Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > Re: interesting...

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: interesting...

 
 
Mike Yetto
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2011
Joe <a#@#.com> writes and having writ moves on.
>Muse Gruppes <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:ifu3d5$i4c$1
>@speranza.aioe.org:


>> Windows 7 32bit runs FASTER on my machine than the 64 bit version did. i
>> have 3 gigs of Ram
>>
>> I wonder why that is...
>>
>>


>Man there are stupid people in this group!


>Of course a 64bit OS is slower. It has to move twice as much data (64 bits
>vs. 32 bits) for each clock cycle.


>A 16 bit OS will run faster and an 8 bit OS will run even faster on the
>same platform. Going to an OS with a greatwer number of processor bits is
>not about speed. It is about the command set and capabilities the OS
>brings to the table including the amount of RAM that can be utilitied.


Sounds like homeopathy to me. Would a 1 bit computer be the
fastest possible?

Mike "how dilute is the instruction set?" Yetto
--
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice they are not.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
RonNNN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-05-2011


"Mike Yetto" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
> Joe <a#@#.com> writes and having writ moves on.
>>Muse Gruppes <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:ifu3d5$i4c$1
>>@speranza.aioe.org:

>
>>> Windows 7 32bit runs FASTER on my machine than the 64 bit version did. i
>>> have 3 gigs of Ram
>>>
>>> I wonder why that is...
>>>
>>>

>
>>Man there are stupid people in this group!

>
>>Of course a 64bit OS is slower. It has to move twice as much data (64
>>bits
>>vs. 32 bits) for each clock cycle.

>
>>A 16 bit OS will run faster and an 8 bit OS will run even faster on the
>>same platform. Going to an OS with a greatwer number of processor bits is
>>not about speed. It is about the command set and capabilities the OS
>>brings to the table including the amount of RAM that can be utilitied.

>
> Sounds like homeopathy to me. Would a 1 bit computer be the
> fastest possible?


0=no
1=yes

Oh wait, wouldn't that be a "two-bit" processor?


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Raymond Schmit
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-06-2011
On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 23:41:44 -0600, "Jane_Galt"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"RonNNN" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote :
>
>>
>>
>> "Mike Yetto" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>>> Joe <a#@#.com> writes and having writ moves on.
>>>>Muse Gruppes <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:ifu3d5$i4c$1
>>>>@speranza.aioe.org:
>>>
>>>>> Windows 7 32bit runs FASTER on my machine than the 64 bit version did.

>i
>>>>> have 3 gigs of Ram
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder why that is...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>Man there are stupid people in this group!
>>>
>>>>Of course a 64bit OS is slower. It has to move twice as much data (64
>>>>bits
>>>>vs. 32 bits) for each clock cycle.
>>>
>>>>A 16 bit OS will run faster and an 8 bit OS will run even faster on the
>>>>same platform. Going to an OS with a greatwer number of processor bits

>is
>>>>not about speed. It is about the command set and capabilities the OS
>>>>brings to the table including the amount of RAM that can be utilitied.
>>>
>>> Sounds like homeopathy to me. Would a 1 bit computer be the
>>> fastest possible?

>>
>> 0=no
>> 1=yes
>>
>> Oh wait, wouldn't that be a "two-bit" processor?
>>
>>
>>

>
>Ever heard of decimal bit processors? Instead of binary?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burroughs_B2000

was a cobol oriented processor ... the ADD is performed in decimal as
well as the decimal memory adressing.
It was not a "decimal bit prosessor" but a decimal
oriented/implemented one.
 
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




Advertisments