Do You Have Experience With AMD 64bit CPUs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter maverick280857
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Experience
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around experiences and opinions regarding AMD 64-bit CPUs, particularly in relation to their performance on different operating systems, such as Windows and Linux. Participants explore the implications of choosing 64-bit technology, its current utility, and comparisons with other processors.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the necessity of 64-bit processors for Windows users, suggesting that they are primarily beneficial for Linux environments.
  • One participant argues that purchasing a 64-bit system is a forward-looking choice, as it allows for future upgrades to 64-bit software, even if current programs are 32-bit.
  • Another participant counters that very few users upgrade their operating systems on existing computers, questioning the practicality of investing in 64-bit technology.
  • Concerns are raised about the current state of 64-bit technology, with one participant stating that it is not yet fully realized and requires new operating systems and software designed for 64-bit architecture to be truly effective.
  • Participants discuss the performance advantages of AMD's 64-bit processors, including low memory latency and cache size, compared to older models like the Celeron.
  • One participant suggests that the Athlon XP or P4 may be better choices than investing in AMD 64-bit processors at this time.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions, with no consensus on the value of investing in AMD 64-bit CPUs. Some see potential benefits, while others highlight significant drawbacks and limitations.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the current limitations of 64-bit technology, including the need for compatible operating systems and software, as well as the general trend of users not upgrading their OS on existing machines.

maverick280857
Messages
1,774
Reaction score
5
Hi

Does anyone here have experience of using an AMD 64bit cpu-based computer?

Cheers
Vivek
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
i'm using intel celeron 2.4GHz.
slow compared to duron
 
A friend of mine recently got an AMD 64bit 3200. If your a windows user, don't even bother getting a 64bit processor. The only place where I see a use for 64bit processors is if your running linux.

----

The reason the celeron is slow is because it barely has any onboard cache.
 
I use Windows and Linux both. Thanks for the input.
 
Relating to Windows Operating systems;

Why wouldn't purchase of a 64-bit system be a 'forward looking' choice?
MS had provided a free trial download of WinXP to be used with the 64-bit AMD systems (I don't know whether it is still available). 32-bits is definitely an improvement over the older 16-bit systems and 64-bits ought to be better still. Even if all your programs remain 32-bit the OS itself would be humming along nicely, wouldn't it?
Later, as 64-bit programs become availble, you're not stuck with 'outdated' 32-bit technology. Is anything wrong with this thinking?
 
BoulderHead said:
Later, as 64-bit programs become availble, you're not stuck with 'outdated' 32-bit technology. Is anything wrong with this thinking?
Just that last bit. Very, very few people upgrade their OS on an existing computer. I'm a computer geek and I've only done it once - and on a computer that wasn't my choice to have anyway.
 
heres a nice artical on the AMD 64bit procs

http://www.devx.com/amd/Article/17962
 
Opteron and Athlon 64 - not just 64-bit

dduardo said:
A friend of mine recently got an AMD 64bit 3200. If your a windows user, don't even bother getting a 64bit processor. The only place where I see a use for 64bit processors is if your running linux.
AMD's 64-bit processors also have low memory latency due to their onboard memory controllers.



The reason the celeron is slow is because it barely has any onboard cache.
AMD's only chips with more than 512k L2 cache are 64 bit. Also, one reason cache enhances performance is the reduction in memory latency it provides (when cache hits are correctly predicted), and AMD's 64-bit processors have - again, due to their onboard memory controllers - about half the non-cache memory latency of AMD's Athlon chips.
 
Just that last bit. Very, very few people upgrade their OS on an existing computer. I'm a computer geek and I've only done it once - and on a computer that wasn't my choice to have anyway.

It doesn't mean you can't though. If Windows were to come out with a 64-bit version soon, you could simply upgrade your software.
 
  • #10
Right now the 64-bit isn't at the top of it's game. For it to actually run like a 64-bit, Microsoft would have to pullout a new OS and any program would have to be designed for the 64. It's not worth it right now. It needs time.
 
  • #11
So, the comclusion is "do not invest in AMD 64 bit", Athlon XP or P4 is the best choice.
 
  • #12
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/evaluation/upgrade.mspx
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K