Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
No, I have no reason aside from pure geek value. I was under the,
probably false, impression that sparc64 executables could move data
around faster. i.e. doubles could be loaded in fewer clock cycles. So
I have 2 questions that maybe you can answer,
1) Is the only advantage to a sparc64 executable access to memory larger
than 2G per process?
2) Assuming yes to question 1, then what is with the hype with 64bit
processors?
On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 16:44, Josh Grebe wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> There are a few of us who have them, built to various stages, but they
> are generally not useful. This has been well covered elsewhere, but the
> short story is "its slower and uses more memory in almost all cases".
>
|
| Attachment: |
|
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part)
|
|
