Re: Comparing x86 to x64.

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Rick, Jan 30, 2006.

  1. Rick

    Rick Guest

    I think he should include his motherboard information. I have recently
    discovered that the Asus A8V seems to be a better platform for Win x64
    than a MSI K8t Neo2.

    I had bought some MSI K8T Neo2 MBs to build systems for customers and
    had a lot of problems with the BIOS and E6 versions of Athlon 64 3000+.
    MSI's only response was: Your memory isn't compatible. So, I bought
    an Asus A8V just for comparison and I was surprised at the difference.
    Asus has done more to optimize their BIOS than MSI and makes it a much
    more reliable platform.

    The difference was even more noticeable with an x2 CPU. Everything
    slowed down on the MSI K8T Neo2 when running multiple application, but
    on the Asus A8V everything seems to be running at full speed. Music in
    a game sounded like a tape at 1/2 speed on the MSI. On the Asus, the
    music sounded normal.

    So, hardware is important in comparisons like this, too.


    Andre Da Costa wrote:
    Dennis, you need to start a blog and blog this good stuff. :) Might I
    recommend, http://spaces.msn.com ?
    --
    --
    Andre
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
    "Dennis Pack" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In comparing encoding times with x86 and x64 were performed on a AMD 3200+
    > 32-bit machine and a FX51 64-but machine which indicated a 28% reduction
    > in overall time. This was actually comparing apples and oranges.
    >
    > The latest results were performed on an AMD 4400x2 dual boot system with
    > the same programs installed on each operating systems, data files stored
    > in a separate partition.
    >
    > The first test was to convert a 7.26G DVD movie to a 714MB file using
    > FairUse Wizard v2.1a, haven't tested v2.4 yet. Time and temperatures were
    > the same, CPU usage was 5% less with x64 and PF was 80MB higher with x64.
    >
    > The second test was capturing a 40 minute VCR clip using a Leadtek TV2000
    > XP expert card with CyberLink Power Director 5 and creating a DVD of the
    > clip. Time and temperatures were the same, didn't record CPU or PF data.
    >
    > FairUse Wizard and Power Director 5 are 32-bit programs, drivers for the
    > Leadtek TV2000 XP expert were the latest x86 drivers and the latest x64
    > beta drivers.
    >
    > With the performance being the same on x86 & x64 for 32-bit programs is an
    > indication that the emulation being performed doesn't slow the programs
    > function. A performance increase should be noted when 64-bit programs are
    > available.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    Rick, Jan 30, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Rick

    Dennis Pack Guest

    Rick:
    The mother board is an Asus A8N-E with 2GB ECC ram. As stated in my
    original post this is a dual boot test and all hardware is the same also the
    same programs are installed on both operating systems. In this test I was
    testing apples to apples, even though I didn't note a performance gain, the
    results indicate that there wasn't a performance loss due to the 32-bit
    emulation factor.


    "Rick" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I think he should include his motherboard information. I have recently
    >discovered that the Asus A8V seems to be a better platform for Win x64 than
    >a MSI K8t Neo2.
    >
    > I had bought some MSI K8T Neo2 MBs to build systems for customers and had
    > a lot of problems with the BIOS and E6 versions of Athlon 64 3000+. MSI's
    > only response was: Your memory isn't compatible. So, I bought an Asus
    > A8V just for comparison and I was surprised at the difference. Asus has
    > done more to optimize their BIOS than MSI and makes it a much more
    > reliable platform.
    >
    > The difference was even more noticeable with an x2 CPU. Everything slowed
    > down on the MSI K8T Neo2 when running multiple application, but on the
    > Asus A8V everything seems to be running at full speed. Music in a game
    > sounded like a tape at 1/2 speed on the MSI. On the Asus, the music
    > sounded normal.
    >
    > So, hardware is important in comparisons like this, too.
    >
    >
    > Andre Da Costa wrote:
    > Dennis, you need to start a blog and blog this good stuff. :) Might I
    > recommend, http://spaces.msn.com ?
    > --
    > --
    > Andre
    > Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    > Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    > http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    > FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
    > "Dennis Pack" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> In comparing encoding times with x86 and x64 were performed on a AMD
    >> 3200+ 32-bit machine and a FX51 64-but machine which indicated a 28%
    >> reduction in overall time. This was actually comparing apples and
    >> oranges.
    >>
    >> The latest results were performed on an AMD 4400x2 dual boot system with
    >> the same programs installed on each operating systems, data files stored
    >> in a separate partition.
    >>
    >> The first test was to convert a 7.26G DVD movie to a 714MB file using
    >> FairUse Wizard v2.1a, haven't tested v2.4 yet. Time and temperatures were
    >> the same, CPU usage was 5% less with x64 and PF was 80MB higher with x64.
    >>
    >> The second test was capturing a 40 minute VCR clip using a Leadtek TV2000
    >> XP expert card with CyberLink Power Director 5 and creating a DVD of the
    >> clip. Time and temperatures were the same, didn't record CPU or PF data.
    >>
    >> FairUse Wizard and Power Director 5 are 32-bit programs, drivers for the
    >> Leadtek TV2000 XP expert were the latest x86 drivers and the latest x64
    >> beta drivers.
    >>
    >> With the performance being the same on x86 & x64 for 32-bit programs is
    >> an indication that the emulation being performed doesn't slow the
    >> programs function. A performance increase should be noted when 64-bit
    >> programs are available.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    Dennis Pack, Jan 31, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. NoneOfBusiness
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,093
    NoneOfBusiness
    May 7, 2005
  2. Dennis Pack

    Comparing x86 to x64.

    Dennis Pack, Jan 29, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    667
    Andre Da Costa
    Jan 29, 2006
  3. =?Utf-8?B?RWxsaW90IEh1ZGdpbnM=?=

    Why is there an x86 emu if a processor is x86-64?

    =?Utf-8?B?RWxsaW90IEh1ZGdpbnM=?=, Jul 23, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    669
  4. Daniel
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    628
  5. markm75
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    1,121
    S.SubZero
    Jan 9, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page