64-bit in Leopard - Printable Version
+- iDevGames Forums (http://www.idevgames.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Development Zone (/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: Tools & Technology (/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: 64-bit in Leopard (/thread-4014.html)
64-bit in Leopard - OneSadCookie - Aug 7, 2006 02:14 PM
Yes, Carbon and Cocoa are 64-bit in Leopard. Yes, on the Intel chips, 64-bit is a performance advantage.
Three-way universal binary, anyone? How about a six-way one?
64-bit in Leopard - Max - Aug 7, 2006 03:59 PM
Hum, what about the G5. It is 64-bit too. It's funny though - the previous generation (PowerMac G5) has more advanced technology (64-bit) than the newest generation (Intel iMac which is 32-bit).
64-bit in Leopard - OneSadCookie - Aug 7, 2006 04:12 PM
On PowerPC, 64-bit is a performance disadvantage -- the only reason you'd use it is if you actually wanted to use more than 4GB of RAM in one process.
On Intel, 64-bit is a substantial performance advantage, so you'll want to use it whenever possible.
Apple've said that Leopard's 64-bit Carbon and Cocoa apply to both Intel and PowerPC, though.
The three-way UB that'll be "standard" I guess is 32-bit PowerPC + 32-bit Intel + 64-bit Intel, but there might be reason to make a six-way UB (32-bit PowerPC without Altivec, 32-bit PowerPC with Altivec, 32-bit PowerPC with Altivec and sqrt, 64-bit PowerPC with Altivec and sqrt, 32-bit Intel, 64-bit Intel).
64-bit in Leopard - SethWillits - Aug 7, 2006 10:01 PM
The G5 in the iMac was a joke though. There was no reason to use a G5 other than the fact that it was faster than the G4. 64 bit didn't mean anything there.
64-bit in Leopard - akb825 - Aug 7, 2006 11:02 PM
Wouldn't 64 bit only benefit you if you're actually using 64 bit integers/floating point numbers? Assuming that's the case, it won't make much of a difference most of the time.
64-bit in Leopard - OneSadCookie - Aug 8, 2006 05:14 AM
64-bit Intel chips have twice the number of architected registers that 32-bit ones do. That's where the performance improvement comes from.
64-bit in Leopard - akb825 - Aug 8, 2006 10:54 AM
Alrighty, thanks. Good move for them, and the perfect opportunity to implement such a change without breaking everything.
64-bit in Leopard - KittyMac - Aug 8, 2006 11:04 AM
Quote:On Intel, 64-bit is a substantial performance advantage, so you'll want to use it whenever possible.
Actually, this is almost true. Many programs have been profiled already, and MOST benefit from 64-bit (on a varying scale from "some" to "a whole lot"). However, there are a few tried that are negatively impacted by 64-bit.
You won't know for sure until you recompile and run it.
64-bit in Leopard - OneSadCookie - Aug 9, 2006 02:45 AM
Interesting post from Ian Ollmann on the subject: http://lists.apple.com/archives/perfoptimization-dev/2006/Aug/msg00006.html
64-bit in Leopard - OneSadCookie - Aug 9, 2006 08:03 PM
Interesting post here:
says that APIs that have been deprecated already have *not* been ported to 64-bit. Guess those deprecation warnings may have been more important than some people have been pretending
I'm sure this post breaches NDA, so take a local copy of it before it vanishes
64-bit in Leopard - SethWillits - Aug 9, 2006 10:02 PM
It seems strange to me what's under NDA and what isn't. I get from Apple's point of view that it makes it simple for them, but I can't imagine them going after some developers because they said "deprecated APIs aren't ported to 64-bit" or "Interface Builder 3.0 is totally rewritten and rocks your socks off"
64-bit in Leopard - PowerMacX - Aug 10, 2006 06:06 AM
Well, if you consider that Apple said that they didn't want Microsoft to get a head-start, it makes sense. Well... no it doesn't: Microsoft's MacBU has without a Premium ADC membership, right?
64-bit in Leopard - SethWillits - Aug 10, 2006 08:52 AM
And many of these details aren't exactly... revolutionary. I suppose they do it so they can change it as much as they want and not receive (as much) flak for it.