|
President's Corner: What is After 64-Bit?
by David Robbins March 2005
A quick explanation of the “bit”, in this context of terminology, relates to the amount of data being transferred on each clock cycle. A bit is a “0” or “1,” which when combined into groups of eight, produces Bytes. So a 64-bit system is passing twice the data that a 32-bit one passes in the same amount of time, loosely translated. There has been quite a lot of discussion about the advantages of 64-bit over 32-bit in the last couple of years. The major difference is the size of the path for data. This is because the x86 architecture has about reached its limit concerning maximum speed. So when you can’t go up, you spread out, widen the path to pass more data. This on its own does not sound too controversial, but it makes for many possible changes in the home computer world. The first is the difference in the physical aspects of the CPU. The socket of course has to accommodate many more pins. This is not really a problem since the P4 from Intel has gone to 775 pins. The case, power supply and other considerations for the support of a 64-bit CPU are not really different from the 32-bit CPU. So, you say, “What is the big deal?” The big deal is to have the 64-bit CPU run in the 64-bit mode and to do that there has to be a 64-bit system. This includes 64-bit motherboard, 64-bit daughter cards and 64-bit software. Then you will have to dump all of your software and buy 64-bit versions. There is a 64-bit version of XP, but I don’t think there is much in the way of home-user software. If you were involved with the change from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95, I think you can put this software change-over into perspective. AMD’s idea was to have every body consider changing to 64-bit to increase the performance of the home computer. They included the 32-bit capability so that we would not have to jump right into 64-bit. As a result of the combination there are some performance advantages for the 32-bit side. Although you are running in 32-bit mode, the chip uses some of the 64-bit architecture; that gives some increase in speed relative to running a straight 32-bit CPU at the same speed. In my opinion, if you are considering upgrading and don’t mind the cost, 64-bit may be the way to go. I don’t think we will have much choice in the near future as to whether we go with a 64-bit cpu or not. The 32-bit is slowly disappearing. However, I think we may see a change on the horizon. Intel has decided not to pick up the 64-bit gauntlet and is going in another direction. There is a configuration, which has been around for a long time, that has not been considered by the average home user due to software and hardware limitations. Windows NT has had this option because of its server capability. This other choice is dual processor. There are many disadvantages to this option dealing with control of system resources and each CPU having its own memory, etc. This is an expensive and complicated configuration and use of a computer, which is why the home user has not gone this way en masse. However, Intel is working on a solution to this situation. It is called “Dual-Core”. I don’t think this is the name, just a category. This involves putting two chips in one package. This is done to eliminate most of the troublesome hardware problems related to dual-CPU systems and so make this option more viable to the home user. Thus Intel has expanded the performance capability of the 32-bit system without the headaches of software and extensive hardware change-over. Software writers can make the changes needed for better use of dual processing as the market demands. There is one hitch: this will not necessarily bring about a great increase in performance for the e-mail and Internet-only crowd. Also, this may cause a little more confusion for the “user-only” computer user. But for the slightly advanced to more advanced user this opens doors to what can be done on one computer. With Windows XP you can limit specific programs to use only one processor. If you have a dual CPU and are using XP you can set some of your programs to use CPU1 or CPU2. For example setting one processor to run all the background programs and leaving the other CPU to run programs you are actively using (i.e., Word, Internet Explorer, etc). This can be done on an Intel HyperThreading CPU; I would caution you before doing much of this on the single core HyperThread CPU. This is not a true dual-core CPU package. The CPU2 is a virtual CPU as a result of better management of what otherwise would be wasted cycles of the CPU. Hopefully we will see the fruits of Intel’s labor some time mid-2005. AMD is working on a similar device. I would personally like to have seen the 64-bit technology advance leaving the 32-bit behind. This could open performance doors that as home users we could not even dream of at this time. However, I suffered through one major change and I don’t look forward to having to do it again.
David Robbins is President of the Computer Club of Oklahoma City. David can be reached at David Robbins
|
