 2 Duos, it even processes an entire 128-bit chunk of data in one clock cycle, where in previous processors, it took two or more.)
 
ehurtley said:
It is. At least, the SSE3 vector engine is... (And in Core 2 Duos, it even processes an entire 128-bit chunk of data in one clock cycle, where in previous processors, it took two or more.)
Click to expand...

except that it can't process 128-bit data as a discrete entity. it is at least two 64-bit pieces of data.
 
ChrisA said:
Not 64 bits but 60. What's four bits? I was a system programmer on a CDC 6600 which I think was the first 60 bit machine introduced in the 1960's It had some very advanced features even by today's standards. For example almost 100% of the operating system and I/O processing was off loaded from the CPU(s) to a set of 10 or 20 smaller "peripheral processors". Using modern terminology the machine had up to 24 "cores" but they were specialized, up to 20 for the OS and I/O and up to 4 for number crunching.
Click to expand...

well, people back then used some weird architectures. 60-bit gp registers, 18-bit scratch-pad registers? who comes up with these bit sizes?
 
..now entering the TWONKY ZONE

..this is scary:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Twonky
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/click...?critic=all&sortby=default&page=1&rid=1210903
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0046475/
http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/movie.html?v_id=114914
http://www.neetstuff.com/TwonkyVideo/TwonkyHome.asp

..and this is the current enabler:

http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/voiceover/

Gee..if Core-Duo IS 128-bit..then maybe we need Solaris with ZFS.

Java IDE's can emulate 128/256 bit chips right?

Anyone run advanced Java (custom Sun modified stuff) on Darwin since
the early releases? Some of that stuff crashes bad..but most of the Darwin
patches (according to many un-dead Bothans..ahem..Unix Gurus) can be
worked around in Objective C using custom assembly for .s code.

WW

<--not my TWONKY
 
..for all the "optical chip" TWONKEYS

..here is an update:

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/media/03/steveObrien/index.html

Columbia showed how to assemble a 3D opti-chip using nano-technology.

Might be awhile before Steve Jobs (Intel or IBM for that matter) get to
purchase a "quantum dot total opti-path chip" using "positronic biasing"
(gee....just like Mr. Data)..but as Shatner sez.."I am working on that".

WW

<--knows PCman
 
...here is what we missed:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/10/power7_optical_ibm/

...more DARPA money* for Steve.

From my previous posts..(on optical processing chips at Intel)..you now
know "the rest of the story".

Avie Tevanian..pls come back and be president of Apple...SJ is so thin now
his neck has almost disappeared.

Oracle ate Sun...Balmer might eat Apple.

WW

* (POWER7 poop:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POWER7

http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/26/ibm-brings-the-ruckus-and-new-power7-processor/

http://www.pclaunches.com/processors/ibm_power7_processor_unveiled.php

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/ibm_gives_details_octocore_power7_processor

)
 
POWER7 is sexy. I mean POWER6 is pretty damn sexy, but POWER7 is just I.want.you.now kind of sexy.
 
The POWER7 is nice and all, but remember that THERE WAS NEVER A G5 POWERBOOK. I'm happy with my dual-core 64-bit laptop capable of running both OS X and Windows at native speeds.


That being said, being able to run 32 threads simultaneously on a single chip is DAMN SEXY. :D
 
It would be absolutely AWESOME if the Core Duo was 64-bit capable. I've been holding off on getting Snow Leopard because I have a Core Duo processor, and it would be pointless to get Snow Leopard if my computer didn't support 64-bit. If the Core Duo's do support 64-bit then I'll be upgrading.
 
MLS said:
It would be absolutely AWESOME if the Core Duo was 64-bit capable. I've been holding off on getting Snow Leopard because I have a Core Duo processor, and it would be pointless to get Snow Leopard if my computer didn't support 64-bit. If the Core Duo's do support 64-bit then I'll be upgrading.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, you'd need the Core 2 Duo to gain a 64-bit processor. The original Core Duo was 32-bit.
 
Ok, I've read all 7 pages of this thread today, and what the hell are you talking about wms121? Just in general, what is the point that you are trying to make?
 
MLS said:
Ah I see. Well I've been planning on upgrading my iMac, so I'll wait until Apple releases a new batch and then buy one of those.
Click to expand...

If you can find one on eBay or somewhere similar, a first-generation mobile Core 2 Duo (aka "Merom") chip will work just fine in your iMac. The CPU on the MacBook (including Pro and Air) line may be soldered down, but on the first Intel-generation iMacs, it used Intel's standard "mPGA 479" mobile socket. Any "T5000" or "T7000" series Core 2 Duo with a 667 MHz front side bus should work just fine. (See Intel's Processor Spec Finder, then change the "Bus Speed" dropdown to "667 MHz", and click "Filter On Selections".) A quick search on eBay shows the top-of-the-line T7600 for $250; or the next-down T7400 for $150-ish.

iFixit even has repair guides that will show you how to do it yourself, step by step.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back