64-bit vs 32-bit
jciccone at gmail.com
Tue Mar 27 15:31:18 PDT 2007
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Thanks Bryan. That is a very interesting result. It's only one data
> point, but it tends to confirm other reports that I have seen that 64
> bit processing isn't significantly faster for most tasks.
> If you are running a server with > 4G Ram and very large data sets (i.e.
> a large database) the additional memory address size would be a definite
> advantage. Also if you are doing very compute intensive tasks such as
> solving systems of differential equations (e.g. computational fluid
> dynamics), 64-bit processing can make a difference.
> Until I see a need, I'm going to stick with 32-bit computing. YMMV
If you have a generic peice of code targeted to run on all x86 cpus
(32bit and 64bit) regardless of the amount of registers / banks the
processor has it's going to take just as long to get the job done,
within a reasonable difference in time. But where you see a difference
is when that piece of code is tailored to that processor. You can
definitely also see a difference in math processing. I'll have to run
some benchmarks. Probably be some time before I don't have my hands tied
behind my back though.
Personal Opinion: My AMD Athlon X2 4400+ (2.4ghz) seems to be just
slightly faster then my P4 3ghz (Prescott). It takes probably almost
20-30 more minutes to build clfs-sysroot (through xorg) on my P4. Bear
in mind that the LFS build on the P4 is substantially older then the
CLFS build on my AMD.
More information about the lfs-dev