Interesting business story about Apple/IBM - ehMac.ca
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Advertise


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old May 21st, 2003, 03:13 PM   #1
Full Citizen
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 918
Post

Saw this and thought it might be of interest.

John

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo..._PG2_tc056.htm
jlcinc is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old May 21st, 2003, 04:41 PM   #2
Full Citizen
 
Tomac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Burnaby, B.C.
Posts: 259
Post

Remember to check out page one.

Quote:
IBM says the new Apple chip will be of the 64-bit variety, which means it can process twice as much information per cycle as existing 32-bit chips.
Mmmmm... good things cookin'.
Tomac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2003, 05:31 PM   #3
Assured Advertiser
Honourable Citizen
 
jfpoole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Posts: 2,198
Post

While it's strictly true that a 64-bit chip can process as much data per cycle as a 32-bit chip (all other things being equal, of course), a lot of the time applications won't take advantage of this fact.

Say, for example, I write a program that computes all of the primes less than a million. All of the numbers the program deals with can be expressed as 32-bit numbers. Running this program to a 64-bit platform won't yield any speed increase over running this program on a 32-bit platform.

Of course, if I write a program that manipulates 64-bit values, then there will be a speed increase if I run it on a 64-bit platform rather than a 32-bit platform.

The real advantage (as far as I'm concerned) with moving from a 32-bit platform to a 64-bit platform is the ability to address far more memory in a process (2^32 times more, actually). While this isn't a problem for most users, it is a problem for some, and it's the sort of thing that's going to only get worse as time goes on.
jfpoole is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old May 21st, 2003, 06:31 PM   #4
Canadian By Choice
 
used to be jwoodget's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,138
Post

jfp,

Did coders consolidate/compile data segments in moving from 8 to 16 to 32 bit processors? In other words, is there a processing efficiency gain to be made by concatenating input data if the processor can handle more bits? If not, I'd imagine that the speed gains from moving up the bit tree would be significantly reduced (diminishing returns). But then, this doesn't seem to be the case in graphics chips (which are at 128 bit). I'm utterly ignorant of this in spite of reading the Ars Technica article on 64 bit processing. I understand the memory addressing gain and agree that this is a significant limitation of 32 bit chips.
used to be jwoodget is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2003, 08:12 PM   #5
Honourable Citizen
 
(( p g ))'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,304
Post

If Apple drops Motorola for IBM it won't just be for a faster chip: it will be becasue Moto has become an unreliable supplier to the point where delays and an apparent lack of interest in developing a G5 have cost Apple a sizeable chunk of its market. I'd be pulling my hair out if my business relied on these guys as a sole-source for such an important component.

[ May 21, 2003, 11:11 PM: Message edited by: PGant ]
(( p g )) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2003, 10:23 PM   #6
Assured Advertiser
Honourable Citizen
 
jfpoole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Posts: 2,198
Post

jwoodget,

Developers will generally only re-write code to take advantage of new, wider registers if the code is manipulating data that is too wide to fit into exisitng registers.

Consider a graphics package that stores screen co-ordinates as 64-bit integers. On a 32-bit system, each co-ordinate would have to be split across multiple registers, and calculations on these co-ordinates would take longer to execute than equivalent calculations on 32-bit values. On a 64-bit system, each co-ordinate would fit in a single register, and calculations on these co-ordinates would be as fast as equivalent calculations on 32-bit values. Hence, moving the graphics package to a 64-bit platform would yield a significant speed increase.

Of course, if the screen co-ordinates are 32-bit integers, then there isn't an advantage to moving to a 64-bit platform. You can't cram two 32-bit integers into a 64-bit register and get correct results. This is where SIMD (single instruction, multiple data) instructions (like Altivec, MMX, and 3DNow!) come in handy; you can perform the same operation on multiple values which yields a hefty speed increase.
jfpoole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2003, 03:37 PM   #7
Canadian By Choice
 
used to be jwoodget's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,138
Post

Thanks jfp! Let's hope the adoption of optimized 64 bit programming is reasonably fast.
used to be jwoodget is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2003, 09:14 AM   #8
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 933
Post

Quote:
Thanks jfp! Let's hope the adoption of optimized 64 bit programming is reasonably fast.
Yes, faster than Altivec optimization and Cocoa-ization would be very nice . Perhaps Quark will be able to roll that out before 2010.
mycatsnameis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2003, 04:12 PM   #9
Assured Advertiser
Honourable Citizen
 
jfpoole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Posts: 2,198
Post

Out of curiosity, why does it matter if an application is written in Carbon or Cocoa?
jfpoole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2003, 11:09 PM   #10
Honourable Citizen
 
Chealion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,069
Send a message via ICQ to Chealion Send a message via AIM to Chealion Send a message via MSN to Chealion
Post

From a consumer perspective, not a bit. Although both Carbon and Cocoa have their pros and cons, working in either should be just fine, however Carbon would most likely be phased in about 5 years... However Carbon theoretically can run much faster the Cocoa.
Chealion is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CBS NEWS: Major players fired for fake story! MacNutt Everything Else, eh! 11 Jan 17th, 2005 03:50 PM
ehMac Story Archive - Interview with Alex Seropian from Bungie ehMax Anything Mac 0 Dec 11th, 2003 10:38 PM
ehMac Story Archive - Interview with Alex Seropian from Bungie ehMax Anything Mac 0 Dec 11th, 2003 10:38 PM
an interesting look on the itunes business model thewitt All iOS - iPhone, iPad, iPod touch, Apple TV & iTunes 4 Nov 9th, 2003 09:51 PM
Interesting story and a question MacDoc Everything Else, eh! 9 Sep 18th, 2003 07:18 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:08 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999 - 2012, ehMac.ca All rights reserved. ehMac is not affiliated with Apple Inc. Mac, iPod, iTunes, iPhone, Apple TV are trademarks of Apple Inc. Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2

Tribe.ca: Urban living in Toronto!