02-27-2008, 07:31 PM

..If so it is using the full power the Intel Core 2 Duo processeor right? 90% of PC/ Laptops come with 64-bit processeors and use 32-bit OS and you need at least 2GB ram for XP-64 and something like at least 8GB to run vista-64 bit. I know mac are designed in a diffient way but it sems very cool that 1GB ram can run a 64-bit os with a 64-bit chip if that is the case

thanks

02-27-2008, 07:39 PM

I think you have things backwards here.
First, Leopard is 10.5, not 10.0. Leopard is 64 bit on 64 bit Macs. On 32-bit Macs, Leopard is 32 bits.
You will only need the minimum amount of RAM to run any OS. For XP 64-bit, it's 256MB according to the Microsoft page I found.
I would do a little more research on the Microsoft website.

02-27-2008, 07:41 PM

Bryphotoguy is correct. Mac OSX 10.5 Leopard is a FULL 64 Bit OS with Backward compatibility for older 32 Bit Macs.

02-27-2008, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by natrino

..If so it is using the full power the Intel Core 2 Duo processeor right? 90% of PC/ Laptops come with 64-bit processeors and use 32-bit OS and you need at least 2GB ram for XP-64 and something like at least 8GB to run vista-64 bit. I know mac are designed in a diffient way but it sems very cool that 1GB ram can run a 64-bit os with a 64-bit chip if that is the case

thanks

For all intents of purposes, the primary benefit of a 64-bit OS is the ability to address more than 3GB of RAM. Unless your apps are specifically coded to take advantage of 64-bit and have incredible memory requirements, there really isn't much of a performance advantage. Either way, the industry has bloated up their software to the point that we're starting to see the need for that kind of memory utilization, which is why you're starting to see the push by Apple and MS to move toward 64-bit.

02-27-2008, 10:02 PM

Sad, really sad. I am still amazed at how much I can do with an old Windows 3.1 environment and 24 MB of RAM!

02-28-2008, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by mac57

Sad, really sad. I am still amazed at how much I can do with an old Windows 3.1 environment and 24 MB of RAM!

Same here... or how about an Amiga with 8MB? But I digress....

02-28-2008, 08:39 AM

So I guess the real solution to always needing more ram, is to have the software developers start to re-write bloated code.

02-28-2008, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by PowerBookG4

So I guess the real solution to always needing more ram, is to have the software developers start to re-write bloated code.

Writing efficient code is a lost art, unfortunately. There was a time when there was no other way to do it, because the resources simply weren't there. But why bother coding efficiently when memory and disk capacity are so cheap?

I just bought a 2GB SD card off Woot.com for $12 (shipped). Unbelievable!

02-28-2008, 08:54 AM

so which macs qualify to run leopard as a 64 bit system?

02-28-2008, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by rohan

so which macs qualify to run leopard as a 64 bit system?

Anything with a G5 or Core 2 Duo CPU.

02-28-2008, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by cwa107

Anything with a G5 or Core 2 Duo CPU.

Don't forget the Xeon processors. They are 64 bit as well. And the Core 2 Extreme in the iMac.

02-28-2008, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by bryphotoguy

Don't forget the Xeon processors. They are 64 bit as well. And the Core 2 Extreme in the iMac.

My bad - you are absolutely right.