[PD] Pd 0.49 64b windows processing question (+ pd~)
jmmmpais at gmail.com
Sat Oct 27 13:09:24 CEST 2018
thanks. That's what I thought, but just wanted to be sure. I also notice
that since it's a new thing, there aren't that many externals available
for it yet.
> On 24.10.18 21:11, João Pais wrote:
>> Hello list,
>> I just noticed that pd 0.49 comes packed with 64b. I was interested to
>> ask what are currently the biggest advantages. I imagine that lots of
>> added memory capacity; but for example, is it still limited to only one
> 64bit binaries are just this: binaries that can run natively on a 64bit
> (read: it has nothing to do with the ability to use multiple CPUs, the
> precision of numbers within Pd, or the bugginess of your patches ;-)).
> the only changes the user might notice when running a 64bit binary of Pd:
> - Pd can use 64bit pointers to address memory. that means it could use
> about 18.4 exabytes (provided you have a computer equipped with that),
> instead of a meagre 4GB as is the case with 32bit applications (and
> Windows would reservere another 512MB, so you could only use 3.5GB)
> - Pd can use more features (registerse, instructions) of the CPU,
> potentially speeding up the execution (regardless of the number of CPUs)
> - Pd can use more modern frameworks provided by the OS. iirc, there are
> some ASIO drivers which can only be accessed from 64bit applications.
>> I also notice that pd~ is in windows already for a while, I think I'll
>> test it soon for the next version of my porting of Henke's granulator. I
>> would like to know: is it guaranteed that parallel processes will run in
>> different processors, or a bit of a luck game managed by the operating
> the actual CPU assignment of a process is managed by the OS.
> this is actually not a bad thing.
> since the OS does CPU management anyhow, you might end up ensuring that
> a process is running on the same CPU as another process that - by mere
> chance - requested to run on that very CPU...
> also, if your hardware happens to only have a single CPU, it would be
> rather annoying if pd~ would insist on running on a CPU#3.
More information about the Pd-list