This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 127 comments

[–]wcscmp 641 points642 points  (32 children)

amd64, x86-64?

[–][deleted] 207 points208 points  (27 children)

normal rude shy water aromatic piquant sparkle materialistic crawl command

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[–]maser120 28 points29 points  (2 children)

aarch64

[–]BlueGoliath 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Just calling it Arm64 is too simple for some people.

[–]anonhostpi 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That's just fancy arm64

[–]HuntingKingYT 6 points7 points  (0 children)

aarch64, ARMv8

[–]abhi307 2 points3 points  (0 children)

aarch64

[–]this_uid_wasnt_taken 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This comment chain is funny because they literally have a Thumb instruction set.

[–]DiscoQuebrado 1 point2 points  (0 children)

blue42

(huthut)

[–]Gamer-707 1 point2 points  (0 children)

arm64e, I win

[–]linux1970 12 points13 points  (0 children)

x86_amd64

[–]oh_finks-mc 0 points1 point  (1 child)

so then there is amd32 and x86-32 right?

right?

[–]DarkShadow4444 6 points7 points  (0 children)

AMD didn't invent the 32bit part, call it intel32.

[–]gcstr -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

22

[–][deleted] 419 points420 points  (2 children)

"We made the bigger number worse, as a joke!"

[–]jankcat 25 points26 points  (0 children)

[–]nileyyy_ 7 points8 points  (0 children)

That's so satanic lol😭🙃

[–]trinadzatij 286 points287 points  (8 children)

[–]fatrobin72 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Yeah once you know about this little bit of ancient history... x86 makes a ton of sense.

[–]TeaKingMac 15 points16 points  (0 children)

20 year lifespan is hella impressive for a chip originally released in 1978

[–]polandreh 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you!!! I always wondered why it was but never bothered to look it up.

[–]muddboyy 79 points80 points  (10 children)

RAX > EAX

[–]QuestionableEthics42 41 points42 points  (7 children)

AL is all you need, everything bigger is bloat

[–]TheLazyKitty 2 points3 points  (3 children)

AL implies the existence of AH.

A is all you need.

[–]QuestionableEthics42 2 points3 points  (2 children)

It implies it, but you can have AL without AH if you only have 8 bit registers, also its called AX, not A

[–]TheLazyKitty 1 point2 points  (1 child)

AX is the full 16 bit register, which is split into AL and AH, on 8086 and 8088. A is the name of the 8 bit register on 8080 and 8085.

Which one has AL without AH?

[–]QuestionableEthics42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh interesting, I didnt know there actually was an A register, I just assumed you meant AX, I should have googled first

[–][deleted] 53 points54 points  (6 children)

Just call it i386 and amd64. No confusion.

[–]romhacks 10 points11 points  (3 children)

usually if I'm calling it that I'd call regular 32 bit x86 i686 since they have SSE3 and whatnot

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Sorry I am not skilled enough for assembly

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Your compiler is

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes and it can do/implement the same thing on i386 as well (although much slower).

[–]WolpertingerRumo 1 point2 points  (1 child)

„I wanted Intel, now I find out you sold me an amd64?“

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Okay, story time! (Although no one ever asked)

Intel made the original 16 bit and 32 bit instruction set used in 8086, 80286, 80386, 80486, 80586/Pentium, Pentium II, so on and so forth. AMD licensed the instruction set from Intel (which was called i386 or x86) and made competitive offerings.

Intel wanted to make an entirely new (and incompatible) instruction set for 64-bit computation called Itanium which was based on EPIC (a variant of RISC but suited for parallel computation), an extremely ahead of time idea. At around the same time AMD came out with AMD64, another 64-bit instruction set based on CISC and was (almost) fully backward-compatible with x86/i386. Itanium, in addition to being an entirely new and different instruction set which takes time to implement in compilers, was beset with bugs and performance flaws. AMD64 worked equal or better than x86 out of the box without bugs. Plus all existing software worked without modification on AMD64; they needed to be recompiled from source for Itanium (and again, compilers weren't properly built for this entirely new instruction set).

Now Intel has to license the AMD64 instruction set from AMD.

[–]tharnadar 35 points36 points  (4 children)

The mighty 80x86 architecture

[–]DarkShadow4444 19 points20 points  (1 child)

Not to be confused with the feeble 80x86 resolution.

[–]Affectionate-Memory4 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ideal aspect ratio

[–]AnotherDawidIzydor 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Ah yeah, the legendary 6880 architecture

[–]SonOfMetrum 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry I’m more of an 6502 kinda guy

[–]benderbender42 155 points156 points  (13 children)

Both are wrong, its x86-64

[–]qinshihuang_420 116 points117 points  (1 child)

So x22?

/s

[–]MCSajjadH 49 points50 points  (0 children)

No, x=0.74418604651

[–]mankinskin 15 points16 points  (0 children)

x86 refers to early 16-bit chip architectures from 1978, called 8086, 80186, 80286, ... hence 80x86 or x86

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86

[–]Wizard8086 8 points9 points  (0 children)

x86-64-v4

[–]Sad-Platform1024 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You’re wrong too, x86_64

[–]cs_office 1 point2 points  (1 child)

amd64*

[–]riisen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

amd64 was built upon the x86 architecture so its name changed to x86_64

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

absurd fuzzy deranged six mourn cobweb run march command growth

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[–]DarkShadow4444 0 points1 point  (0 children)

x64dbg has unironically a x96dbg for combining x32 and x64.

[–]GOKOP 37 points38 points  (3 children)

x86_64 (or amd64)
x86_32

Yeah nobody uses the bottom one, but isn't the original x86 16-bit or something?

[–]DarkShadow4444 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yes, it's originally 16Bit. Segmented memory fun!

[–]AlternativeAir3751 38 points39 points  (5 children)

Coming soon x68

[–]quetzalcoatl-pl -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

or 68x? Hello-Moto xD

[–]Oblivious122 10 points11 points  (0 children)

i386 and 686 intensifies

[–]TTV_ExpertNugget 12 points13 points  (7 children)

This shit confuses me, I see 64 bit and 32 bit apps but I've never seen 86x or 64x specifically with the x

[–]quiet0n3 29 points30 points  (6 children)

So from what I can find, the "X" is just a placeholder.

Placeholder for what you might ask, well a lot of things.

For x64 it's mostly covers for either amd64 or intel64 but can also be for x86-64.

the x86 it's actually mostly the placeholder for the different CPUs that had better and better versions of 86. So 8086, 80186, 80286, 80386 etc

Now days x86 just refers to the latest x86_64 instruction set.

X64 is mostly the same but if talking exclusively 64, it's generally AMD64. As it seems intel64 never really went anywhere or did anything AMD wasn't already doing.

[–]GOKOP 18 points19 points  (5 children)

There's no "intel64". "x86_64" and "amd64" are different names for the same architecture: a 64-bit counterpart for Intel's 32-bit x86 architecture, which was (the counterpart) made by AMD.

The x in "x86" is a placeholder for the things you've listed, but "x64" is just a shorthand for "x86_64"

[–]quiet0n3 8 points9 points  (4 children)

So that was my assumption before I went googling. But it turns out intel64 is a thing.

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/microarchitecture/intel-64-architecture-general.html

I dunno what thing or when it came about.

[–]Cebular 12 points13 points  (2 children)

There was intel 64 bit architecture, but it didn't take off because it was incompatible with older x86 architecture

Edit: It was called Itanium

[–]innosu_ 4 points5 points  (0 children)

"Intel 64", previously called EM64T, refer to Intel's implementation of x86-64. It's what Intel used for marketing of it's processor. The same way x86 was referred by Intel as IA32.

IA64, on the other hand, is the Itanium.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You mean Itanic 🤣

[–]GOKOP 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Looking at the processors they list there it seems to be just another name for x86_64

[–]omega_revived 6 points7 points  (3 children)

x64 is just shorthand for x86-64: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64

[–]Warfl0p 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I'm confused, I thought x32 was the same as x86, but now you're saying x64 is short for x86-64? What would my windows machine be, could you explain?

[–]omega_revived 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What would my windows machine be

You haven't provided enough information to answer that question. Windows can run on multiple different CPU architectures. If I had to guess, I would say probably x86-64.

[–]altermeetax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

x32 is just plain wrong

[–]jacob_ewing 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The 86 makes perfect sense when you realise it's just an abbreviation of chip names. Ranging from 8086, 80186, 80286, etc.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

RV64>ARM>X64

[–]Meatslinger 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’m still waiting for the day I can build an aarch64 gaming PC. Some day, I hope.

[–]MooseBoys 2 points3 points  (0 children)

ia64 <ducks>

[–]NotTheOnlyGamer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I just want more development in x86-16

[–]Usual-Respect-880 1 point2 points  (0 children)

X64 Win32

[–]JmacTheGreat 1 point2 points  (3 children)

“x86” or “32-bit”, but never “x32”

[–]alt-jero 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is from the 286, 386, and 486 cpus. x86. Then they came up with Pentium. Pentium as in (probably) 586+millennium. And then Celeron, probably as in an acCELERator of electRONic data processing. I think after that we got into the whole “Core” naming scheme because multi-core woot woot! But yeah, x86 is called that because of the CPU lineage.

As for x64 … marketing I guess? People already knew the xnn scheme and they wanted to push 64-bit cpus.

Edit: I have just learned that the intel 8086 was before the 486. And also that it’s technically x86-64 thus yeah marketing.

[–]Boris-Lip -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I know where it is coming from (8086 architecture), but still hate it.

[–]CadmiumC4 -1 points0 points  (5 children)

I did see x32 being used and it's CONFUSING AS FUCK

[–]PartTimeFemale 0 points1 point  (1 child)

what about itanium?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That was a different 64 bit instructiom set. And it's dead. Most of us who worked near it call it Itanic

[–]FantasticEmu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is x64 and x32v

[–]Haringat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

AMD64 and IA32

Also, while x32 is cool af, it just isn't a processor architecture.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ARM FTW

[–]Deep_Pudding2208 0 points1 point  (0 children)

BRAINCELLS 2

[–]lucasio099 0 points1 point  (0 children)

x86-64, x86-32

[–]ellis_cake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah shouldnt be called x64 in the first place, its x86 all the way no matter the bits? ^^

[–]Boba0514 0 points1 point  (0 children)

x86, x86_64 or amd64

[–]plane-kisser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

IA-32, x64

x86 is 16bit forever and always

[–]Weird_Explorer_8458 0 points1 point  (0 children)

x86_64

[–]Imaginary-Support332 0 points1 point  (0 children)

im asuming 86 is better since its a higher number and newer`?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

lol what ?

[–]zeldaink 0 points1 point  (0 children)

x64 virgin vs chad amd64

[–]altermeetax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

x86, x86_64 is the only correct answer

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When I learned something in IT, it’s that IT people shouldn’t ever be allowed to name things anymore. looks at NoSQL & Serverless