From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: 64 bit official Windows builds Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 21:10:06 +0200 Message-ID: <83r3gnow6p.fsf@gnu.org> References: <2577057e-98d3-41ce-ade2-1496648b09c3@googlegroups.com> <8337t3qdpd.fsf@gnu.org> <874mdjxdh2.fsf@wanadoo.es> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1454958659 1572 80.91.229.3 (8 Feb 2016 19:10:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 19:10:59 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 08 20:10:54 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aSrD3-00010h-LK for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 20:10:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48003 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSrD3-0002Xu-09 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 14:10:53 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52688) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSrCc-0002UB-Nm for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 14:10:27 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSrCY-0007Ug-Kq for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 14:10:26 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:35872) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSrCY-0007Ua-ID for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 14:10:22 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1621 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aSrCX-0005ZI-I2 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 14:10:22 -0500 In-reply-to: <874mdjxdh2.fsf@wanadoo.es> (message from =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3s?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?car?= Fuentes on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:29:29 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:109060 Archived-At: > From: Óscar Fuentes > Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:29:29 +0100 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > Third, when Emacs is built with a 64-bit compiler, it runs faster, not > > slower, because running a 32-bit executable on a 64-bit Windows > > requires expensive thunking for every call to any Windows API, > > something that happens a lot. > > For a pointer-chasing program like Emacs, data cache effects are orders > of magnitude more expensive than thunking. That's what I observe with > similar applications. As for Emacs, I see no performance difference > among 32 bit and 64 bit executables, for ordinary use. That's how it > should be: a good interactive application is never supposed to make the > user wait, and Emacs does a decent job at that. Try some CPU intensive processing, or a command that does a lot of disk I/O. A program such as GNU Find runs more than twice faster when compiled as a 64-bit application.