Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #19763

Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK?

Show key headers only | View raw

On 11/15/2012 7:23 PM, SL@maxis wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 07:08:58 +0800, Stuart <DerTopper@web.de> wrote:
>
>>
>> Wrong. Typical 64 bit processors have either a 36 bit or a 40 bit
>> physical address bus (40 bits are 1 TB, an almost incredible amount of
>> RAM, wikipedia mentions that some AMD chips even offer a 48 bit memory
>> bus). Note that bus width and register width do not have to have a
>> one-to-one relationship. The early 286 processor had a register width
>> of 16 bits but an address bus with 24 bits (4MB), so they had to
>> invent this segmentation model in order to compute a 20bit address
>> from two 16 bit registers. Twenty years later, the segmenation unit is
>> still present at the Intel architecture while the numbers have been
>> reversed: now the 36 or 40 bit physical address is computed from a 16
>> bit value and a 64 bit value. Sounds like overkill, and yes, it is.
>> That's just for backwards compatibility for applications from 1985.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Stuart
>
> Thanks. I am not too sure now :-(
>
> I have an old Intel Pentium 4 1500Mhz PC. Can it run 64-bit OS ?
>
>

it may or may not run 64-bits (depending on the specific core it has), 
you would have to test and see if it does or not.

one way to test easily would be to get a Linux live-cd for x86-64. if it 
boots up, the CPU does 64-bit, and if it refuses to boot up with an 
error message about the type of CPU, then the CPU doesn't support it.

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? "sl@exabyte" <sb5309@hotmail.com> - 2012-11-14 21:58 +0800
  Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? "sl@exabyte" <sb5309@hotmail.com> - 2012-11-14 22:01 +0800
  Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-11-14 09:12 -0500
    Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2012-11-14 14:11 -0300
      Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-11-14 12:14 -0500
        Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2012-11-14 18:36 +0100
          Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? "sl@exabyte" <sb5309@hotmail.com> - 2012-11-15 10:48 +0800
            Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Stuart <DerTopper@web.de> - 2012-11-16 00:08 +0100
              Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? "SL@maxis" <ecp_gen@my-rialto.com> - 2012-11-16 09:23 +0800
                Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-11-15 22:52 -0600
                Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201211.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2012-11-16 16:44 +0100
                Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2012-11-17 13:18 +0100
                Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-11-17 12:42 -0600
              Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-11-15 22:46 -0600
                Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Stuart <DerTopper@web.de> - 2012-11-16 12:08 +0100
                Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-11-16 18:08 -0600
                Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Stuart <DerTopper@web.de> - 2012-11-17 23:59 +0100
              Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2012-11-16 12:42 +0000
            Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-11-16 05:17 -0800
    Re: Program in 32-bit, run on 64-bit OK? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2012-11-14 20:08 +0100

csiph-web