will adobe support the new amd 64 and the new microdoft 64 bit os?

Discussion in 'Photoshop Tutorials' started by elven, Feb 17, 2004.

  1. elven

    elven Guest

    Now that the AMD 64bit processor is in wide release and Microsoft has
    released it's public beta of the next windows xp 64, will Abobe
    release a patch or upgrade to photoshop to support it?
    Curious to see if anyone on this forum has heard any new concerning
    this.

    -long time photoshop user. I've have every upgrade from version 2.0
    to CS.
    Just got a AMD 64 computer. Will install the 64 bit os beta soon.
     
    elven, Feb 17, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. elven

    Flycaster Guest

    Good question - but I doubt it'll be a "patch." ;)
     
    Flycaster, Feb 17, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. elven

    Brian Guest

    Now that the AMD 64bit processor is in wide release and Microsoft has
    As I just posted in the Adobe forum, I doubt that they are in any rush
    to issue a patch for a beta OS...
     
    Brian, Feb 17, 2004
    #3
  4. elven

    Norman Black Guest

    Good question - but I doubt it'll be a "patch." ;)

    I cannot be a patch. The code generation for 64-bit is different. The
    whole executable has to change.

    Norman
     
    Norman Black, Feb 18, 2004
    #4
  5. elven

    Eric Gill Guest

    That depends, of course, on what is meant by "support". Adding 64-bit code
    to plugins that might benefit from it is (relatively) simple. Making
    Photoshop 64-bit clean, including the much greater memory support, does
    indeed involve nuke and pave.
     
    Eric Gill, Feb 18, 2004
    #5
  6. elven

    Norman Black Guest

    I cannot be a patch. The code generation for 64-bit is different.
    The
    If a plugin is 64-bit capable then Photoshop must also be so. You cannot
    mix 32-bit mode and 64-bit mode. You are either in one mode or the
    other. The only way a process can be in 64-bit mode is if the app is
    compiled and linked for 64-bit.

    Norman
     
    Norman Black, Feb 19, 2004
    #6
  7. elven

    Eric Gill Guest

    Sure, sure. That, of course, explains the G5 plugins for Photoshop, and the
    hybrid code of OSX.
     
    Eric Gill, Feb 19, 2004
    #7
  8. elven

    Norman Black Guest

    I cannot be a patch. The code generation for 64-bit is different.
    Other processors and other operating systems are neither here nor there
    when concerning Windows 64-bit and the AMD 64-bit processor extensions
    to IA32 (x86) architecture. The AMD processor extensions are modal.
    Modal meaning that when the processor is in 32-bit mode, 64-bit anything
    is not available. A mode switch must be done by "supervisor" priveledge
    code. The PowerPC architecture has always supported 64-bit in a non
    modal manner. Initial processors simply did not implement the 64-bit
    features of the architecture. An example similar to the AMD extensions
    is the MIPS processor where the 64-bit mode is modal. Processor "modes"
    exists because an identical machine code instruction has different
    meanings depending on the mode you are executing in. For example AMD64
    redefines the single byte opcode INC and DEC instructions in 64-bit mode
    to enable new features.

    The PowerPC had the luxury of being defined at a time of 32-bit with an
    eye towards 64-bit. The x86 line of processors goes back to the 16-bit
    days. Hence the need for "modal" extensions to a new world.

    Norman
     
    Norman Black, Feb 23, 2004
    #8
  9. This is interesting; I had assumed that some 64-bit instructions would
    be available in 32-bit mode. That would allow a new shared C library or
    a new photoshop extension (like the MMX extension) to use 64-bit
    registers etc. for speeding up things like memory copies. I assumed
    that Windows XP and Photoshop 8 would already have these things! Maybe
    I'm too optimistic. Do you have a reference which I could read that
    explains things like this?

    Thanks,

    Andrew
     
    Andrew Brooks, Feb 25, 2004
    #9
  10. elven

    Norman Black Guest

    This is interesting; I had assumed that some 64-bit instructions would
    No free opcodes available for 64-bit extensions. AMD obviously decided
    to simplify by not using prefixes ala the 32-bit IA32 instruction set. I
    assume the prefixes are not really available and certainly not a linear
    sequence of opcodes which AMD wanted to use for their REX prefixes. This
    is the best thing about AMD64... the REX prefixes provide more registers
    (double to be exact). Not many apps care about 64-bit addressing, though
    Photoshop is one of these, but all applications can use the additional
    registers for better code generation. With the linear opcode requirement
    for the REX prefixes AMD changed the meaning of the single byte INC/DEC
    instructions. This move invalidates interoperability of 32<->64-bit
    modes.

    The mass market will care about "64-bit" because of the performance
    increase due to the extra registers. It will be publicized by the media
    that "64-bit" computing is inherently faster, but this is not true in
    this case. Since the MMX extensions you could operate with 64-bit data
    operands. Since SSE2 you could operate on 128-bit data operands. Code
    that could use these extensions, mostly the SIMD features, are using
    those instructions so AMD64 will add nothing there.
    The AMD instruction set reference manuals. I have these. I am a compiler
    writer by profession. You can order the manual from AMD.com. They
    probably have enough information for your interests online. Somewhere at
    Intel.com they have "their" 64-bit extensions in a downloadable PDF
    format.

    Norman
     
    Norman Black, Feb 26, 2004
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.