Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Windows 64bit > Windows XP 64-bit - based in 32-bit code?

Reply
Thread Tools

Windows XP 64-bit - based in 32-bit code?

 
 
=?Utf-8?B?SnVtcHlKaW0=?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-13-2005
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is x64 solely based on the Server 2003
32-bit code then recompiled with a 64-bit compiler, taking no advantage and
optimisation of a 64-bit processor?

Or is it based on 32-bit Server 2003 code, but with critical system code
manually re-edited to be more efficient with 64-bit processors, then
recompiled with a 64-bit compiler?

Thanks.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Colin Barnhorst
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-13-2005
It is branched from Server 2003 Service Pack 1. It is native 64-bit. It's
closest relation is Windows Server 2003 x64. You may be misunderstanding
the ability to run 32-bit software on x64. It is done through a thin
emulation layer called Windows on Windows64 (WOW64). It cannot run 16-bit
software or 32-bit device drivers.

--
Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
(Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)
"JumpyJim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is x64 solely based on the Server 2003
> 32-bit code then recompiled with a 64-bit compiler, taking no advantage
> and
> optimisation of a 64-bit processor?
>
> Or is it based on 32-bit Server 2003 code, but with critical system code
> manually re-edited to be more efficient with 64-bit processors, then
> recompiled with a 64-bit compiler?
>
> Thanks.



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
=?Utf-8?B?SnVtcHlKaW0=?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-13-2005
Thanks for the reply. I perhaps didn't word my question well originally. I
meant to say that the source code for x64 is 32-bit and MS have merely
recompiled said 32-bit source code using a 64-bit compiler. What I was trying
to ask if the recompilation included any additional tweaks and optimisations
to take advantage of 64-bit processors.

Also I had thought that the codebase was based on 32-bit Windows Server 2003
RC2 and not Server 2003 SP1. Could anyone else provide futher information?

Thanks for all replies.




"Colin Barnhorst" wrote:

> It is branched from Server 2003 Service Pack 1. It is native 64-bit. It's
> closest relation is Windows Server 2003 x64. You may be misunderstanding
> the ability to run 32-bit software on x64. It is done through a thin
> emulation layer called Windows on Windows64 (WOW64). It cannot run 16-bit
> software or 32-bit device drivers.
>
> --
> Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
> (Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)
> "JumpyJim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is x64 solely based on the Server 2003
> > 32-bit code then recompiled with a 64-bit compiler, taking no advantage
> > and
> > optimisation of a 64-bit processor?
> >
> > Or is it based on 32-bit Server 2003 code, but with critical system code
> > manually re-edited to be more efficient with 64-bit processors, then
> > recompiled with a 64-bit compiler?
> >
> > Thanks.

>
>
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
Charlie Russel - MVP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-13-2005
First, it is Server 2k3 SP1. Period. Same build number, if you look at it.

Now, as to compiling, code base, optimizations, etc. Source code is neither
32-bit nor 64-bit. It's just source code. There are many ways to use a
single code base to compile for different platforms, some of which do
optimizations appropriately, and some of which do not. I saw some
interesting blogs around 9-10 months ago that made it clear that all
versions of Windows Server are now being compiled on x64 machines, running
x64 Windows. And that the difference in compile time when the moved to
compiling on x64 was an order of magnitude faster. The machines were 4 way
Opterons, as I recall.


--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64

JumpyJim wrote:
> Thanks for the reply. I perhaps didn't word my question well originally.
> I meant to say that the source code for x64 is 32-bit and MS have merely
> recompiled said 32-bit source code using a 64-bit compiler. What I was
> trying to ask if the recompilation included any additional tweaks and
> optimisations to take advantage of 64-bit processors.
>
> Also I had thought that the codebase was based on 32-bit Windows Server
> 2003 RC2 and not Server 2003 SP1. Could anyone else provide futher
> information?
>
> Thanks for all replies.
>
>
>
>
> "Colin Barnhorst" wrote:
>
>> It is branched from Server 2003 Service Pack 1. It is native 64-bit.
>> It's closest relation is Windows Server 2003 x64. You may be
>> misunderstanding the ability to run 32-bit software on x64. It is done
>> through a thin emulation layer called Windows on Windows64 (WOW64). It
>> cannot run 16-bit software or 32-bit device drivers.
>>
>> --
>> Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
>> (Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)
>> "JumpyJim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is x64 solely based on the Server
>>> 2003 32-bit code then recompiled with a 64-bit compiler, taking no
>>> advantage and
>>> optimisation of a 64-bit processor?
>>>
>>> Or is it based on 32-bit Server 2003 code, but with critical system code
>>> manually re-edited to be more efficient with 64-bit processors, then
>>> recompiled with a 64-bit compiler?
>>>
>>> Thanks.



 
Reply With Quote
 
John Barnes
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-13-2005
True at the application level, generally, but at the O/S level, there is
more involved than just using a different compiler. The routines for
SYSWOW64 etc. require new code to be written (modified), especially for
lower level processes.


"Charlie Russel - MVP" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:usVk%(E-Mail Removed)...
> First, it is Server 2k3 SP1. Period. Same build number, if you look at it.
>
> Now, as to compiling, code base, optimizations, etc. Source code is
> neither 32-bit nor 64-bit. It's just source code. There are many ways to
> use a single code base to compile for different platforms, some of which
> do optimizations appropriately, and some of which do not. I saw some
> interesting blogs around 9-10 months ago that made it clear that all
> versions of Windows Server are now being compiled on x64 machines, running
> x64 Windows. And that the difference in compile time when the moved to
> compiling on x64 was an order of magnitude faster. The machines were 4 way
> Opterons, as I recall.
>
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>
> JumpyJim wrote:
>> Thanks for the reply. I perhaps didn't word my question well originally.
>> I meant to say that the source code for x64 is 32-bit and MS have merely
>> recompiled said 32-bit source code using a 64-bit compiler. What I was
>> trying to ask if the recompilation included any additional tweaks and
>> optimisations to take advantage of 64-bit processors.
>>
>> Also I had thought that the codebase was based on 32-bit Windows Server
>> 2003 RC2 and not Server 2003 SP1. Could anyone else provide futher
>> information?
>>
>> Thanks for all replies.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Colin Barnhorst" wrote:
>>
>>> It is branched from Server 2003 Service Pack 1. It is native 64-bit.
>>> It's closest relation is Windows Server 2003 x64. You may be
>>> misunderstanding the ability to run 32-bit software on x64. It is done
>>> through a thin emulation layer called Windows on Windows64 (WOW64). It
>>> cannot run 16-bit software or 32-bit device drivers.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
>>> (Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)
>>> "JumpyJim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is x64 solely based on the Server
>>>> 2003 32-bit code then recompiled with a 64-bit compiler, taking no
>>>> advantage and
>>>> optimisation of a 64-bit processor?
>>>>
>>>> Or is it based on 32-bit Server 2003 code, but with critical system
>>>> code
>>>> manually re-edited to be more efficient with 64-bit processors, then
>>>> recompiled with a 64-bit compiler?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Charlie Russel - MVP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-13-2005
Yes, but those routines are in a single set of code -- with no special NDA
knowledge, I would be astonished if MS maintained seperate code bases for
each architecture. Astonished.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64

John Barnes wrote:
> True at the application level, generally, but at the O/S level, there is
> more involved than just using a different compiler. The routines for
> SYSWOW64 etc. require new code to be written (modified), especially for
> lower level processes.
>
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:usVk%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> First, it is Server 2k3 SP1. Period. Same build number, if you look at
>> it. Now, as to compiling, code base, optimizations, etc. Source code is
>> neither 32-bit nor 64-bit. It's just source code. There are many ways to
>> use a single code base to compile for different platforms, some of which
>> do optimizations appropriately, and some of which do not. I saw some
>> interesting blogs around 9-10 months ago that made it clear that all
>> versions of Windows Server are now being compiled on x64 machines,
>> running x64 Windows. And that the difference in compile time when the
>> moved to compiling on x64 was an order of magnitude faster. The machines
>> were 4 way Opterons, as I recall.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>>
>> JumpyJim wrote:
>>> Thanks for the reply. I perhaps didn't word my question well originally.
>>> I meant to say that the source code for x64 is 32-bit and MS have merely
>>> recompiled said 32-bit source code using a 64-bit compiler. What I was
>>> trying to ask if the recompilation included any additional tweaks and
>>> optimisations to take advantage of 64-bit processors.
>>>
>>> Also I had thought that the codebase was based on 32-bit Windows Server
>>> 2003 RC2 and not Server 2003 SP1. Could anyone else provide futher
>>> information?
>>>
>>> Thanks for all replies.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Colin Barnhorst" wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is branched from Server 2003 Service Pack 1. It is native 64-bit.
>>>> It's closest relation is Windows Server 2003 x64. You may be
>>>> misunderstanding the ability to run 32-bit software on x64. It is done
>>>> through a thin emulation layer called Windows on Windows64 (WOW64). It
>>>> cannot run 16-bit software or 32-bit device drivers.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
>>>> (Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)
>>>> "JumpyJim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is x64 solely based on the Server
>>>>> 2003 32-bit code then recompiled with a 64-bit compiler, taking no
>>>>> advantage and
>>>>> optimisation of a 64-bit processor?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or is it based on 32-bit Server 2003 code, but with critical system
>>>>> code
>>>>> manually re-edited to be more efficient with 64-bit processors, then
>>>>> recompiled with a 64-bit compiler?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Wayne Wastier
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-14-2005

"Charlie Russel - MVP" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:eWFF5$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Yes, but those routines are in a single set of code -- with no special NDA
> knowledge, I would be astonished if MS maintained seperate code bases for
> each architecture. Astonished.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>


Then be astonished, as that is what it is.



Wayne


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Convert table based webpage to css based John Dalberg HTML 11 05-29-2009 08:53 PM
n-gram based & edit distance based comparisons Ezee Java 6 07-27-2005 05:26 PM
Question: Writing text file based TestBenches vs. Waveform file based simulation. BLF VHDL 4 08-07-2004 12:44 AM
Set based vs. IOS based Jim Cisco 2 02-18-2004 09:23 PM
Software-based VERSUS hardware-based routers JohnNews Cisco 2 12-05-2003 03:00 AM



Advertisments