• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: 64bit v Intel Macs?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 64bit v Intel Macs?


  • Subject: Re: 64bit v Intel Macs?
  • From: William Stewart <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:53:33 -0800

Right - Here's some factoids to mull on.

64Bit - in general terms this means the available address space (size of a pointer).
Currently a 32bit Mac OS X system, provides you a full 32 bit address space (4gbyte) per application/process
Currently, a 32bit Win XP system provides you with a 31 bit address space (2gbyte) per application/process
There is obviously more motivation for Windows apps to become 64 bit due to this limit - in fact most of the motivation for audio apps is really just to get that extra 2gbyte...


It is a mistake to associate 64bit sample sizes with 64bit addressing.

CoreAudio already support arbitrary sample sized data. We state that 32bit floats are the canonical format for linear PCM. This is generally specified in the AudioStreamBasicDescription (ASBD) in <CoreAudio/CoreAudioTypes.h> . This struct enables for a flexible description of diverse formats from compressed VBR formats, to differently packed and sized lpcm.

AudioUnits too use this struct to define the formats they use - so to support 64bit samples would not require API changes, but rather implementation and adoption. We've currently seen no need to support this (AUs can of course use 64bit floats internally in any case), but are always open to suggestions.

Bill

On 19/01/2006, at 1:33 PM, Richard Dobson wrote:

Evan Olcott wrote:

Though I'm not on the Apple team, it'd be pretty safe to say that the 32-bit audio stream is what we'll be sticking with for a long time. I don't think the benefits (if there are any, speed-wise) of a 64-bit audio stream versus the potential dynamic range gain of 32-bit vs 64-bit (whose math escapes me currently) is probably not worth the paradigm shift.

Out of interest, VST 2.4 has just been announced, complete with 64bit sample support (reflecting an initiative from Cakewalk, who are making a forceful case for 64bit streams - I must admit to being a little skeptical myself). However, my post was concerned only with 32/64 architecture, not sample size.


Richard Dobson


_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Coreaudio-api mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden

--
mailto:email@hidden
tel: +1 408 974 4056
________________________________________________________________________ __
"Much human ingenuity has gone into finding the ultimate Before.
The current state of knowledge can be summarized thus:
In the beginning, there was nothing, which exploded" - Terry Pratchett
________________________________________________________________________ __


_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Coreaudio-api mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


References: 
 >RE: 64bit v Intel Macs? (From: Evan Olcott <email@hidden>)
 >Re: 64bit v Intel Macs? (From: Richard Dobson <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: 64bit v Intel Macs?
  • Next by Date: Apple Lossless, iPods and bitrate in iTunes
  • Previous by thread: Re: 64bit v Intel Macs?
  • Next by thread: Off Topic: CA Job Posting
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread