[LAU] OT: 32-bit vs 64-bit speeds

Arnold Krille arnold at arnoldarts.de
Sun Feb 10 08:51:13 EST 2008

Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2008 schrieb david:
> Arnold Krille wrote:
> > Am Montag, 4. Februar 2008 schrieb Dave Phillips:
> >> Obviously the memory handling capacity is much greater on the 64-bit
> >> machine, and I expect that we'll all be running 64-bit boxes eventually.
> > No, 32bit and 1GB of ram ought to be enough for everybody!
> 32-bit + 2GB RAM would be enough for me to handle stitching large
> panoramic photos ... don't know about how it would help audio work.

The more ram the better for audio! Loading big soundfonts is easier with more 
ram (try loading a 3gig piano-font into 1gig of ram). Caching more 
audio-tracks is easier with more ram (and thus gives you more cycles 
available for effects)...

RAM can't be substituted by anything else then RAM!

(DE: Frei nach "Hubraum ist durch nichts zu ersetzen als Hubraum.")

And that "ought to be enough for everybody" is a funny reference. Like that 
famous (incorrect citation) "I think the world will be saturated with 5 

visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and send me 
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a "rm -rf /". Or ask your 
administrator to do so...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/attachments/20080210/10a0303f/attachment.pgp 

More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list