Never read x32 being used. So most of the time you can simplify it this way: x86 is Intel compatible in bit mode, x64 is Intel compatible in bit mode. Python Javascript Linux Cheat sheet Contact. Difference between x86, x32, and x64 architectures? Related Android - Is it possible to run Android applications on normal Linux? How does the ELF loader determine the initial stack size?
Porting Linux to another platform requirements What does physical address 0 in x86 Linux contain? Don't know if your question was a question or statement, but interesting none the less. I'm sure you'll get some more info in this thread yet Back in my day The difference between x86 and x64 is in the memory addressing capability, x86 processors can address 32bit memory addresses, while x64 processors can handle 64bit addresses.
They are both comaptible with the same instruction set, but x86 have smaller memory limits ok, I'm pretty sure they've added some 64bit-only instruction too, but that's not the point.
Systems access memory using byte addresses, that is, say, "get me the value in the th byte" or "write me this value in the th byte", so both technologies can work with the same system, but x86 can call up to the 4. This means 32bit architecture can use a maximum of 4GB RAM while 64bit is dimensioned to fullfill the memory needs for some years in the future!
I think the "x84" is a typo. There has never been an "x84". There has only been x86 and x Traditionally, x86 referred to the Intel architecture, which can be or bit. Create a free Team What is Teams? Learn more. Why does x86 represent 32bit when x64 represents 64bit? Asked 11 years, 1 month ago. Active 1 year, 11 months ago. Viewed k times. Improve this question. RBT 1 1 silver badge 9 9 bronze badges. Simon Foster Simon Foster 2, 6 6 gold badges 35 35 silver badges 54 54 bronze badges.
I just asked myself this this-morning! IMHO, "x86" does not mean and never has meant just any generic bit architecture. Daniel's answer below gives the history. There are lots of other bit processors that are both contemporaneous to or older than the , and quite a few are still alive and well in the market today.
The family used in the original Macintosh is much older than the , for instance. The PowerPC's claim to fame when new was strong emulation support for both x86 and 68K. The ARM is bit, more modern, and quite common as well. I don't see it as x64, at least I don't writ it that way. I write it as 32b and 64b, respectively. Show 5 more comments.
Active Oldest Votes. In other words, it's more marketing than technology for the reason. Improve this answer. Bart Silverstrim Bart Silverstrim And because x86 originated with the I've never been able to work out why it's always associated with 32 bits.
As I recall, the was a 16 bit processor, which used double registers to enable 32 bit memory addressing. Intel was far from being a leader in the field in those days. Modern Windows are based on Windows NT.
To differentiate between windows compiled for these different instructions sets, some short and precise name had to be used for the architectures. These names are also be used on many scripts, build systems etc so they cannot be changed after they are selected without breaking huge amount of things. Anything that contained number 32 would not have made any sense as there were three different bit architectures supported by Windows NT. Over 10 years later, when the bit extension to x86 instruction set was released, and Microsoft started porting later NT-derived windows to it, some official technical name had to be selected for the version compiled for this architecture.
Even later, support for the Itanium architecture was dropped and support for and bit ARM architectures were added to Windows. No, the had a Protected Mode, but it was not bit. Since the was strictly a 16bit processor, it used segmentation even in Protected Mode. The segment register was loaded with a bit index, which pointed to an entry in a descriptor table.
0コメント