Geek News: Latest Technology, Product Reviews, Gadgets and Tech Podcast News for Geeks

128 bit Windows? Don’t make me salivate.

Posted by J Powers at 9:43 AM on October 8, 2009

windows 8Ars Technica reported that in a secret bunker somewhere below the depths of Redmond, versions of Windows 8 and 9 are being planned. The big technology advance with them? 128 bit versions.

Interesting, especially since we’ve been so slow on getting to 64 bit software. Windows 7 will be shipped in 32 and 64 bit versions, but how many people will install, or have the power to install, a 64 bit version?

If you have a dual or Quad core machine, 64 bit computing will be great. Even though the requirements say only a 1 GHz machine will support it, don’t think about putting it on a single or Hyperthreaded single processor. If you do, don’t expect it to be better.

Why 64 or 128? What is the difference?

Think of it this way. You are in Grand Central Station, or another busy room. Would you want a busy room to have 32 exits, 64 or 128? The more doors, the easier to move around.

Of course, 128 bit processing is a ways away. Then there is the factor that Intel and AMD are skirting the issues and keeping the hardware in 32 bit with multi-core processors. While you can have a 32 bit processor and 64 bit OS, you can still see bottlenecks on the system because of it.

128 bit computing can really change the way we work on the machines. Faster, better, easier. But once again, that is a few years down the road.

One Comment

  1. From Dan at 11:11 am on October 8, 2009

    “Of course, 128 bit processing is a ways away. Then there is the factor that Intel and AMD are skirting the issues and keeping the hardware in 32 bit with multi-core processors. While you can have a 32 bit processor and 64 bit OS, you can still see bottlenecks on the system because of it.”

    No, you can’t. 64-bit instructions (e.g. amd64) can only run on a CPU with a compatible ISA. (I’m not sure what that has to do with multi-core–many of Intel’s dual- and quad-core CPUs are 64-bit, including the one I’m typing from.)

    Also, the 128-bit-Windows article is a hoax.

    And a 128-bit CPU wouldn’t be inherently faster, since instructions and memory addresses would now be twice as big (requiring twice the L1 and L2 cache). Unless you plan to buy more than 2^64 bytes of memory, you wouldn’t see an advantage from having “more exits.”

    I know I’m wasting my time pointing out that someone is wrong on the Internet, but maybe you should blog about a topic you know something about.