Panther not really 64 Bit?

WOW!

Tons of great info and debate! While it is clear that the final verdict is still out on this one, the contributions have been very insightful.

I hope the HP comparison in the last quote is correct, and that the installer just installs the correct version for your machine.

Keep discussing! I've learned more about system architecture in the last 2 pages that I could on my own, and appreciate everybody's input.
 
Reading on the Register, they claim that Panther won't actually be 64 Bit, but have certain features that allow optimization in 64 bit environments, and allow software programs to actually utilize the 64 bit processes.
I think this is quite interesting. I thought it was supposed to be completely 64 Bit.
 
It was a dead give away when I heard someone (I think right here in this board) was running Panther on an iBook.

For those who care to listen:
64 bits will not be what gets me excited about the G5. Here is what will:

2 integer execution units
2 floating point execution units
1 vector unit (Altivec)
What was that remakr about 200+ "in flight" instructions per cycle? *me drools*

There are tons of other goodies being overlooked. People hear G5 and automatically think "64 bit computing" and again make an assumption that 64 bits is the key to faster computation. It's the opposite. A 64 bit platform has more overhead compared to a 32 bit platform. No it doesn't mean twice the power, it means twice the baggage. Your instructions will be twice as big so your compiled app binaries will be larger and the system will need a faster bus to send these instructions to the CPU. Yes, the new PowerMacs will have up to 1 GHz bus speeds but that's a compromise, not an improvement. That fact that the G5 can run 32 bit code natively and not emulated, it can then take advantage of the faster bus speeds and all the improvements done to the architecture.
 
Lycander, you now make me think that 64-bit computing has no speed benefits then!? Could you elaborate please? ;)
 
At equal clockspeeds, 64bit computing is not faster than 32bit computing. Driving at 100Mph, a 64 ton lorry is not faster than a 32 ton lorry. I'm afraid it boils down to that. If you need to transport 64 tons of data, you must use the 64 ton lorry, becasue you cannot cut your stuff in two. It will then take longer to load the 64 ton lorry. Even if you want to transport only 32 tons of data, you will have to use more time to load it (overhead). However, you have a clear advantage over the 32 bit lorry which cannot transport 64 ton data all all! Moreover the G5 lorry will run at much more than the measly 1.42 GHz/Mph of the G4...
 
Cat sums it up nicely. 64 bit computing puts emphasis on:

1) Dealing with large amounts of memory for apps that require it (graphics/video, database, scientific analysis)

2) Accuracy (higher precision floating point math)

64 computing does not put emphasis on speed/performance. Performance is measure by many factors and not the bits of a platform alone. It's a case of functionality over performance. A diesel truck is not as fast or elegant as a sports car, but you wouldn't haul nothing more than a blonde feather weight model in a sports car.

In my first post I should have used the word "compensation" not compromise. The 800-1000 MHz bus speeds in the new PowerMacs compensates for larger data/instruction sizes.
 
Originally posted by Lycander

2) Accuracy (higher precision floating point math)
Click to expand...

Not quite since we have basically always had 64 bit floating point processors.

Also on may 64 bit processors there is a 32 bit address mode where a given process which does not need to see more the 32 bits of address space can still use 32 bit pointers. These are just zero extended in the processor for 64 bits. That lets you avoid many of the 64 bit slowdowns when you can.
 
mostly agreeing with what has been said here. 64bit is a memory address thing. For the few current apps and many future apps that benefit from it, it's there. The truly crazy coolness of the PowerPC architecture is that it runs 32 bit code with no speed hit on 32 bit or 64 bit architectures. It's been that way for years, this is just the first one to be mainstream / personal computer oriented.

So if you benefit from smaller application size, compile 32 bit, it'll run on both. If you compile for 64 bit, a 32 bit processor won't understand it. Just like if you compile specifically for the G4 a G3 or below won't run it.

As for the OS, well, they didn't rewrite and recompile every single line of code you ninnies. :) I believe this is helped by the Mach hardware abstraction layer in place in Mac OS X. I see very little reason that one couldn't write a 32 bit bootloader that asked the CPU how many bits it was and then loaded the appropriate kernel. The rest of the OS can stay. As long as Mach can understand 64 bit calls on 64 bit hardware then the 64 bit apps can benefit from the 64 bit hardware. Just because it runs on 32 bit hardware doesn't mean there's nothing else there.

Though I must agree that if it runs at all on 32 bit hardware then it's not purely 64 bit. But really, did you expect it to be? It takes a decade to flesh out a full OS anymore, there'll be 32 bit code in there forever. It's smaller, just as fast, and if it doesn't need 4+G of RAM, there's no reason to change it.
 
All I have to say is:
Big freaking deal if Panther will be semi 64 bit, 32 bit+, 64 bit-, whatever!

As long as I will be able to use:
-8GB of RAM or more
-more than 1 TB of hard disk
-32&64 bit apps
-32&64 bit whatever stuff
-all while >=speed than I can do 32 bit on Jaguar and >=stable too, all I say is:
:mad: BIG FREAKING DEAL :mad:
 
The big freakin deal is "bragging rights." Apple gets to brag about being the first company to bring 64 bit computing into the mainstream consumer market. Customers get to brag that they have a 64 bit workstation - and didn't have to sell their car (or whatever valuables).
 
I'm quite sure the definite info will come with the G5s and later Panther builds.
 
Originally posted by Lycander
The big freakin deal is "bragging rights." Apple gets to brag about being the first company to bring 64 bit computing into the mainstream consumer market. Customers get to brag that they have a 64 bit workstation - and didn't have to sell their car (or whatever valuables).
Click to expand...

...name a company which offers a 64 bit solution with all the tech stuff of G5+OS X software solutions and performance at prices of $2000-$3000... Oh, provide and some links too! :rolleyes:

Then we can start bragging or not...

Not to mention that Apple brags about the worlds fastest (or first 64 bit) Personal Computer... Not Server... Not Workstation... :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top