How much faster are 64 bit cpus?

Tim

How much faster are 64 bit CPUs when it comes to folding? If you have a 32 bit (like an Athlon XP) at 2 Ghz, and a 64 bit AMD CPU also at 2 Ghz, will one fold faster? And by how much? Same question for Intel CPUs.

Try to compare AMD single cores to AMD single cores if possible. Or in Intel's case, a P4 HT to a 64 bit P4-whatever they call them now. And of course, the usual AMD / Intel comparison.

From what I've read (not much) about 64 bit systems, I don't think there'd be much speed difference.

Leonardo

64 bit technology CPUs essentially only offer improved performance in software optimized (written in) for 64 bit instructions. Pardon my terminology, but it's the best I can muster.

primesuspect

They are no faster at all.

Omega65

primesuspect wrote:

They are no faster at all.

While the FPU is essentially the same between the Athlon 64 & the Athlon XP, the Athlon 64 with its on die Memory controller, tweaked pipeline and other improvements is noticeablly faster in most applications.

Techreport S939 3500+ Review

The review contains benchmarks for both the S939 3500+ and the Athlon XP 3200+ both CPUs are 2.20ghz operating with a 11x multiplier and DDR400 Dual channel memory.

Athlon 64 3500+ - 2.20ghz - L2:512K 11x multi DualChannel DDR400
Athlon XP 3200+ - 2.20ghz - L2:512K 11x Multi DualChannel DDR400

Some benches from the article....

UT 3004
A64 3500+: 304.8
AXP 3200+: 233.8

Q3 Arena
A64 3500+: 474.9
AXP 3200+: 373.0

Wolfenstein
A64 3500+: 175.8
AXP 3200+: 140.7

Comanche
A64 3500+: 69.76
AXP 3200+: 51.44

LAME MP3 encoding (less is better)
A64 3500+: 53.0
AXP 3200+: 58.5

DivX video encoding
A64 3500+: 61.2
AXP 3200+: 43.5

Also check out the article I have linked below in my sig.

primesuspect

thanks, omega. It would be interested to see a ghz-for-ghz folding comparison btwn 32 and 64 bit athlons, though.

Garg

Sounds like somebody should write an article for SM (and reap the monetary rewards and esteem of their peers). Is there anyone with an Athlon 64 and a Athlon XP they could clock the same?

Jeff34Buff

I think this is an excellent question. Considering the extra expense buying special hardware and software that moving to 64 bit requires, the cost/benefit has always said NOT Yet to 64 bit for me.

Maybe that's the price of being cutting edge, but I think manufacturers, not customers should bear the price of product development

Nosferatu

I have a 3200+ venice clocked at 2GHz and a 2500+ Athlon XP that can be clocked at 2GHz, however the rest of the systems specs are very different so they would probably throw-off any benchmarks.

Sledgehammer70

the major 2 difference's in a Athlon 64 and a Athlon XP is the Hypertransport settings, and the Cache Levels. A Athlon XP processor is faster than a Athlon XP. But not by that much... just because of the chip size in general and because it is new tech...

I have a Athlon XP 3000+ and a Athlon 64 3000+

Athlon 64 3000+
1.8Ghz
64 Bit support
HT support
SSE2, and SSE3 support
90nm chip type
Voltage: 1.35

Athlon XP 3000
2.18Ghz
No 64 Bit support
No HT support
No SSE2, or SSE3 support
0.13 µm chip type

As you can see form the basic layout, the Athlon XP has a higher clock speed, why you ask? 2 reason, No HT and 0.13 Chip type, AMD is able to get a bit more Clock out of the 0.13 µm chip's.

In a head to head running bases, I have both towers set up wit 1.5 Gig's of ram and both have Nvidia 6600GT 128 Graphic Cards, 1 AGP the other PCI-E

In which is faster at folding?

the Athlon XP sits with 3 WU's completed each one at 2500

The Athlon 64 has 7 Wu's completed 2 @ 2500 1 @ 5000 and 4 at 250

From my results I can honestly say the Athlon 64 is a faster chip.

Omega65

Sledgehammer70 wrote:

the major 2 difference's in a Athlon 64 and a Athlon XP is the Hypertransport settings, and the Cache Levels. A Athlon XP processor is faster than a Athlon XP. <s>But not by that much... just because of the chip size in general and because it is new tech...</s>

The MAJOR Difference is the ON DIE Memory Controller. The Athlon 64 is faster and far more efficient at using memory than any other X86 CPU. Also the the A64 3000+ and AXP 3000 operate with different clock speeds (1.8ghz vs 2.16ghz) and Use different memory (DDR400 vs DDR333)

Leonardo

OK, let's split hairs - and I will do it. The question was "How much faster are 64 bit CPUs...?" The 64 bit structure in and of itself contributes nothing to speed versus an identical 32 bit unit. But of course, you can't find identical 32 and 64 units - the whole CPU architecture is different. Now see, if Tim had asked, "How much faster are AMD64 CPUs than AMD XP CPUs of the same speed rating...." it would have been a whole different issue.

Oh, it's been a long day. I really should go to bed.

Maybe that's the price of being cutting edge, but I think manufacturers, not customers should bear the price of product development

Any item is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Evidently, there are always enough people eager to pay the premium for the excitement (or lack thereof). I wait for cutting edge to be a little dulled before I buy. The razor sharp factor is just too rich for my budget.

Omega65

I have the hardware (A64 3500+ & AXP 3200+) but I dont how to do a fair FAH test.
Someone care to enlighten me how to get two machines running the same set (2-5) of FAH Work Units?

Garg

I think you could let one machine download the WU, and then copy the F@H folder to the other machine.

Leonardo

Exactly. I've copied whole Folding folders before and stored the data on backup media when I've needed to reconfigure a computer or format a hard drive.