Performance of 64-bit vs. 32-bit Windows Dual Core
mikemuch writes "ExtremeTech's Loyd Case has done extensive testing on the same dual-core Athlon X2 4800+ system to explore performance differences between Windows XP Professional x64 and good ole Win32. The biggest hurdle is getting the right drivers. There are a few performance surprises, particularly in 3D games."
In addition to being able to address much more RAM, x86-64 chips also have more general purpose registers than their 32-bit brethren. This would probably account for performance gains more than anything else in most applications.
English is easier said than done.
When running in 64-bit mode you have a cleaner API with more registers. Compiler writers and low-level developers like this.
In addition, the kernel can provide the full 4GB of virtual address to userspace apps without having to resort to performance-robbing kludges.
Once you switch to 64-bit userspace apps with their huge virtual address space you can also do things like mmap() your entire 500GB disk and manipulate it as though it's all in memory.
The end user might not notice a lot but it's much nicer for coders.
I've had problems installing and / or running apps in directories with parentheses.
And there we go, the MAIN DIRECTORY for storing the program files uses them! Don't they ever learn? We had the same problems when dealing with Program[INSERT BIG UGLY SPACE HERE]Files. Couldn't PROGRAMS work? And look, it's 8 characters long!
Sheesh... (/rant)
A "new era", no, it's just an incremental improvement. 32- to 64-bit x86 is going to be far less dramatic than 16- to 32-bit.