• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

64 bit folding

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

wheatbix

Member
Joined
May 17, 2002
Location
Sydney, Australia
When the 64 bit athlons come out, do you think stanford will write a 64 bit folding program? Will it be twice as fast?

I've got some money and am going to buy a new fast rig soon, but i'm trying to decide whether it would be better to wait until the 64 bit ones come out, because they can process twice as much information (theoretically). Any advice or opinions?
 

OCn00b

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2002
I doubt they'll rewrite it for 64bit until it becomes the standard and that's what most people are using.
 

Audioaficionado

Sparkomatic Moderator
Joined
Apr 29, 2002
64 bit isn't twice as fast as 32 bit. It's related to processor architecture. Way too technical for me to attempt a defination. Only the mumber 64 is twice 32.
 

scoobiedoo

Love slave to da man
Joined
Sep 6, 2001
Location
Uniontown, PA
Stanford next port for the client will more than likely be a os9 port, maybe after that when the 64 bit architecture matures will they port it to 64bit.

Supply and demand baby!!!

the demand is right now for a os9 port.

scoobs
 

AmigoThree

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2002
Location
Gettysburg, PA
Good I hope they get an OS9 port, I know myself, and so many others could borg school computers because many shools use macs, and atleast in my school, all but 1 (something in the DV room) run OS9.
 

Sterculus

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Location
Seattle
a 64 bit port would be nice, i bet that the athlon 64s would pwn with a 64 bit folding proggy :)
imagine...an athlon 64 yatta ;)
 

pip

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Location
Oregon, The InteLinux State
Here's a simplified explanation of 64-bit versus 32-bit

this is 2+2=4 in 32-bit
00000000000000000000000000000010
00000000000000000000000000000010
=
00000000000000000000000000000100

here is that same equation in 64-bit

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000010
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000010
=
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000100

so basically 32 bit can make larger calculations over twice as fast, which would be good for folding but not so effective in normal programs

props to Ed for this great explanation
 

SickBoy

Inactive Moderator
Joined
Jan 13, 2001
Location
Minneapolis, MN
Not like it's a big deal, either.

Hammer chips run x86-64 code standard (aka AMD64) which can run 32 bit apps in ful hardware mode (not emulation like IA64). Folding will still be pretty fast on a Hammer in 32 bit, just not as fast as it could be.

Moral of the story? If you're building a dedicated folding rig, stick to Bartons until an AMD64 port of the Folding client comes out.
 

cack01

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2002
Location
San diego or UC Davis
Keep in mind that the AMD PR folks said it took only a week for one person to make the 64 bit version of unreal 2003, atleast thats what I remember. So a 64 bit version is pretty likely the way I see it. The big question should be if anyone here actually wants to dish out all the money for a new type of chip.