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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #41190

Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH?

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, 07 Aug 2015 12:44:11 -0400, <mfanyikazi@gmail.com> wrote:

> I was just wondering why many Forth CPU's are desinged to
> be 16 bit whereas a 64 bit CPU would be more practial in
> today's data processing needs.
>
> [...]
>
> If I am missing something , please someone enlighten me.
>

32-bit has some advantages over 16-bit:

1) larger address space
2) bigger integers

32-bit proved to be sufficient for most processing.

There is nothing that I can do on this 64-bit Linux
that I couldn't do on 32-bit Windows 98/SE.

So, what advantage does 64-bit have over 32-bit?

I.e., there is a financial advantage to companies
selling 64-bit processors.


Rod Pemberton

-- 
Scientists now say we'll experience a mini-ice in 2030.
So, I guess we need more global warming today ...

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

Thread

Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? mfanyikazi@gmail.com - 2015-08-07 09:44 -0700
  Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-07 10:13 -0700
  Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-08-07 13:21 -0400
  Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-07 10:24 -0700
  Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-08-07 16:59 -0700
    Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-08-08 01:11 -0400
  Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-08-08 01:38 -0400
    Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-07 23:42 -0700
      Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-08-08 19:41 +0200
  Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-08-07 23:03 -1000
  Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? mhx@iae.nl - 2015-08-08 02:31 -0700
  Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-08-08 11:27 +0100
    Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-08-08 15:28 +0000
    Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-08-09 03:24 -0400
      Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? mfanyikazi@gmail.com - 2015-08-09 01:59 -0700
      Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-08-09 15:15 -0400
  Re: Which is more practical , 64 bit , 32 bit or 16 bit CPU for FORTH? Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2015-08-08 13:55 -0700

csiph-web