Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So then we think the only issue will start at 10.7 when the 64-bit Kernel becomes a requirement?

Why would Apple make the 64 bit kernel a requirement? The XNU source doesn't look like it's been released yet for 10.6, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a PowerPC version of the kernel still hanging around.
 
Why would Apple make the 64 bit kernel a requirement? The XNU source doesn't look like it's been released yet for 10.6, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a PowerPC version of the kernel still hanging around.

I can accept that through some brilliant code trickery that everything will run smoothly at 64-bit speeds despite the Kernel, but there must be some performance gains from a 64-bit Kernel, or, conversely, some sacrifices they're making in the name of backward compatibility, and I'd think at some point (ie. maybe 10.7) they're going to want to cut ties with the past to move fully forward to exclusively 64-bit computing - and make us buy new workstations :)

Hope I'm wrong! Not much point worrying about an OS that's 18-24 months away :)
 
I can accept that through some brilliant code trickery that everything will run smoothly at 64-bit speeds despite the Kernel, but there must be some performance gains from a 64-bit Kernel, or, conversely, some sacrifices they're making in the name of backward compatibility, and I'd think at some point (ie. maybe 10.7) they're going to want to cut ties with the past to move fully forward to exclusively 64-bit computing - and make us buy new workstations :)

Hope I'm wrong! Not much point worrying about an OS that's 18-24 months away :)

Most likely the benefit of a 64 bit clean kernel is better management of accessing real memory in the system. It can map the memory clean, and not have to remap page tables, etc, to get access to the full memory. As is, it probably has to do some workarounds to handle a 64 bit application using, say, 8gb of physical RAM.
 
Here is some speculation posted on Macintouch at http://www.macintouch.com/readerreports/snowleopard/topic4883.html#d29aug2009

David Empson
Regarding [64-bit kernel support]:
There are some models which have 64-bit EFI but are not able to use the 64-bit kernel. My mid-2007 MacBook Pro (model identifier "MacBookPro3,1") is one such model. If I try to boot into 64-bit kernel, it ends up still being in 32-bit mode. The mid-2007 iMac ("iMac7,1") may fall into the same camp but I haven't confirmed its EFI type.
From other evidence it appears Apple has limited 64-bit kernel support to models introduced in 2008 and later, and so far it is only supported on the iMac, 15"/17" MacBook Pro, Mac Pro and Xserve.
This appears to be tied to the "Penryn" generation of processors, which introduced SSE4 vector instructions. A restriction of this nature allows Apple to make use of SSE4 in the 64-bit kernel.
The precise list of models which can run the 64-bit kernel is on the web page for Markus Winter's Startup Mode Selector, already referenced from this question in the FAQ.

Some future OS may drop support for macs with out SSE4, but Snow Leopard runs the 32 bit kernel by default in everything except the Xserves which run the server version of the OS anyway. It's a public beta at this point.
 
Here is some speculation posted on Macintouch at http://www.macintouch.com/readerreports/snowleopard/topic4883.html#d29aug2009



Some future OS may drop support for macs with out SSE4, but Snow Leopard runs the 32 bit kernel by default in everything except the Xserves which run the server version of the OS anyway. It's a public beta at this point.

Whilst Apple may have limited the 64-bit kernel to SSE4, not all SSE4 Macs can load that kernel. For example, my Santa Rosa MacBook has a Penryn and CPU-X confirms that it has SSE4. That said, the SR MacBook has the Intel X3100, for which there are no 64-bit drivers.

Perhaps it would be possible to load the 64-bit kernel on this machine by disabling the Intel drivers and using the generic VGA fallback.
 
Ummm... I don't think you get it.

Kernel 32 is not the memory manager. Kernel 32 is what powers Leopard and Tiger, and both of those can handle more than 4 gigs of memory, actually a lot more.

The only reason you'd need kernel 64 is if you plan on running more than 4 gigs of kernel extensions.

Snow Leopard will continue running with the same kernel 32 that powers both Leopard and Tiger on the Rev A Mac Pro, which means you will not be capped at 4 gigs of memory.

Again, there are very limited reasons why you'd need to actually run kernel 64.

yes, but what about graphic cards with rom made for efi64 will they be able to run I doubt it. If apple would patch mp1,1 with efi64 (possible?) would graphicards made for efi32 run, i doubt that too.?

Just ordered a 8800GTS patched with 8800GT rom for EFI 32. For my old MP
 
yes, but what about graphic cards with rom made for efi64 will they be able to run I doubt it. If apple would patch mp1,1 with efi64 (possible?) would graphicards made for efi32 run, i doubt that too.?

Just ordered a 8800GTS patched with 8800GT rom for EFI 32. For my old MP

My ATI Radeon HD 4870 has both EFI64 and EFI32 on it.
 
My ATI Radeon HD 4870 has both EFI64 and EFI32 on it.

Does that card work unmodded on a MacPro1,1 (aka 2006)?

A friend just bought a new MacPro some months ago and says having troubles in Leopard and in Sno Leopard. Says unusable in Leopard and very annoying in Snow Leopard. Hes ADC member so he has it on GM which should be the same that is distributed today.
 
Does that card work unmodded on a MacPro1,1 (aka 2006)?

A friend just bought a new MacPro some months ago and says having troubles in Leopard and in Sno Leopard. Says unusable in Leopard and very annoying in Snow Leopard. Hes ADC member so he has it on GM which should be the same that is distributed today.

I bought the 4870 directly from Apple and installed it on my 2006 Mac Pro (original Mac Pro) and it works great. No issues. I didn't modify it at all. It's all stock.
 
My ATI Radeon HD 4870 has both EFI64 and EFI32 on it.

Not sure but read here that the HD 4870 is nether, possible working on a computer with both EFI standards.

edit: second that working on computer with both standards.
also i haven't dared to get SL yet gona wait some weeks at least to see the reaction. But surly is tempting to oder now.
 
I can accept that through some brilliant code trickery that everything will run smoothly at 64-bit speeds despite the Kernel, but there must be some performance gains from a 64-bit Kernel, or, conversely, some sacrifices they're making in the name of backward compatibility, and I'd think at some point (ie. maybe 10.7) they're going to want to cut ties with the past to move fully forward to exclusively 64-bit computing - and make us buy new workstations :)

It entirely depends on the program. A lot of things double in size under 64 bit, and take longer to move around.

If you're dealing with programs that deal with large chunks of data anyway, you'll likely see a speed gain. If you're dealing with code that didn't need 64 bit, you've just double the size of portions of the program, with no real benefit, except causing things to take longer to get shuffled around the processor.

The additional registers are nice, but the kernel code is designed to be small anyway...

There could possibly be very small performance gains, but they really aren't worth the trouble right now. I have no doubt Apple will enable the 64 bit kernel by default in 3-4 years, but everybody freakin out about it now needs to calm down... It's totally the new QuartzGL.
 
Not sure but read here that the HD 4870 is nether, possible working on a computer with both EFI standards.

edit: second that working on computer with both standards.
also i haven't dared to get SL yet gona wait some weeks at least to see the reaction. But surly is tempting to oder now.

The 4870 does indeed work great in Snow Leopard. I've found no issues with it at all. Drivers actually seem to be better in Snow Leopard. Animations are smoother and CoD4 runs a little better in the areas that bogged down in 10.5.8.
 
Are you saying that this card (HD 4870) works with MP 1,1? The information page at apple.com indicates that MPs made before 2008 are not supported.
 
Are you saying that this card (HD 4870) works with MP 1,1? The information page at apple.com indicates that MPs made before 2008 are not supported.

it just works. perfectly. yes, that's what we're saying.

For the last time... There are no issues with using the Apple ATI Radeon 4870 in ANY Mac Pro. I've got a Mac Pro 1,1 here with a 4870 installed and it ran perfect in 10.5.7, 10.5.8 and now 10.6. It's actually running smoother in 10.6, but I think that's due to newer and better video drivers bundled with 10.6.

Just buy the card and stop worrying about it. I didn't hack it or anything.
 
Does this card do OpenCL? If not, why would I want to upgrage to it, seeing I don't game and do only limited video editing. Honestly, I haven't run into any issues with my lowly 7300 GT. It's plenty fast for what I do and dead quiet to boot.
 
Does that card work unmodded on a MacPro1,1 (aka 2006)?

A friend just bought a new MacPro some months ago and says having troubles in Leopard and in Sno Leopard. Says unusable in Leopard and very annoying in Snow Leopard. Hes ADC member so he has it on GM which should be the same that is distributed today.

Correction the card does have issues but not with the computer. It's incompatible with certain screens and apple has been aware of this fact for a long period.
 
Does this card do OpenCL? If not, why would I want to upgrage to it, seeing I don't game and do only limited video editing. Honestly, I haven't run into any issues with my lowly 7300 GT. It's plenty fast for what I do and dead quiet to boot.

From what u say u dont seem to do anything that has anything with graphics to do except some video editing. Well depending on applications you can see huge performance leaps with a good graphic card for such tasks. Also holds true for still picture editing.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.