| Author
|
Unfortunately, the VST/VSTi specification cannot currently support 64-bit plug-ins
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Jul 4, 2005 16:16
|
http://www.cakewalk.com/x64/faq.asp
we're we go again... clean your desks and make room for your hardware safely kept in the closet...
you got to love hardware and SO independency 
  roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
WAVELOGIX
Wavelogix
Started Topics :
136
Posts :
1214
Posted : Jul 4, 2005 23:54
|
barring the hardware advice , look the age of 64 bit processing is finally comming ! .....
im just curious , how audio will sound different ? it @ all ... ?
|
|
|
|
fregle
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
982
Posted : Jul 5, 2005 17:10
|
|
it will sound better to analysing equipment, the quality of our human ears won't be high enough to hear the difference i think And i'm sure they'll find out a kind of trick to make sure our favorite plugins will keep on working... |
|
|
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Jul 5, 2005 17:11
|
hope so...
roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
thockin
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
114
Posted : Jul 5, 2005 21:42
|
64 bit computing will not make *any* difference *at*all* to the sound. What it will do is allow you to have more RAM in a system than is currently possible. A side effect of the AMD64 architecture is that it has more registers, so some apps will speed up a bit, but not much.
That's it.
I hardly think that, just because a 64 bit app is available, you should switch to it. If you need plugin support for the near future, stick to 32 bit apps. If you think a 64 bit app will make your sound better, you are mistaken.
I have spoken to people at Cakewalk, and they have a few ideas for how to make 32 bit plugs work, but it basically involves two processes, one 32 bit and one 64 bit, and inter-process communication. |
|
|
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Jul 6, 2005 11:42
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-07-05 21:42, thockin wrote:
64 bit computing will not make *any* difference *at*all* to the sound. What it will do is allow you to have more RAM in a system than is currently possible. A side effect of the AMD64 architecture is that it has more registers, so some apps will speed up a bit, but not much.
That's it.
I hardly think that, just because a 64 bit app is available, you should switch to it. If you need plugin support for the near future, stick to 32 bit apps. If you think a 64 bit app will make your sound better, you are mistaken.
I have spoken to people at Cakewalk, and they have a few ideas for how to make 32 bit plugs work, but it basically involves two processes, one 32 bit and one 64 bit, and inter-process communication.
|
|
AMD computers support both 32 and 64 processing so that may be part of the solution.
If you intend using a 64bits processor and a 64 bits SO it makes sense to swith to 64 bits apps.
I witnessed it all when Intel and Windows switched from 16 bits to 32 bits... hope it gets better done now!
Joao
roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
thockin
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
114
Posted : Jul 6, 2005 18:08
|
Switching from 16 to 32 bit computing meant that you could move from 64 KB of memory to 4 GB of memory. That makes sense.
I'm hard pressed to believe that the average person needs more than 4 GB *today*. It will happen, but 64 bits is still mostly for servers and fringe users. |
|
|
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Jul 6, 2005 18:13
|
yeahh... some similar remarks were made when 256kb machines went out!
And a 64 bits arquitecture means more than 4gb addressing space... and thousands of Athlon 64 bits have been sold to home users since their release
...and i think i'e seen adverts for xeons in music magazines wich have been built for servers so...
roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
WAVELOGIX
Wavelogix
Started Topics :
136
Posts :
1214
Posted : Jul 6, 2005 23:28
|
|
well, even if 64 bit means faster running machines ....id definately switch ..... use more plugins / vsti and no compromising / bouncing anymore |
|
|
|
DennisTenaglia
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
40
Posted : Jul 7, 2005 17:55
|
|
32-bit architectures will remain predominant in the near future. migrating a 32-bit apps to a 64-bit environment should be simple but not so fast. it's best to design new apps so that this migration would be as smooth and automatic as possible, necessitating only recompilation and re-linking. I suppose vst technology will reamin 32-bit architectures for the next couple of year. other appl like protool or logic could migrate to 64-bit faster. a problem that may arise is that new processors sometimes don't support 8-bit types at all that makes difficoult to run 32-bit programs that use it. a 64bits processor architectures is nearly useless without a 64bit compatible appliction. maybe in the near future we'll use 32 bit 144/192khz audio data. |
|
|
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Jul 7, 2005 18:01
|
most compilers with produce 64 bit ready code in next versions updates (if they don't do it already).
Taking advantage of 64 bits special features is a bit more complicated, but since developers are already used to other arquitectures will not be a problem.
you say that "a problem that may arise is that new processors sometimes don't support 8-bit types" it's wrong because as thockin said "AMD64 architecture is that it has more registers" so 8 bits and 16 bits registers will be kept.
in machine code if the register is called AB (just an exemple, doesnt relate to any current arquitecture) A and B are 8 bits register and can be manipulated as AB for 16 bits
joao
roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
thockin
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
114
Posted : Jul 7, 2005 18:31
|
WAVELOGIX: the point is that a 64 bit CPU does not mean faster running machines. It means some apps *might* run faster because of extra registers. It also means some apps *might* run slower because of extra memory bandwidth used. And any 32 bit app should run exactly the same OR SLOWER.
SY000321: All the AMD64 CPUs sold so far are either being used in 32 bit mode, or are bing used by other OSes, like Linux. Win64 beta has only recently turned into a real release, and there are VERY few 64 bit apps. |
|
|
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Jul 7, 2005 18:53
|
there already are some 64 bits apps (i think sonar is one of them) and drivers (m-audio at least)
yes... most 64bits are running emulating 32 bits... i guess that's a lot of power waiting to be unleashed in there
joao
roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
DennisTenaglia
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
40
Posted : Jul 7, 2005 20:19
|
->you say that "a problem that may arise is that new processors sometimes don't support 8-bit types" it's wrong because as thockin said "AMD64 architecture is that it has more registers" so 8 bits and 16 bits registers will be kept.
AMD64 is not the only 64bit processor for the future, intel sony/motorola, sparc etc are all migrating to 64bit architecture. C++ requires that the smallest addressable datatype should be char. Such platforms represent char as a 16-bit type. if the underlying number of bytes is not an issue, you can safely ignore this difference since all the standard char * functions and data structures will work as expected. If you truly need an 8-bit datatype, you have to use bit fields or other kludges. Should that be the case, it's always advisable to hide the low-level details in a class such as std::bistet or a similar custom class. about registers: 32-bit systems represent data pointers as a 32-bit integer. 64-bit systems have 64 bit pointers in addition to, or instead of, 32-bit pointers. This duality enables users to run 32-bit programs under an emulator. another disadvantage is that 64-bit applications do not run on 32-bit platforms(exept amd(as they said)). as thokin said 'some apps *might* run slower because of extra memory bandwidth used. And any 32 bit app should run exactly the same OR SLOWER. ' that's the point. 64-bit programs that use 32-bit signed integers as array indexes might require additional instructions to perform sign extension each time the array is referenced. anyway here is not the right place to discuss this kind of things. actually psytrance doesn't need more than a 16 bit 44.1 cd media.
|
|
|
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Jul 7, 2005 20:28
|
I've read that document it not accurate!
"Another problem that may arise is that new processors sometimes don't support 8-bit types at all. C++ requires that the smallest addressable datatype should be char."
What do they mean by sometimes???
They don't give an example and as such it is not a real problem... just something that might creep in the future.
The problem would arise if calculations would be made on a 8 bit char (very unlikely but very possible too )
in 8bits 254+3 = 2 (and a flag is set)
in 16 bits 254+3 = 257 and you have to do a AND operation (257 AND 255 = 2) to get the same result...
but it's very unlikely...
for most code is just compile
joao
roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
