[ale] OT: 64 bit laptops

[Alan Stewart]

Lies, damn lies, statistics, and then benchmarks. They're fun but I 
don't think they mean much except in very specific cases.

Greg wrote:

>64 bits only is better than 32 in some respects - high end
>graphics,modeling,multimedia, (perhaps mathematics) and huge databases.  I
>have a UltraSPARC-IIe (64-bit SPARCv9 processor) and it drags on Solaris, is
>ok on OpenBSD but the word from others is that they still get better mileage
>on 32 bit architectures.  Or as one person advised me "64-bit applications
>tend to be a tad bit slower than their 32-bit counterparts so even though
>I'm running a 64-bit SPARCv9 kernel, I still compile those apps as 32-bit
>programs using the Sun compilers and optimize the heck out of them."  As far
>as the reports about the new Macs - who knows.  So much crap has been done
>in the name of "benchmarks" that I am truly skeptical of just about
>everything - especially if comparing 2 different systems (each should be
>optimized by an expert in that system to really get a good comparison).
>
>Greg
>  
>

-- 

D. Alan Stewart
Senior Software Developer
Layton Graphics, Inc.
155 Woolco Drive
Marietta, GA 30065
Voice: 770/973-4312
Fax: 800/367-8192
http://www.layton-graphics.com