Linked by Tony Bourke on Thu 22nd Jan 2004 21:29 UTC
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Is this dude sponsored by Intel? Why would someone go through these kind of efforts to find out a 64bit app is a tiny bit slower as the 32bit version? Maybe some people were shocked to find Opteron on 64bit was a lot faster as when running in 32bit mode. Why would someone create FUD about 64bit being slower as 32bit when Opteron currently is pulling _all_ bricks out of Intel's backyard??
remember this quote? :
"Windows [n.]
A thirty-two bit extension and GUI shell to a sixteen bit patch to an eight bit operating system originally coded for a four bit microprocessor and sold by a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of competition."
(Anonymous USEnet post)
Here's another one :
"Itanium [n.]
a.k.a. Itanic. An incompatible sixty-four bit extension to a thirty-two bit Pentium 4 CPU created by a company who's previous CPU was called Pentium 5 and presumably also cannot count upwards in performance."
Robert