Re: AMD64 (aka x86-64) shift
Monday, January 31st, 2005I’ve been meaning to do the same since I’ve heard these quite a while ago, way back when I played PC games to kill time (like I don’t nowadays, but I now play for a different reason, worth another blog entry…)
I’ve been reading stuff on the AMD64 straight from the source, and it seems that there really is only one reason why you would want to play (and work) on an x86-64: 64-bit machines can run apps fast. Don’t worry if your existing apps are 32-bit: apparently AMD has done a neat job of using the existing x86 arch and extending its capacity to 64-bit (hence the machine hardware technical designation x86-64), essentially bridging the gap Intel has been struggling for some time, wishing that corporate consumers would take the lead in the utility of 64-bit computing.
Why so fast? Well, in a (very inacurrate perhaps, but still descriptive) nutshell, when the processor sees 32-bit instructions, it can feed those into its 64-bit bus, effectively allowing for two instructions to be processed at the same time. Forget about Pentium 4’s hyperthreading: this is faster. And it altogether saves more power, as the AMD64 is built on the same copper-based core as the breakthrough K6s and Athlon K7s.
But, of course, everything I just wrote isn’t even new. If I were you, I’d wait, like what they say, “good things come to those who wait.” There’s a lot of buzz about them processor giants releasing dual-core processors, and that would be nice, since that would most likely bring prices down and make us all happy…