Avast X64 bit version for Windows 7

[system]

@pk post:10

Unfortunately, antivirus software is not a typical product which would greatly profit from x64 architecture. The harddrive is always the biggest bottleneck for antivirus.

@rdmaloyjr post:12

I would also like a pure 64bit version of avast! for my 64bit copy of Windows 7.

MSE has three versions, XP 32, Vista/7 32 & Vista/7 64. 8)

how does pk’s post answer my question to you when I asked you what that would change ? pk meant no obvious benefit, and you insisted that you still would like a 100% 64 bit avast ??? so, why ;D

[system]

how does pk's post answer my question to you when I asked you what that would change ?

The answer is below

pk meant no obvious benefit,

[system]

@rdmaloyjr post:22

how does pk's post answer my question to you when I asked you what that would change ?

The answer is below

pk meant no obvious benefit,

so you meant even if there’s no benefit with 100% 64 bit you still want it… doesn’t bother you that your first comment comes in complete contradiction with pk’s statement, and your statement now?

[system]

No contradiction.

I have a 64bit OS, so I would like everything 64bit on my 7 64bit computer.

Call it vanity or whatever you want to call it. ;D

Eventually everything will be x64 until 128bit comes out. ;D

It has been posted on avast!Webforums that MS is working on 128bit.

[system]

So guys… Are we saying that there is no benefit of creating a 64 bit version over 32 bit?

I agree with rdmaloyjr. Avast is a major player in AV industry and i personally think it will better for its image to provide an x64 bit version even if it does not provide any signification advantage over 32 bit version.

If the major players are not going to drive the move for 64bit than who would?

[wonderwrench]

@igor post:20

There’s no “emulation” here (unless we’re talking about Itanium, not x64).
Basically, the CPU is just switched into 32bit mode (when executing the 32bit code). The overhead is so small that it’s kinda pointless to talk about it.

I do not know where you get your information from. All 32 bit applications run in Vista/7 64 bit are being run in a x86 emulator.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa384249(VS.85).aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WoW64
I do agree the overhead is small and it may even be near pointless to talk about it but lets get the facts straight. A correctly coded application coded in 64 bit will perform better than the same application correctly coded in 32 bit. Edit: You are correct in stating the CPU is switched to 32 bit mode as needed. The overhead is indeed small compared to running 32 bit apps on IA-64.

[system]

@rdmaloyjr post:24

No contradiction.

I have a 64bit OS, so I would like everything 64bit on my 7 64bit computer.

Call it vanity or whatever you want to call it. ;D

Eventually everything will be x64 until 128bit comes out. ;D

It has been posted on avast!Webforums that MS is working on 128bit.

thanks for the fun game, and all the non-sense there, referring to pk’s post etc…and best of luck on 256 bit

[system]

@sdevil post:25

So guys… Are we saying that there is no benefit of creating a 64 bit version over 32 bit?

I agree with rdmaloyjr

yeah but the problem is that rdmaloyj agrees with both opinions

[system]

@sdevil post:25

So guys… Are we saying that there is no benefit of creating a 64 bit version over 32 bit?

I agree with rdmaloyjr. Avast is a major player in AV industry and i personally think it will better for its image to provide an x64 bit version even if it does not provide any signification advantage over 32 bit version.

If the major players are not going to drive the move for 64bit than who would?

@igor post:20

There’s no “emulation” here (unless we’re talking about Itanium, not x64).
Basically, the CPU is just switched into 32bit mode (when executing the 32bit code). The overhead is so small that it’s kinda pointless to talk about it.

pk:Unfortunately, antivirus software is not a typical product which would greatly profit from x64 architecture. The harddrive is always the biggest bottleneck for antivirus.

Little benefit over “mixed” 32/64.

I agree with sdevil:

Avast is a major player in AV industry and i personally think it will better for its image to provide an x64 bit version even if it does not provide any signification advantage over 32 bit version.

[igor0]

@wonderwrench post:26

@igor post:20

There’s no “emulation” here (unless we’re talking about Itanium, not x64).
Basically, the CPU is just switched into 32bit mode (when executing the 32bit code). The overhead is so small that it’s kinda pointless to talk about it.

I do not know where you get your information from. All 32 bit applications run in Vista/7 64 bit are being run in a x86 emulator.

Sure, you can call the WoW64 subsystem an “emulator”, if you wish - cause it somehow “emulates” the 32bit Windows environment.
However, there is no instruction emulation there - once the thunking (switch into the 32bit/64bit mode is made - with the corresponding parameter translation, if calling Win32 API), the code runs natively.
It would be rather stupid to emulate the 32bit code if the CPU can run it natively, wouldn’t it?

[system]

yeah but the problem is that rdmaloyj agrees with both opinions :D

??? ;D ;D ;D

I prefer pure x64, but I’m realistic, ALWIL isn’t going to give us pure x64 now.

I have tried MSE 64bit, but I believe avast! 5 is better. I do believe if ALWIL would make a pure x64 avast! 5 it would be slightly better than the current avast! 5 (for x64 OS), but more bugs to work out in more beta versions. As it is, there are some saying avast! 5 shouldn’t have been released yet. :

[wonderwrench]

@sdevil post:25

So guys… Are we saying that there is no benefit of creating a 64 bit version over 32 bit?

I agree with rdmaloyjr. Avast is a major player in AV industry and i personally think it will better for its image to provide an x64 bit version even if it does not provide any signification advantage over 32 bit version.

If the major players are not going to drive the move for 64bit than who would?

You will never be able to feel the difference between a 32 app and a 64 bit app. Only when the app needs to access more ram than 32 bit would allow would you feel the difference. At this point in time games are the only apps that could truly benefit by being 64 bit. Anyone that thinks they are only going to use 64 bit apps on their 64 bit windows at this point in time is in for a tough time as there are very few 64 bit apps. You might as well run a MAC.