64 v 32 bit CPU

Jrik · 10-03-2005

Could someone please tell me about 32 versus 64 bit CPUs. As I'm going to build a new pc I'm trying to learn as much as poss.
Jrik

*debro* · 10-03-2005

Current software support for 64bit chips is pretty much unavailable outside of linux.

64bit is technically faster, as you can process more information, or same information but at better detail than a 32bits.

In terms of athlon64 vs athlon, the 64b chips are slightly faster & will have a longer life for when we (finally) get a 64b OS (other than linux). And the 64 bit chips have a better upgrade path than the 32b chips.

Also, if you are comparing semprons (athlon 32's) & athlon 64's, the athlon64's are faster as they have more cache & higher clock speeds.

*isadore2* · 10-03-2005

jrik,

I build my own computers also.

I usually make a point of putting "state of the art" ( latest technology ) components into the box.

*debro* · 10-03-2005

Which is great if you have money to burn.

Try and find the sweet spot, price versus performance.

*pipemanid* · 10-03-2005

Check out this thread:
http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=128555

*isadore2* · 10-03-2005

debro,

Isn't that always the prudent way?

Jrik · 10-03-2005

As I do a lot with Photoshop CS 8 & am getting tired of waiting & working around on my present pc. XP OS AMD XP 1800+ CPU (overclocked a bit I have a M/B with Red Storm overclocking, it should be underclocking, as it only lets you go over a little bit) & 512 Mb RAM. I'm thinking of an Intel P4 630 3.0 Mhz 800 FSB 2Mb Cache S775 CPU, which is 64 bit on a Gigabyte GA-81PE775-G Pentium 4 775 Motherboard with 800Mb FSB & 1 or 2 Gigs of RAM. I want to know if 64 bit is of benefit to Photoshop CS 8.
Thanks for replies but I realise I should be a bit clearer.
Jrik

*pipemanid* · 10-03-2005

No real benefit unless the application is written for 64 bit.

Planatoid · 10-03-2005

I'd go for s939 3000+. The stock speed is 1.8ghz but everyone is overclocking them at least to 2.4ghz, probably higher. And they have the built in memory controller, which helps a lot and also dual channel memory.

*pipemanid* · 10-03-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Planatoid

I'd go for s939 3000+. The stock speed is 1.8ghz but everyone is overclocking them at least to 2.4ghz, probably higher. And they have the built in memory controller, which helps a lot and also dual channel memory.

Does anyone run their CPU at the rated speed?

*isadore2* · 10-03-2005

Planatoid,

you look just like Red Green on the canadian show by that name.

Planatoid · 10-03-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by pipemanid

Does anyone run their CPU at the rated speed?

Hmm, I wonder? Could be. However, the 3000+ s939 is the best deal out there right now for an Athlon 64 in a price/performance perspective.

Jrik · 10-03-2005

Thanks, Planatoid but I wouldn't use AMD for Graphics they're good for almost anything else though. I'm wondering if the 64 bit AMDs such as s939 would be different than the 32 bit AMDs for handling graphics?
Jrik

*debro* · 10-03-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jrik

Thanks, Planatoid but I wouldn't use AMD for Graphics they're good for almost anything else though. I'm wondering if the 64 bit AMDs such as s939 would be different than the 32 bit AMDs for handling graphics?
Jrik

Not at the moment. Software is still only 32b, hence performance is still only gonna be marginally faster for the 64b chips (as they are generally marginally faster than their 32b couterparts).

Ice cold · 10-03-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by pipemanid

Does anyone run their CPU at the rated speed?

I do but thats only because i overclocked my cpu to far and now anything faster actually turns out slower so 1.7ghz stays till i can afford a new processor
did boot it to 2.1ghz at one stage.

Planatoid · 10-03-2005

I took some kid's P4 1.8GHz and got it to 2.6GHz stable. It was funny.

crustyteacup · 11-03-2005

go for 64bit, no point in getting a 32bit processor now, you won't see a big difference in performance for most things but when microsoft release xp 64bit you'll get a free speed increase and when programs (and games) come in 64bit versions you'll yet again get a free speed increase. So basically the benefits will not be realised until microsoft release xp 64bit.

*Dee-ehn* · 11-03-2005

Well the benefit of a 64bit CPU because of its ability to do 64bit apps is, when using Windows, zero to none. In about a month, XP64 will be released (at least, that's what some MS marketing guy said). Applications that are made for 64 bit can benefit from it.
As Linux has been ready for 64 bit for quite a long time now, several tests have been done on the Athlon 64 CPUs. The biggest measured difference in speed was a 54% increase (when using the same system, same installation and the 32 and 64bit version of an MP3 encoder called lame). This doesn't mean that all applications will run more than 54% faster when using 64 bit optimized software, but the differences can be big. My guess that, generally speaking, the performance increase will be about 10~20% on an average.

There are good reasons to buy a 64 bit chip (actually I'm talking about AMD chips right now, as their are no interesting Intel alternatives at this time) though. The K8 architecture is quite optimized, also for 32 bit. It has a native built-in memory controller (huge performance boost), dual channel abilities (on the s939 platform) and more interesting techniques. Also Cool'nquiet is an interesting technique; this lowers the clockspeed of the CPU when not that much power is needed, resulting in lower power consumpion, less heat dissipation and thus less noise production.

About the overclocking issue: if you get a mainboard that has working AGP/PCI locks and you have good memory, the Winchester based A64 (s939) can be quite an overclocking monster. I run my 3200+ Winchester on 2167 Mhz (I can't go any further because my mainboard isn't fitted well for overclocking so I can't really set the AGP and PCI locks), but I know more than enough ppl that have NF3/NF4 based systems that do more than 2.5Ghz with their 3000/3200+ Winchester CPU's. That's a lot of performance for very little money.

crustyteacup · 11-03-2005

the native built in memory controller isn't as good as you may think, it means that AMD has control over whether DDR2 memory works with there chips.

look here as its been discussed before (well this was about windows 64bit)

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=117362

*Dee-ehn* · 11-03-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by crustyteacup

the native built in memory controller isn't as good as you may think, it means that AMD has control over whether DDR2 memory works with there chips.

look here as its been discussed before (well this was about windows 64bit)

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=117362

Well... of course AMD controls the use of DDR2 in some way. But, as already has been proven, AMD chips perform better with agressive timed DDR chips than slowly timed DDR2 chips (at a higher clockspeed). That's a very good reason not to support DDR2 yet. AMD did announce that they might skip DDR2 and go for DDR3 (Q1 2006) at once.

And IF DDR2 is needed, it's easy for AMD to integrate it into their CPUs or to add a northbridge to the mainboard (and thus not making use of the internal memory controller).

Jrik · 12-03-2005

Quote:

crustyteacup wrote on 8-11-04 http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=117362 (the intel one has to boot into 32bit mode, like an emulation mode and only runs around 1Ghz when dealing with 32bit code,

& I've heard that Intel 64 bit are 30% faster when running a 64 bit app. but 30% slower when running a 32 bit app. the new 64 bit CPUs do have twice as big L2 cache. As I want Photoshop 8 CS to run a lot better than at present, I realy can't decide tween 64 & 32. If it runs slower in 32 bit mode then the extra cache would be to no advantage wouldn't it? & I believe Photoshop CS 8 would run on 32 bit.
Jrik

*pipemanid* · 12-03-2005

Try this link and see if it answers some of your questions. I'm running Photoshop 8 CS and it runs well with my setup but it needs memory, the more the better.
http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q1...0/index.x?pg=1

Jrik · 12-03-2005

Thanx pipemanid, that was interesting but I still want to find out more.Are thry youor rigs below your message,I hope not,I was thinking 1 or 2GBs of memory but the main systems got 3GB.
Jrik

crustyteacup · 12-03-2005

in that thread i think i was referring to the old Itanium 2 which never got a general release i think apart from in the server and workstation markets. Now intel have new CPU's with 64bit support but i haven't seen there performance with 32bit apps yet but you're probably right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jrik

& I've heard that Intel 64 bit are 30% faster when running a 64 bit app. but 30% slower when running a 32 bit app. the new 64 bit CPUs do have twice as big L2 cache. As I want Photoshop 8 CS to run a lot better than at present, I realy can't decide tween 64 & 32. If it runs slower in 32 bit mode then the extra cache would be to no advantage wouldn't it? & I believe Photoshop CS 8 would run on 32 bit.
Jrik

Asid · 12-03-2005

I have built a system for a friend using the Athlon 64 3000 939 chip and the performance increase compared to my Athlon XP chip is huge. I would reccomend taking the 64 bit path. Also if you are using Photoshop then 512 MB memory is just not enough. Get atleast 1 Gig of Dual Channel memory and you will notice a big performance boost compared to 512 MB

10-03-2005	#1
Jrik MyCE Rookie Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Cairns,Australia Posts: 42	64 v 32 bit CPU Could someone please tell me about 32 versus 64 bit CPUs. As I'm going to build a new pc I'm trying to learn as much as poss. Jrik

10-03-2005	#2
debro Blown to smitherines Join Date: Jul 1999 Location: Between the CDFreaks Orange and Blue Portals Posts: 13,327	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU Current software support for 64bit chips is pretty much unavailable outside of linux. 64bit is technically faster, as you can process more information, or same information but at better detail than a 32bits. In terms of athlon64 vs athlon, the 64b chips are slightly faster & will have a longer life for when we (finally) get a 64b OS (other than linux). And the 64 bit chips have a better upgrade path than the 32b chips. Also, if you are comparing semprons (athlon 32's) & athlon 64's, the athlon64's are faster as they have more cache & higher clock speeds. __________________ / ----- I remember when all this will happen again -----/ You will be baked ... and there will be cake ... you monster. Click here to still be alive! Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. --Terry Pratchett Primary PC: 1.4Ghz Quad Core Cortex A9, 2048MB Ram, Mali 400 video, 32GB Primary, 64Gb Secondary, 802.11N 2.4/5Ghz, 1280x800@10.1" with one years supply of Jelly Beans Secondary PC: i7-Q720@1.6Ghz, 4GB, 500GB Hybrid HDD, Win7 x64 BusPre, Ati HD5470M-1GB, backlit keyboard. Tertiary PC: Amd Phenom II 945, 4GB DDR2, 120GB Vertex 2, AMD HD7850(OC) 2GB , Win8 Pro, 24" 1920x1200, cordless keyboard + mouse + gaming mouse.

10-03-2005	#3
isadore2 CDFreaks Resident Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Seattle Posts: 777	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU jrik, I build my own computers also. I usually make a point of putting "state of the art" ( latest technology ) components into the box.

10-03-2005	#4
debro Blown to smitherines Join Date: Jul 1999 Location: Between the CDFreaks Orange and Blue Portals Posts: 13,327	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU Which is great if you have money to burn. Try and find the sweet spot, price versus performance. __________________ / ----- I remember when all this will happen again -----/ You will be baked ... and there will be cake ... you monster. Click here to still be alive! Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. --Terry Pratchett Primary PC: 1.4Ghz Quad Core Cortex A9, 2048MB Ram, Mali 400 video, 32GB Primary, 64Gb Secondary, 802.11N 2.4/5Ghz, 1280x800@10.1" with one years supply of Jelly Beans Secondary PC: i7-Q720@1.6Ghz, 4GB, 500GB Hybrid HDD, Win7 x64 BusPre, Ati HD5470M-1GB, backlit keyboard. Tertiary PC: Amd Phenom II 945, 4GB DDR2, 120GB Vertex 2, AMD HD7850(OC) 2GB , Win8 Pro, 24" 1920x1200, cordless keyboard + mouse + gaming mouse.

10-03-2005	#5
pipemanid MyCE Resident Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: In The Mountains Posts: 5,374	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU Check out this thread: http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=128555 __________________ Main System Intel D865GBF P4 3.2E 4GB DDR400 2x Maxtor 250GB BenQ 1650 BenQ 1620 Matrox P650 InWin Q500/Antec True550 Dual 19"LCD Backup System Intel D865GLC P4 3.0E 4GB DDR400 2x Maxtor 250GB BenQ 1620 BenQ 1650 Matrox P650 InWin Q500/Antec True550 Dual 17"LCD Workhorse System SuperMicro P6DBS P3 850MHz x 2 1GB SDRAM 4x Seagate UW 9.1GB LiteOn 1633S Pioneer A-305S Matrox G450 InWin Q500/PC Power & Cooling 510 ATX Dual 15"LCD Play System AOpen AX4SG P4 2.8E 2GB DDR400 2x Maxtor 160GB BenQ 1620 BenQ 822A Matrox G550 Antec CS600/Antec True550 Dual 17"LCD Server/Firewall Biostar P4TDK P4 2.4GHz 2GB DDR400 2x Seagate 160GB BenQ 1620 LiteOn SOHD 167T Matrox G450 Antec CS600/Antec True550 19" CRT All Computers Use TB SantaCruz Sound Cards & RealMagic Hollywood+ DVD Decoder cards

Today
Mr. Adbot Register to remove me Join Date: Today Location: Myce HQ Posts: Zillions

Today
Adbot Always the best offers Join Date: Today Location: Myce HQ Posts: Zillions

10-03-2005	#6
isadore2 CDFreaks Resident Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Seattle Posts: 777	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU debro, Isn't that always the prudent way?

10-03-2005	#7
Jrik MyCE Rookie Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Cairns,Australia Posts: 42	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU As I do a lot with Photoshop CS 8 & am getting tired of waiting & working around on my present pc. XP OS AMD XP 1800+ CPU (overclocked a bit I have a M/B with Red Storm overclocking, it should be underclocking, as it only lets you go over a little bit) & 512 Mb RAM. I'm thinking of an Intel P4 630 3.0 Mhz 800 FSB 2Mb Cache S775 CPU, which is 64 bit on a Gigabyte GA-81PE775-G Pentium 4 775 Motherboard with 800Mb FSB & 1 or 2 Gigs of RAM. I want to know if 64 bit is of benefit to Photoshop CS 8. Thanks for replies but I realise I should be a bit clearer. Jrik

10-03-2005	#8
pipemanid MyCE Resident Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: In The Mountains Posts: 5,374	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU No real benefit unless the application is written for 64 bit. __________________ Main System Intel D865GBF P4 3.2E 4GB DDR400 2x Maxtor 250GB BenQ 1650 BenQ 1620 Matrox P650 InWin Q500/Antec True550 Dual 19"LCD Backup System Intel D865GLC P4 3.0E 4GB DDR400 2x Maxtor 250GB BenQ 1620 BenQ 1650 Matrox P650 InWin Q500/Antec True550 Dual 17"LCD Workhorse System SuperMicro P6DBS P3 850MHz x 2 1GB SDRAM 4x Seagate UW 9.1GB LiteOn 1633S Pioneer A-305S Matrox G450 InWin Q500/PC Power & Cooling 510 ATX Dual 15"LCD Play System AOpen AX4SG P4 2.8E 2GB DDR400 2x Maxtor 160GB BenQ 1620 BenQ 822A Matrox G550 Antec CS600/Antec True550 Dual 17"LCD Server/Firewall Biostar P4TDK P4 2.4GHz 2GB DDR400 2x Seagate 160GB BenQ 1620 LiteOn SOHD 167T Matrox G450 Antec CS600/Antec True550 19" CRT All Computers Use TB SantaCruz Sound Cards & RealMagic Hollywood+ DVD Decoder cards

10-03-2005	#9
Planatoid New on Forum Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 9	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU I'd go for s939 3000+. The stock speed is 1.8ghz but everyone is overclocking them at least to 2.4ghz, probably higher. And they have the built in memory controller, which helps a lot and also dual channel memory.

10-03-2005	#11
isadore2 CDFreaks Resident Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Seattle Posts: 777	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU Planatoid, you look just like Red Green on the canadian show by that name.

10-03-2005	#13
Jrik MyCE Rookie Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Cairns,Australia Posts: 42	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU Thanks, Planatoid but I wouldn't use AMD for Graphics they're good for almost anything else though. I'm wondering if the 64 bit AMDs such as s939 would be different than the 32 bit AMDs for handling graphics? Jrik

10-03-2005	#16
Planatoid New on Forum Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 9	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU I took some kid's P4 1.8GHz and got it to 2.6GHz stable. It was funny.

11-03-2005	#17
crustyteacup CD Freaks Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Newcastle, UK Posts: 370	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU go for 64bit, no point in getting a 32bit processor now, you won't see a big difference in performance for most things but when microsoft release xp 64bit you'll get a free speed increase and when programs (and games) come in 64bit versions you'll yet again get a free speed increase. So basically the benefits will not be realised until microsoft release xp 64bit.

11-03-2005	#18
Dee-ehn Retired Administrator Join Date: Feb 2000 Location: On my chair Posts: 15,199	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU Well the benefit of a 64bit CPU because of its ability to do 64bit apps is, when using Windows, zero to none. In about a month, XP64 will be released (at least, that's what some MS marketing guy said). Applications that are made for 64 bit can benefit from it. As Linux has been ready for 64 bit for quite a long time now, several tests have been done on the Athlon 64 CPUs. The biggest measured difference in speed was a 54% increase (when using the same system, same installation and the 32 and 64bit version of an MP3 encoder called lame). This doesn't mean that all applications will run more than 54% faster when using 64 bit optimized software, but the differences can be big. My guess that, generally speaking, the performance increase will be about 10~20% on an average. There are good reasons to buy a 64 bit chip (actually I'm talking about AMD chips right now, as their are no interesting Intel alternatives at this time) though. The K8 architecture is quite optimized, also for 32 bit. It has a native built-in memory controller (huge performance boost), dual channel abilities (on the s939 platform) and more interesting techniques. Also Cool'nquiet is an interesting technique; this lowers the clockspeed of the CPU when not that much power is needed, resulting in lower power consumpion, less heat dissipation and thus less noise production. About the overclocking issue: if you get a mainboard that has working AGP/PCI locks and you have good memory, the Winchester based A64 (s939) can be quite an overclocking monster. I run my 3200+ Winchester on 2167 Mhz (I can't go any further because my mainboard isn't fitted well for overclocking so I can't really set the AGP and PCI locks), but I know more than enough ppl that have NF3/NF4 based systems that do more than 2.5Ghz with their 3000/3200+ Winchester CPU's. That's a lot of performance for very little money. __________________ Every answer is just a question away... My other hobby is photography. Come take a look at what I do! Help us fighting cancer! Hardware tools: Prime95, Sandra, MemtestX86, MBM, DFT CD/DVD: Smartripper, DVD Decrypter, DVD Shrink, ForceAspi Check your CPU wattage online! Nederlandse dropship leveranciers ( gratis ) Linux: be root \|\| Windows: reboot

11-03-2005	#19
crustyteacup CD Freaks Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Newcastle, UK Posts: 370	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU the native built in memory controller isn't as good as you may think, it means that AMD has control over whether DDR2 memory works with there chips. look here as its been discussed before (well this was about windows 64bit) http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=117362

12-03-2005	#22
pipemanid MyCE Resident Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: In The Mountains Posts: 5,374	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU Try this link and see if it answers some of your questions. I'm running Photoshop 8 CS and it runs well with my setup but it needs memory, the more the better. http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q1...0/index.x?pg=1 __________________ Main System Intel D865GBF P4 3.2E 4GB DDR400 2x Maxtor 250GB BenQ 1650 BenQ 1620 Matrox P650 InWin Q500/Antec True550 Dual 19"LCD Backup System Intel D865GLC P4 3.0E 4GB DDR400 2x Maxtor 250GB BenQ 1620 BenQ 1650 Matrox P650 InWin Q500/Antec True550 Dual 17"LCD Workhorse System SuperMicro P6DBS P3 850MHz x 2 1GB SDRAM 4x Seagate UW 9.1GB LiteOn 1633S Pioneer A-305S Matrox G450 InWin Q500/PC Power & Cooling 510 ATX Dual 15"LCD Play System AOpen AX4SG P4 2.8E 2GB DDR400 2x Maxtor 160GB BenQ 1620 BenQ 822A Matrox G550 Antec CS600/Antec True550 Dual 17"LCD Server/Firewall Biostar P4TDK P4 2.4GHz 2GB DDR400 2x Seagate 160GB BenQ 1620 LiteOn SOHD 167T Matrox G450 Antec CS600/Antec True550 19" CRT All Computers Use TB SantaCruz Sound Cards & RealMagic Hollywood+ DVD Decoder cards

12-03-2005	#23
Jrik MyCE Rookie Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Cairns,Australia Posts: 42	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU Thanx pipemanid, that was interesting but I still want to find out more.Are thry youor rigs below your message,I hope not,I was thinking 1 or 2GBs of memory but the main systems got 3GB. Jrik

12-03-2005	#25
Asid CD Freaks Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Brummieland - UK Posts: 407	Re: 64 v 32 bit CPU I have built a system for a friend using the Athlon 64 3000 939 chip and the performance increase compared to my Athlon XP chip is huge. I would reccomend taking the 64 bit path. Also if you are using Photoshop then 512 MB memory is just not enough. Get atleast 1 Gig of Dual Channel memory and you will notice a big performance boost compared to 512 MB

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
32-bit OS and 64-bit CPU	Sodom	General Software	5	23-11-2007 13:32
changing from xp pro 32 to 64 bit	reddswiss	General Software	5	23-05-2007 06:04
64-bit vs. 32-bit Vista...advantages / disadvantages	Hyperspace	General Software	24	12-03-2007 17:54
Do I need 64bit Win XP for a dual core 64 bit CPU?	AlonsoF	General Hardware Forum	6	03-02-2007 02:08
What are 48,000hz, 32 bit wavs for? I thought 44,100 16 bit was CD quality.	MyDivineShadow1	Newbie Forum	1	21-02-2004 22:38

This page was also found with these words
, 32 bit agains 64 bit , 32 bit cpu, 32 bit or 64 bit? windows 7 upgrade 3200 amd sempron xp processor 32 bit, 32-bit cpu, 64 bit os and 32 bit cpu , 64 v 32 , 64-bit os 32-bit cpu , 64bit vs v32bit, 1 ghz 32 bit processor