Is Core 2 Duo a true 64 bit Processor?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
W

Wabbit

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2002
100
0
18,680
I have a Core 2 Duo E6600 and I am thinking of trying out 64 bit Vista. But I would like to know if this processor is really a native 64 bit processor, or if it is really just a 32 bit processor that can work with 64 bit software.

Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
 
core is a native 64bit architecture.
Click to expand...
Uhhh . . . no. It's EM64T technology.

Conroe and EM64T

Thanks to both of you for posting. But WiseCracker, what do you mean?
32/64 bit is not a architecture or anything, it is a instruction set that a processor can run. So there is no "native". It either has support for it, or it doesn't.
 
The only mainstream processor that I know of that is a true 64-bit is Intel's Itanium. Current AMD and Intel processor's are both x86-64, meaning that they are based off of the regular x86 instruction code that has been running for years, but is also capable of running 64-bit code as well. When the time comes around for 128-bit computing, there is a fair chance (don't quote me on this, talking out my rear), that the chips to run it will be x86-128, as by even that time there will still be a lot of x86/32-bit code running around.

Disclaimer: I don't know what I'm talking about, just throwing out my layman knowledge.
 
I have a Core 2 Duo E6600 and I am thinking of trying out 64 bit Vista. But I would like to know if this processor is really a native 64 bit processor, or if it is really just a 32 bit processor that can work with 64 bit software.

Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Click to expand...
NO, because it does not include '64' in it's name.... :lol:
If you have read seen it, this chip supports the AMD64/EMT64 instruction set and that's all about 64bits that a CPU should have; there's even PEntium4s, PentiumDs and CeleronDs with these instructions that are not 'less' 64bit than Core2 CPUs.
 
Kuma, Agena, Penryn, Nehalem doesn't include "64" in their name, so they won't support 64-bit instructions also..... :lol: :lol: :lol:. Ninja, why don't you try Cell or PowerPC cpus?
 
Anyone know where one can find an Itanium? I really want to play with one.
Click to expand...
You'd get bored very soon :roll:
So says you. I have the mind of a steel trap and the attention span that borders on... ooh look... a cookie...
That's much healthier than an Itanium. I mean... there's the whole SW industry not getting much to do with it since it was released (and it's a lot of time) but if you want to try...good luck 😀
 
Kuma, Agena, Penryn, Nehalem doesn't include "64" in their name, so they won't support 64-bit instructions also..... :lol: :lol: :lol:. Ninja, why don't you try Cell or PowerPC cpus?
Click to expand...
I'd find living in a monastery more entertaining than playing with an Itanium :wink:
 
NO, because it does not include '64' in it's name.... :lol:
If you have read seen it, this chip supports the AMD64/EMT64 instruction set and that's all about 64bits that a CPU should have; there's even PEntium4s, PentiumDs and CeleronDs with these instructions that are not 'less' 64bit than Core2 CPUs.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that being a true 64 bit processor is really irrelevant when it can run the instructions for 64 bit programming?
 
Current x86-64 processors have, I believe, been known to outperform true 64-bit processors.

This isn't like monolithic multi-core processors, native support doesn't mean much right now. Would you rather have true 64-bit, or 64-bit support, and twice the power for half the electrical usage?
 
The only NATIVE 64bit CPU is the Itanium but that won't run ANY 32bit app and not even run MOST 64bit apps a x86 CPU can.
This said, a Core2, is a 64bit CPU the same way of an Athlon64 or a CeleronD with 64bit extensions or a Sempron etc and will run fine ALL 64bit and 32bit desktop apps (including Vista of course) because the 64bit instructions on all these CPUs are the same.
 
Yep. All it has to do is support 64bit code and instructions. Which almost all modern CPU's do.

@m25
Play with doesn't mean buy. Thats for damn sure. I want to see what the big fuss was about.

@aBg_rOnGak
Hnn, time to go bother the guys at IBM again...

@darious00777
From what I found, those things cost around the price of a car....
 
Was it M$ fault for not creating a good 64-bit platform/OS or was it software s developers fault? Hardware drivers are also a problem for certain device
 
I have a Core 2 Duo E6600 and I am thinking of trying out 64 bit Vista. But I would like to know if this processor is really a native 64 bit processor, or if it is really just a 32 bit processor that can work with 64 bit software.

Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Click to expand...

Why would it matter to you if it was a 64 bit processor that could run 32 bit aplications or a 32 bit processor that could run a 64 bit software (just curios)

It is a great CPU and it will run Vista 64 and 64 bit apps (assuming you can find any)
:roll:
 
core is a native 64bit architecture.
Click to expand...
Uhhh . . . no. It's EM64T technology.

Conroe and EM64T

Thanks to both of you for posting. But WiseCracker, what do you mean?The x86-64 architecture (which AMD created) provided for the use of 32-bit and 64-bit extensions to the x86 32-bit nee 16-bit nee 8-bit architecture.. EM64T is the Intel adaptation of AMD64.

"True" 64-bit processors include the Alpha (RIP), PA-RISC and the *I-Tanic* (heh heh) listed above. When the I-Tanic1 first set sail there were great hopes that it would bridge the 32-bit/64-bit divide but, of course, it sunk . . .

What all this poo-poo is about is that processors have *registers*. The x86-64 architecture doubled the number of general registers and SIMD registers.

The 8 general registers in x86 could only handle 32 bit values. x86-64 provides for 16 general registers and 64 bit values.

32 bit hit the memory ceiling at 4gb and Windoze effectively splits this at 2gb for the OS and 2gb for apps. Prior to WinV the only MS operating systems with >4gb RAM were Win Server03 and WinXP Pro64.

In your lifetime you will not hit the memory ceiling with the x86-64 ISA and a 64-bit OS.

With the Core2 Intel took x86-64 and kicked AMD's ass with it. Intel loaded up the cache and beefed up SSE utilization. How well AMD will return the favor to Intel is the subject of great debate on this forum.

AMD's K10 will greatly expand SSE utilization. To the extent it allows them to catch up or surpass Intel is the $64 million question.

To add fuel to this fire (LOL) I think the *Mean Green* is sandbagging (like they did with the Opteron in 2003). Intel will soon lose all of it's business to AMD and have to close their doors by mid-2008 . . . :roll:

And I think you could set up a *dual-boot* if you really wanted to check out a 64-bit OS. Be prepared and do your homework . . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom