Level 1

0 points

MacBookPro3,1 + Snow Leopard = 32 bits.

The MacBookPro 3,1 should be capable of running the 64 bit kernel but it's not on the list.

Core2duo = 64 bit
Santa Rosa chipset = 64 bit (I have 4GB and it can use it all)

Yet with the 6+4 key press, the Boot.plist and nvram modifications this will not boot into 64 bit kernel.

My reason for wanting this is that I'm concerned with a 32 bit kernel mode then OpenCL drivers will only allow addressing of 2GB.

I know in the past that nVidia CUDA & ATI CTM GPGPU drivers only supported 32 bit on PC platforms until they decided to move forward.

So what reason is there? Is the MBP3,1 considered obsolete Apple?

MBP3,1 15" 2.4 SR, 4GB, 120GB SSD, Mac OS X (10.6)

Posted on Aug 29, 2009 4:37 AM

192 replies

Sep 12, 2009 8:43 AM in response to R C-R

R C-R wrote:

kaosdroid wrote:
oh yeah.. and YES.. even by default on newer mac pro models..

Again, I only see this info from Apple for Snow Leopard Server, not for the regular version of the OS. Do you have any reference (preferably from Apple) for this as the default behavior for the latest Mac towers running Snow Leopard?

you're right! only XServe will boot regularly into "64bit mode" / with 64bit kernel and extensions loaded and only SL Server seems to on other machines...
badly mistaken there.. =)
thx...!

flauers

Level 1

0 points

Sep 15, 2009 7:09 PM in response to Nick 1066

Any firmware news? Still no 64 bit kernel support for the MBP 3,1 with 10.6.1

Let's wait for 10.6.2 ........

Sep 16, 2009 7:04 AM in response to flauers

yeah.. I hope they will release something...

And.. to answer to previous posts:
why should we care about 32bit/64bit boot mode: because we bought a FULL 64bit capable machine and I WANT to be able to use a FULL 64 bit machine.

And.. Snow Leopard is FULL 64bit capable (at least a lot of macbookpro (4,1 - 5,1), some iMacs) but it checks something at boot and we can't boot in 64bit.

R C-R

Level 6

17,866 points

Sep 16, 2009 7:23 AM in response to francesco_romano

fra.makaveli wrote:
And.. to answer to previous posts:
why should we care about 32bit/64bit boot mode: because we bought a FULL 64bit capable machine and I WANT to be able to use a FULL 64 bit machine.

Even if there is no advantage to doing so?

Sep 16, 2009 11:24 AM in response to R C-R

Yes.
I paid for that, and I want it!

Linux and now Windows are full 64bit, and OS X (that start supporting 64bit some years before the others) no...

Sep 16, 2009 11:30 AM in response to francesco_romano

So to recap what your are saying:
You want to use OS X in such a way (64-bit kernel) that you will have more problems than normally (32-bit kernel), without any advantage merely on the principle of "you bought it, you want it"?

Makes absolutely no sense to me.

Sep 16, 2009 5:53 PM in response to francesco_romano

fra.makaveli wrote:
Linux and now Windows are full 64bit, and OS X (that start supporting 64bit some years before the others) no...

I can get the "because I want to" approach. That's cool.

But this statement is just incorrect. There's definitely no full 64-bit version of Windows (including Win7). I'm sure there's a least a few Linux distros that are pure 64-bit but probably not a lot that are pure because most users end up having to fall back to a 32-bit browser for plugin support.

Sep 16, 2009 5:55 PM in response to MuddyBulldog

Yes there is. I don't know about before, but XP, server 2003, Vista, and Server 2008 all come in x64 editions. They are just less common (at least the desktop OSes).

Sep 16, 2009 6:04 PM in response to Community User

They all come in x64 editions, but they are NOT pure 64-bit as is being claimed. They are x64 and x86 hybrids.

Message was edited by: MuddyBulldog (correct direction of statement)

Sep 16, 2009 6:06 PM in response to MuddyBulldog

No, it is true 64-bit. They require 64-bit drivers, etc... Of course, however, it can run 32-bit apps (albeit not 16-bit).

Sep 16, 2009 6:15 PM in response to Community User

There is a very good, simple reason why Apple defaulted the install of Snow Leopard to the 32bit Kernel. Compatibility!

You will quickly find much more 3rd party software to be incompatible and error prone when running the 64bit Kernel. I know this first hand, having experienced many more issues running SL in 64bit as opposed to 32bit.

You will find NO Performance difference running the 64bit Kernel. It will not magically make your system run any better. It will not allow you to use more memory than the max your system will handle. It will not allow you to run WoW at higher FPS.

Just stick with the 32bit Kernel and things will work out better for you at this point.

Message was edited by: ch0b1ts2600

Sep 16, 2009 6:17 PM in response to Community User

macwiz1220 wrote:
No, it is true 64-bit. They require 64-bit drivers, etc... Of course, however, it can run 32-bit apps (albeit not 16-bit).

Oi! I said they are not pure 64-bit, as the original poster said they were. I see this as being a relevant distinction since the main point of the thread is discussing the 32-bit kernel running in Snow Leopard (making it non-pure/non-full/non-true).

There are still many 32-bit aspects in all of the x64 editions of Windows, though it's getting less and less with each release. You don't have to dig very deep to find it either (though the deeper you dig, the more 32-bit stuff you'll find). Look no further than the default Internet Explorer, which is 32-bit on all Windows x64 systems (XP/2003/Vista/2008/7).

Sep 16, 2009 6:42 PM in response to MuddyBulldog

That is slightly different. IE isn't exactly part of the OS. It is simply an application running in 32-bit mode. It doesn't effect the OS in any way.

And yes, not relevant. Back to SL!

Tekneek

Level 1

24 points

Sep 16, 2009 9:22 PM in response to Community User

In my experience, there is a difference between running 32-bit apps in a 64-bit OS and running 64-bit apps in a 32-bit OS. Being unable to run in 64-bit mode does take some of the shine off for me. I still like it, but I am a little less pleased. The choice should be up to me. Microsoft gives that choice now, and they aren't known for that. Let me decide if I am happy with whatever compatibility problems may come from 64-bit mode. Don't prevent me from running it arbitrarily when my hardware is capable.

Sep 17, 2009 12:41 PM in response to Tekneek

running 64-bit apps in a 32-bit OS

Not sure what you are referring to, but that is impossible... you can't run 64-bit programs within a 32-bit OS...

This thread has been closed by the system or the community team. You may vote for any posts you find helpful, or search the Community for additional answers.

MacBookPro3,1 + Snow Leopard = 32 bits.