From: "David Leimbach" <leimy2k@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Current status of amd64 port?
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 06:43:27 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3e1162e60711160643h329d4d7fh60bb21de30aae89b@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8438B414-BE32-4A89-886B-23547C5B6D7F@utopian.net>
On Nov 15, 2007 4:11 PM, Joshua Wood <josh@utopian.net> wrote:
> > 64 bits is neither here nor there in a vaccuum. you want 64 bits if
> > a) you need more than 4GB of memory, or
> > a) those extra registers and direct vlong really matter for
> > performance.
> > otherwise it's just a lot of extra zeros.
> > it's kind of silly to run 64-bit linux on a machine with <= 4GB of
> > memory.
> >
>
> Some testing we did about a year ago showed that (for us) even the
> extra registers -- I always thought the sweetest-sounding part of the
> deal -- help sometimes, but not always. I ended up thinking it was
> because caches hadn't necessarily grown apace with address space. The
> distance between cpu and main memory seemed to have expanded again...
>
Intel or AMD? I've found AMDs memory architecture for 64bit stuff to
pretty much stomp Intel nearly every time.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-16 14:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-16 0:11 Joshua Wood
2007-11-16 14:43 ` David Leimbach [this message]
[not found] <20071116170014.595B2108A1@mail.cse.psu.edu>
2007-11-16 23:10 ` Joshua Wood
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-11-15 22:51 Anthony Sorace
2007-11-15 22:56 ` Uriel
2007-11-16 6:14 ` ron minnich
2007-11-15 23:14 ` Tharaneedharan Vilwanathan
2007-11-15 23:39 ` erik quanstrom
2007-11-16 0:10 ` Tharaneedharan Vilwanathan
2007-11-16 0:18 ` Anthony Sorace
2007-11-16 7:57 ` Robert William Fuller
2007-11-16 10:05 ` erik quanstrom
2007-11-16 10:20 ` Charles Forsyth
2007-11-16 22:38 ` ron minnich
2007-11-16 22:46 ` Tharaneedharan Vilwanathan
2007-11-16 23:20 ` erik quanstrom
2007-11-16 23:19 ` erik quanstrom
2007-11-16 23:40 ` Charles Forsyth
2007-11-16 23:38 ` ron minnich
2007-11-16 23:56 ` Charles Forsyth
2007-11-16 23:54 ` erik quanstrom
2007-11-17 0:14 ` ron minnich
2007-11-17 0:23 ` Charles Forsyth
2007-11-17 0:30 ` ron minnich
2007-11-17 0:33 ` erik quanstrom
2007-11-17 1:08 ` Charles Forsyth
2007-11-17 6:38 ` Geoffrey Avila
2007-11-16 14:41 ` David Leimbach
2007-11-16 14:46 ` erik quanstrom
2007-11-16 15:33 ` Wilhelm B. Kloke
2007-11-16 15:33 ` David Leimbach
2007-11-16 15:35 ` David Leimbach
2007-11-16 15:53 ` Charles Forsyth
2007-11-16 16:21 ` David Leimbach
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3e1162e60711160643h329d4d7fh60bb21de30aae89b@mail.gmail.com \
--to=leimy2k@gmail.com \
--cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).