| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 125153 | 2012-06-09 17:03:00 | 32 bit v 64 bit | Vince (406) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1280754 | 2012-06-10 06:58:00 | Actually I was not quite up to date - some have a 44 bit address bus: 2^44 = 17,592,186,044,416 bytes = 7,592,186,044,416/ 1,073,741,824 = 16,384 GiB | johnd (85) | ||
| 1280755 | 2012-06-10 12:40:00 | If you wish to run old 16-bit software in windows directly, you need 32-bit windows, as 64-bit windows can only emulate 32-bit, not 16-bit. | Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 1280756 | 2012-06-10 23:52:00 | Not sure that this is true? To my knowledge 64 bit CPUs have a 64bit data bus but usually only a 36 bit address bus - so 2^36 = 68,719,476,736Bytes. (68,719,476,736/ 1,073,741,824= 64GB). Even something old like AMD's original Athlon64 K8-series can address up to 1TB of RAM. Most current desktop CPUs can address up to 256TB of RAM (48-bit address space). I'm not aware of any consumer-level 64-bit desktop processor with less than 40-bit address space. |
inphinity (7274) | ||
| 1280757 | 2012-06-11 10:25:00 | Even something old like AMD's original Athlon64 K8-series can address up to 1TB of RAM. Most current desktop CPUs can address up to 256TB of RAM (48-bit address space). I'm not aware of any consumer-level 64-bit desktop processor with less than 40-bit address space. Yep - partially corrected in my previous post - the main point is that 64 bit CPUs don't have a 64 bit address bus. |
johnd (85) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||