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.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac Pro Classic, Snow Leopard, and 64-bit kernel
- Thread starter bozz2006
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
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.
nightfly13
macrumors 6502a
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
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.
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.
Saladinos
macrumors 68000
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.
the Efi32bit is able to use longmode wich is a 36 bit addressing mode. That means up to 64GB.
However using longmode will have a latency hit by 1-5%
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
TheSpaz
macrumors 604
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.
TheSpaz
macrumors 604
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.
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.
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.
TheSpaz
macrumors 604
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.
TheSpaz
macrumors 604
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.
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.
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.