64-bit or 32-bit: When will it matter?

Discussion in 'IBM' started by aether, Mar 1, 2005.

  1. aether

    aether Guest

    Building a computer from scratch. It'll be built for someone who'll use
    it for alot of things, but tilted in the 'gaming' direction. Should
    whether the processor is 64-bit or 32-bit matter? If not, when? If so,
    how so? In other words, should I go AMD or Intel? I understand AMD is
    slightly faster for games, but what I'm more interested in is the
    long-term utility of the 64-bit processor. By the time 64-bit
    programming is mainstream, will whatever processor I purchase be
    obsolete? I'd like for the computer to be functional for at least two
    years, if not alittle longer. If I went 32-bit (Intel), would it
    assuredly be obsolete, whereas with AMD not so much?
     
    aether, Mar 1, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. aether

    rstlne Guest

    "aether" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Building a computer from scratch. It'll be built for someone who'll use
    > it for alot of things, but tilted in the 'gaming' direction. Should
    > whether the processor is 64-bit or 32-bit matter? If not, when? If so,
    > how so? In other words, should I go AMD or Intel? I understand AMD is
    > slightly faster for games, but what I'm more interested in is the
    > long-term utility of the 64-bit processor. By the time 64-bit
    > programming is mainstream, will whatever processor I purchase be
    > obsolete? I'd like for the computer to be functional for at least two
    > years, if not alittle longer. If I went 32-bit (Intel), would it
    > assuredly be obsolete, whereas with AMD not so much?
    >


    Intel are releasing their 64-bit Processors into the market right now I
    think..
    If not visually then they are at least doing it on paper..
    I'd bet your safe for 2 years using a non-64b system. I doubt you'll save
    any real cost savings by building anything other than a a64 system.
     
    rstlne, Mar 1, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. aether

    joe~V~3838 Guest

    Hey Aether, I'm getting ready to get a N4 and amd 3.2 winchester cpu...
    plus just using the xp home sp2 for software....
    I know MS 64bit OS will be out soon, but I see no real need to get it
    even with a 64bit cpu until games start coming out running in 64bit..
    that's just me.....
    good luck

    "aether" <> wrote in message news:...
    > Building a computer from scratch. It'll be built for someone who'll use
    > it for alot of things, but tilted in the 'gaming' direction. Should
    > whether the processor is 64-bit or 32-bit matter? If not, when? If so,
    > how so? In other words, should I go AMD or Intel? I understand AMD is
    > slightly faster for games, but what I'm more interested in is the
    > long-term utility of the 64-bit processor. By the time 64-bit
    > programming is mainstream, will whatever processor I purchase be
    > obsolete? I'd like for the computer to be functional for at least two
    > years, if not alittle longer. If I went 32-bit (Intel), would it
    > assuredly be obsolete, whereas with AMD not so much?
    >
     
    joe~V~3838, Mar 1, 2005
    #3
  4. "aether" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > Building a computer from scratch. It'll be built for someone who'll use
    > it for alot of things, but tilted in the 'gaming' direction. Should
    > whether the processor is 64-bit or 32-bit matter? If not, when? If so,
    > how so? In other words, should I go AMD or Intel? I understand AMD is
    > slightly faster for games, but what I'm more interested in is the
    > long-term utility of the 64-bit processor. By the time 64-bit
    > programming is mainstream, will whatever processor I purchase be
    > obsolete? I'd like for the computer to be functional for at least two
    > years, if not alittle longer. If I went 32-bit (Intel), would it
    > assuredly be obsolete, whereas with AMD not so much?


    I would consider a processor with 64-bit support to be a slight plus
    right now. At the moment, you're probably better off letting 64-bit CPUs
    drop the prices on processors without 64-bit support. It's quite possible
    that by the time you want a 64-bit CPU for games, the CPU you buy today will
    already be obsolete.

    DS
     
    David Schwartz, Mar 1, 2005
    #4
  5. aether

    Ben Pope Guest

    David Schwartz wrote:
    > "aether" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >> Building a computer from scratch. It'll be built for someone who'll
    >> use it for alot of things, but tilted in the 'gaming' direction.
    >> Should whether the processor is 64-bit or 32-bit matter? If not,
    >> when? If so, how so? In other words, should I go AMD or Intel? I
    >> understand AMD is slightly faster for games, but what I'm more
    >> interested in is the long-term utility of the 64-bit processor. By
    >> the time 64-bit programming is mainstream, will whatever processor I
    >> purchase be obsolete? I'd like for the computer to be functional for
    >> at least two years, if not alittle longer. If I went 32-bit (Intel),
    >> would it assuredly be obsolete, whereas with AMD not so much?

    >
    > I would consider a processor with 64-bit support to be a slight
    > plus right now. At the moment, you're probably better off letting
    > 64-bit CPUs drop the prices on processors without 64-bit support.
    > It's quite possible that by the time you want a 64-bit CPU for games,
    > the CPU you buy today will already be obsolete.


    If you buy a socket 939 CPU and motherboard today, you should be able to
    whack in a dual core CPU at the end of the year.

    I suspect that the 939 socket will live for a while, with options like that.

    Ben
    --
    A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
    Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
    I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...
     
    Ben Pope, Mar 1, 2005
    #5
  6. aether

    Ed Guest

    On 1 Mar 2005 02:27:41 -0800, "aether" <>
    wrote:

    >Building a computer from scratch. It'll be built for someone who'll use
    >it for alot of things, but tilted in the 'gaming' direction. Should
    >whether the processor is 64-bit or 32-bit matter? If not, when? If so,
    >how so? In other words, should I go AMD or Intel? I understand AMD is
    >slightly faster for games, but what I'm more interested in is the
    >long-term utility of the 64-bit processor. By the time 64-bit
    >programming is mainstream, will whatever processor I purchase be
    >obsolete? I'd like for the computer to be functional for at least two
    >years, if not alittle longer. If I went 32-bit (Intel), would it
    >assuredly be obsolete, whereas with AMD not so much?



    When I build a new PC the old one gets used as our 2nd PC, the 2nd then
    becomes the 3rd and so on... so when I built my last PC (6 months ago) I
    went with AMD64 so when it becomes my 2nd PC I'll have two 64-bit
    supported PCs. If you sale the box in 2 years it may be worth more if it
    has a 64-bit CPU inside also.
    Good luck and happy building,
    Ed
     
    Ed, Mar 1, 2005
    #6
  7. aether

    aether Guest

    > Ed wrote:
    > On 1 Mar 2005 02:27:41 -0800, "aether" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    > When I build a new PC the old one gets used as our 2nd PC, the 2nd

    then
    > becomes the 3rd and so on... so when I built my last PC (6 months

    ago) I
    > went with AMD64 so when it becomes my 2nd PC I'll have two 64-bit
    > supported PCs. If you sale the box in 2 years it may be worth more if

    it
    > has a 64-bit CPU inside also.
    > Good luck and happy building,
    > Ed



    Another question: can the Abit AA8XE 'Fatal1ty' board support the new
    Intel EM64T processor? It's an LGA775 based motherboard.
     
    aether, Mar 1, 2005
    #7
  8. aether

    Ed Guest

    On 1 Mar 2005 14:31:01 -0800, "aether" <>
    wrote:

    >> Ed wrote:
    >> On 1 Mar 2005 02:27:41 -0800, "aether" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> When I build a new PC the old one gets used as our 2nd PC, the 2nd

    >then
    >> becomes the 3rd and so on... so when I built my last PC (6 months

    >ago) I
    >> went with AMD64 so when it becomes my 2nd PC I'll have two 64-bit
    >> supported PCs. If you sale the box in 2 years it may be worth more if

    >it
    >> has a 64-bit CPU inside also.
    >> Good luck and happy building,
    >> Ed

    >
    >
    >Another question: can the Abit AA8XE 'Fatal1ty' board support the new
    >Intel EM64T processor? It's an LGA775 based motherboard.


    http://www2.abit.com.tw/test_report/Fatal1ty AA8XE/index.php

    hth,
    Ed
     
    Ed, Mar 1, 2005
    #8
  9. aether

    aether Guest

    > Ed wrote:
    > On 1 Mar 2005 14:31:01 -0800, "aether" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >> Ed wrote:
    > >> On 1 Mar 2005 02:27:41 -0800, "aether" <>
    > >> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> When I build a new PC the old one gets used as our 2nd PC, the 2nd

    > >then
    > >> becomes the 3rd and so on... so when I built my last PC (6 months

    > >ago) I
    > >> went with AMD64 so when it becomes my 2nd PC I'll have two 64-bit
    > >> supported PCs. If you sale the box in 2 years it may be worth more

    if
    > >it
    > >> has a 64-bit CPU inside also.
    > >> Good luck and happy building,
    > >> Ed

    > >
    > >
    > >Another question: can the Abit AA8XE 'Fatal1ty' board support the

    new
    > >Intel EM64T processor? It's an LGA775 based motherboard.

    >
    > http://www2.abit.com.tw/test_report/Fatal1ty AA8XE/index.php
    >
    > hth,
    > Ed



    I honestly overlooked that. Appreciate it, Ed.

    I suppose that means the AA8XE is 'future proof' for a couple years.
    Or, am I missing something?
     
    aether, Mar 1, 2005
    #9
  10. aether wrote:
    >>>Another question: can the Abit AA8XE 'Fatal1ty' board support the

    >
    > new
    >
    >>>Intel EM64T processor? It's an LGA775 based motherboard.

    >>
    >>http://www2.abit.com.tw/test_report/Fatal1ty AA8XE/index.php
    >>
    >>hth,
    >>Ed

    >
    >
    >
    > I honestly overlooked that. Appreciate it, Ed.
    >
    > I suppose that means the AA8XE is 'future proof' for a couple years.
    > Or, am I missing something?

    All boards which can use the 5xx series of intel prescott p4 cpus can
    also use the emt64-capable 6xx series (with a bios update, if there's a
    board which can't yell at the manufacturer until it can...).
    As for future proof, this doesn't exist. With intel, it is already
    certain you will need another board for the upcoming dual-core P4 cpus
    (release sometime this year). With AMD, it wouldn't be that much better,
    you could likely upgrade to some (expensive high-end) dual-core Athlon64
    at the end of the year or so (with socket 939, nothing but new low-end
    cpus are to be released for socket 754), but next year AMD will
    introduce a new socket (M2, boards/cpus will support DDR2-667) too.

    Roland
     
    Roland Scheidegger, Mar 1, 2005
    #10
  11. aether

    Ed Guest

    On 1 Mar 2005 15:16:35 -0800, "aether" <>
    wrote:

    >I honestly overlooked that. Appreciate it, Ed.
    >
    >I suppose that means the AA8XE is 'future proof' for a couple years.
    >Or, am I missing something?


    Hopefully someone else can answer your Qs, I haven't done Intel in
    years.
    Good Luck,
    Ed
     
    Ed, Mar 2, 2005
    #11
  12. aether

    DaveW Guest

    Intel will be releasing their 64 bit P4's shortly. I would recommend
    waiting if you want the computer to be current for several years.

    --
    DaveW



    "aether" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Building a computer from scratch. It'll be built for someone who'll use
    > it for alot of things, but tilted in the 'gaming' direction. Should
    > whether the processor is 64-bit or 32-bit matter? If not, when? If so,
    > how so? In other words, should I go AMD or Intel? I understand AMD is
    > slightly faster for games, but what I'm more interested in is the
    > long-term utility of the 64-bit processor. By the time 64-bit
    > programming is mainstream, will whatever processor I purchase be
    > obsolete? I'd like for the computer to be functional for at least two
    > years, if not alittle longer. If I went 32-bit (Intel), would it
    > assuredly be obsolete, whereas with AMD not so much?
    >
     
    DaveW, Mar 2, 2005
    #12
  13. aether

    Yousuf Khan Guest

    aether wrote:
    > Building a computer from scratch. It'll be built for someone who'll use
    > it for alot of things, but tilted in the 'gaming' direction. Should
    > whether the processor is 64-bit or 32-bit matter? If not, when? If so,
    > how so? In other words, should I go AMD or Intel? I understand AMD is
    > slightly faster for games, but what I'm more interested in is the
    > long-term utility of the 64-bit processor. By the time 64-bit
    > programming is mainstream, will whatever processor I purchase be
    > obsolete? I'd like for the computer to be functional for at least two
    > years, if not alittle longer. If I went 32-bit (Intel), would it
    > assuredly be obsolete, whereas with AMD not so much?


    I actually don't think you will have to worry at all about whether your
    processor will be obsolete by the time 64-bit software becomes more
    prevalent. There used to be a time in the not-too-distant past when
    processors were getting faster and faster all of the time -- those days
    have now past. You won't get more than a few percentage points of
    additional performance even after several years; and the processors are
    way overpowered for the most part. These days they seem to compete on
    "features", such as USB 2.0, or WiFi, or SATA; another feature that they
    compete on is of course 64-bit.

    Go ahead get the 64-bit "feature". The next feature after that might be
    the dual-core feature.

    Yousuf Khan
     
    Yousuf Khan, Mar 2, 2005
    #13
  14. aether

    Tim Guest

    I read recently that MS expects the number of deployments of XP64 bit to be
    in the millions in the first year.
    Secondly, that MS will be aggressively moving apps it markets over to 64bit.
    IE 64 bit is the future, it is here in h/w and the s/w is coming.

    S/W vendors that do not move across quickly will get lost in the rush so
    expect some new Big Names. H/W vendors that do not provide 64 bit drivers
    promptly will be in the shyte. The good thing about the AMD 64 bit
    implementation is the ability to run 32 bit systems. The bad thing about it
    is the ability to run 32 bit systems.

    If you need a system Now then buy what you can Now. The old formular of 1
    step down from the best has always worked well for me IE a Winchester 3500
    on an SLI motherboard would be a good bet. (There used to be 1 very sharp
    price increment between fastest and 2nd fastet).

    The "best" system now tends to last the longest into the future - so long as
    the componentry is good.

    - Tim


    "aether" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Building a computer from scratch. It'll be built for someone who'll use
    > it for alot of things, but tilted in the 'gaming' direction. Should
    > whether the processor is 64-bit or 32-bit matter? If not, when? If so,
    > how so? In other words, should I go AMD or Intel? I understand AMD is
    > slightly faster for games, but what I'm more interested in is the
    > long-term utility of the 64-bit processor. By the time 64-bit
    > programming is mainstream, will whatever processor I purchase be
    > obsolete? I'd like for the computer to be functional for at least two
    > years, if not alittle longer. If I went 32-bit (Intel), would it
    > assuredly be obsolete, whereas with AMD not so much?
    >
     
    Tim, Mar 2, 2005
    #14
  15. aether

    aether Guest

    Well, congratulations guys, you've succeeded in making me somewhat
    cautious again. No matter, I must get this computer built. I've been
    through this before. It seems hesitation only brings other, better
    things on the horizon. If you wait, you wait forever.

    Besides, I've a feeling real utilization of the 64-bit CPU won't take
    place until 2007. At that time, if I'm still breathing air, I'll simply
    upgrade the CPU, as I intend on buying one of the better boards
    available.

    In any event, could anyone clarify what 'Support Intel EM64T' means?
    Compatibility with a 64-bit OS and software? This is surely more
    'future proof' than Intel CPUs currently out that don't 'Support Intel
    EM64T' -- right?
     
    aether, Mar 2, 2005
    #15
  16. aether

    Ed Guest

    On 1 Mar 2005 23:23:34 -0800, "aether" <>
    wrote:

    >Well, congratulations guys, you've succeeded in making me somewhat
    >cautious again. No matter, I must get this computer built. I've been
    >through this before. It seems hesitation only brings other, better
    >things on the horizon. If you wait, you wait forever.
    >
    >Besides, I've a feeling real utilization of the 64-bit CPU won't take
    >place until 2007. At that time, if I'm still breathing air, I'll simply
    >upgrade the CPU, as I intend on buying one of the better boards
    >available.
    >
    >In any event, could anyone clarify what 'Support Intel EM64T' means?
    >Compatibility with a 64-bit OS and software? This is surely more
    >'future proof' than Intel CPUs currently out that don't 'Support Intel
    >EM64T' -- right?



    I would sure hope so, since EM64T is just a copy of AMD's x86-64.
    When you boot up with a 64-bit OS you can mix-and-match 64-bit and
    32-bit applications, running in legacy mode (32-bit apps running under a
    32-bit OS) they remain fully compatible with today's existing 32-bit
    applications and operating systems.

    Ed
     
    Ed, Mar 2, 2005
    #16
  17. aether

    NuTCrAcKeR Guest

    "Ed" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 1 Mar 2005 23:23:34 -0800, "aether" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Well, congratulations guys, you've succeeded in making me somewhat
    >>cautious again. No matter, I must get this computer built. I've been
    >>through this before. It seems hesitation only brings other, better
    >>things on the horizon. If you wait, you wait forever.
    >>
    >>Besides, I've a feeling real utilization of the 64-bit CPU won't take
    >>place until 2007. At that time, if I'm still breathing air, I'll simply
    >>upgrade the CPU, as I intend on buying one of the better boards
    >>available.
    >>
    >>In any event, could anyone clarify what 'Support Intel EM64T' means?
    >>Compatibility with a 64-bit OS and software? This is surely more
    >>'future proof' than Intel CPUs currently out that don't 'Support Intel
    >>EM64T' -- right?

    >
    >
    > I would sure hope so, since EM64T is just a copy of AMD's x86-64.
    > When you boot up with a 64-bit OS you can mix-and-match 64-bit and
    > 32-bit applications, running in legacy mode (32-bit apps running under a
    > 32-bit OS) they remain fully compatible with today's existing 32-bit
    > applications and operating systems.
    >
    > Ed
    >


    I am not sure about the Intel offerings, but the AMD 64bit chips do not
    experience performance degradation when executing 32bit code. If the new
    Xeon/P4 chips will be anything like the Itanum implimenations, you can
    expect horrific 32bit performance. ( 32cpu cycles to execute 1 32bit
    instruction, as opposed to the native 64bit RISC implimenation where its
    nearly a 1:1 ration of clock cycle to instruction execution for native 64bit
    code).

    I have been working with the 64bit Itanium 2 systems from HP ( entry,
    midlevel, and superdomes) ... i like the systems, but not a fan of the lack
    of 32bit performance, since nearly every 64bit app has 32bit code in it
    somewhere. I have been working with 2003 enterprise IA64 and Datacenter
    IA64. Havent been able to play with the enterprise linux platforms yet.

    - NuTs
     
    NuTCrAcKeR, Mar 2, 2005
    #17
  18. "NuTCrAcKeR" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "Ed" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> On 1 Mar 2005 23:23:34 -0800, "aether" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Well, congratulations guys, you've succeeded in making me somewhat
    >>>cautious again. No matter, I must get this computer built. I've been
    >>>through this before. It seems hesitation only brings other, better
    >>>things on the horizon. If you wait, you wait forever.
    >>>
    >>>Besides, I've a feeling real utilization of the 64-bit CPU won't take
    >>>place until 2007. At that time, if I'm still breathing air, I'll simply
    >>>upgrade the CPU, as I intend on buying one of the better boards
    >>>available.
    >>>
    >>>In any event, could anyone clarify what 'Support Intel EM64T' means?
    >>>Compatibility with a 64-bit OS and software? This is surely more
    >>>'future proof' than Intel CPUs currently out that don't 'Support Intel
    >>>EM64T' -- right?

    >>
    >>
    >> I would sure hope so, since EM64T is just a copy of AMD's x86-64.
    >> When you boot up with a 64-bit OS you can mix-and-match 64-bit and
    >> 32-bit applications, running in legacy mode (32-bit apps running under
    >> a
    >> 32-bit OS) they remain fully compatible with today's existing 32-bit
    >> applications and operating systems.
    >>
    >> Ed
    >>

    >
    > I am not sure about the Intel offerings, but the AMD 64bit chips do not
    > experience performance degradation when executing 32bit code. If the new
    > Xeon/P4 chips will be anything like the Itanum implimenations, you can
    > expect horrific 32bit performance. ( 32cpu cycles to execute 1 32bit
    > instruction, as opposed to the native 64bit RISC implimenation where its
    > nearly a 1:1 ration of clock cycle to instruction execution for native
    > 64bit code).
    >
    > I have been working with the 64bit Itanium 2 systems from HP ( entry,
    > midlevel, and superdomes) ... i like the systems, but not a fan of the
    > lack of 32bit performance, since nearly every 64bit app has 32bit code
    > in it somewhere. I have been working with 2003 enterprise IA64 and
    > Datacenter IA64. Havent been able to play with the enterprise linux
    > platforms yet.

    Dead right.
    I have a couple of 64bit systems, because of having a single large
    application, which needs over 8GB of 'flat' memory space. Since we had the
    source, it was relatively easy to generate this as a 64bit application,
    but at the same time I have dozens of 32bit applications. With the AMD64,
    I can run a 32bit copy of XP, as a 'virtual OS', inside a 64bit Linux, and
    get performance in this that is as good as a native 32 bit processor!.
    Intel are launching their third vesion of 64bit procssor, and for some
    things the processors are superb, but the performance in 32 bit, is a real
    'killer' for 90% of users.

    Best Wishes
     
    Roger Hamlett, Mar 2, 2005
    #18
  19. "Roger Hamlett" <> wrote in message
    news:2MqVd.595$...

    > Dead right.
    > I have a couple of 64bit systems, because of having a single large
    > application, which needs over 8GB of 'flat' memory space. Since we had the
    > source, it was relatively easy to generate this as a 64bit application,
    > but at the same time I have dozens of 32bit applications. With the AMD64,
    > I can run a 32bit copy of XP, as a 'virtual OS', inside a 64bit Linux, and
    > get performance in this that is as good as a native 32 bit processor!.
    > Intel are launching their third vesion of 64bit procssor, and for some
    > things the processors are superb, but the performance in 32 bit, is a real
    > 'killer' for 90% of users.


    Don't confuse the Itanium processors, which are 64-bit processors, with
    the new 64-bit Pentium processors, which are 32-bit processors that also
    perform 64-bit operations natively. Itanium processors do not perform 32-bit
    operations as quickly as they perform 64-bit operations. 32-bit processors
    with 64-bit extensions should be essentially equally fast at both (depending
    upon how you measure).

    DS
     
    David Schwartz, Mar 2, 2005
    #19
  20. aether

    aether Guest

    aether, Mar 2, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Gareth Jones

    Does a high FSB really matter??

    Gareth Jones, May 27, 2004, in forum: Abit
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    267
    Gareth Jones
    May 28, 2004
  2. -S-
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    403
  3. aether
    Replies:
    70
    Views:
    1,413
    David Schwartz
    Jun 17, 2005
  4. aether
    Replies:
    70
    Views:
    1,419
    David Schwartz
    Jun 17, 2005
  5. aether
    Replies:
    67
    Views:
    1,440
    David Schwartz
    Jun 17, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page