Gaurev Seth just posted this article on a comparision between x86 and x64. As much as I like the results, they are severly skewed. I am guessing that from the article Gaurev used an Intel P4 2.0 ghz machine for x86 and a P4 2.8 ghz machine for the x64 test. An Itanic (Itanium) had to be used for the IA-64 tests.
The interesting thing is that the less than 1 Ghz Itanic processes more than raw numbers than a the 2 Ghz P4, and manages to keep up with a 2.8 Ghz P4. I’d love to see what an AMD64 processor would score with his ‘test’.
I *want* x64 to be great, as I’ve been running Windows x64 since the Release Candidate last year. It’s been VERY stable, but driver support has been slow. The drivers that were created during the initial testing phase Windows x64 seem to be the only ones adding/maintaining momentum. Heck, most shops don’t even realize that Windows x64 is for sale. (One company, *cough* Line 6 *cough* told me that they don’t support beta products. When I pushed and said it was not in beta, they seemed *surprised*. Star Date was November 2005. x64 was released in April…)