[MattJeff]

if apple where to update before the holidays to merom in the MBP, would it be 100% 64 bit? ready for 64 bit apps, or would i have to wait untill santa rosa for true 64 bit?

[zaghahzag]

you have to wait for a 64 bit os.. of course that won't do anyhting.

i really wish someone would tell the masses how useless 64 bit will be for them until their machines get >2 gigs of ram.

[mduell]

Santa Rosa has nothing to do with 64-bit.

The current Merom on Napa (945PM) will run all the 64-bit (x86-64) OS and apps.

[jamil5454]

Originally Posted by zaghahzag

you have to wait for a 64 bit os.. of course that won't do anyhting.

i really wish someone would tell the masses how useless 64 bit will be for them until their machines get >2 gigs of ram.

True, the masses possibly won't see the benefit of 64-bit until you can affordably get 4GB in your iMac or MacBook, but there are other benefits to having a 64-bit processor, primarily in the fields of scientific apps, rendering apps, and other math-intensive large calculation apps.

The main reason why we see 64-bit apps perform equal to or worse than their 32-bit counterparts is because the app used 64-bit floats where it really only needed 32-bit floats, so you're occupying twice as much memory as you need to and as a result your overhead becomes much larger. As 64-bit processors become more mainstream, I reckon developers will begin optimizing more heavily for 64-bit, at which point I will be glad I upgraded my Core Duo iMac to a Core 2 Duo iMac.

I'm not claiming to be a master on the subject or anything, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn™ last night.

[mac128k-1984]

Originally Posted by zaghahzag

you have to wait for a 64 bit os.

Yep, and its called TIGER. OSX is already 64bit

[shiff]

Tiger is not 100% 64 bit. It does provide support for 64bit and other things.

Leopard is supposed to be fully 64bit.

[Tomchu]

16 GP registers vs. 8 GP registers IS a big deal in quite a few applications. That's where the benefit of x86-64 comes in, but only when done properly.

Intel's past x86-64 hacks actually resulted in lower performance in 64-bit mode than 32-bit, whereas AMD's implementation is almost always faster. I'm not sure whether they're still "faking" 64-bit in Core 2 using 32-bit units.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by mac128k-1984

Yep, and its called TIGER. OSX is already 64bit

No, it's not. Mac OS X can run command line applications as 64 bit. That's it. Carbon and Cocoa are not 64 bit.

[Chuckit]

The OS can totally take advantage of 64-bit processors; a couple of application frameworks can't.

[zaghahzag]

nevermind

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

The OS can totally take advantage of 64-bit processors; a couple of application frameworks can't.

By a couple of frameworks, I hope you mean all of the frameworks, because none of OS X's frameworks are 64 bit, the only exception being the Accelerate framework.

[MattJeff]

So what your saying is that waiting for santa rosa is a waste? should i get the 32 bit right now and forget 64 bit? i work with editing video,creating music, Large amounts of photos, and Gaming when im bored. when i go to college i will most likly be dealing with 3-D apps(pixars toys). is the wait worth it?

[mduell]

Waiting for 64-bit is a waste. Waiting for Santa Rosa? Probably worthwhile.

[jamil5454]

Originally Posted by MattJeff

So what your saying is that waiting for santa rosa is a waste? should i get the 32 bit right now and forget 64 bit? i work with editing video,creating music, Large amounts of photos, and Gaming when im bored. when i go to college i will most likly be dealing with 3-D apps(pixars toys). is the wait worth it?

Just wait. You'll feel much better you did.