Why aren't you on a 64-bit machine?
>>61372349
I bought an i9 and my house burned down, so now I have to post from this Pentium III machine at the library.
Because I dont need more than 4gb ram
3gb windows xp running on pentium 4 is enough.
>>61372349
i'm poor in a third world shithole. my pentium 4 works fine and my netbook with an atom too. sure they are slow and sometimes i want to gage my eyes out of their sockets, but what else can i do
>>61372349
If an x86 machine with a 64 bit OS doesn't count, then because I don't know how to.
>>61372349
>mfw most x86 chips can't even do the full 64 bit of address space
>>61374067
>mfw most x86 chips can't even do the full 64 bit of address space
Most?
There aren't ANY that do full 64bit.
That being said, 48bit address space takes you to 256TB of RAM. The x86-64 architecture can go up to 16EB... but no need for the bit space until hardware is there.
>>61372349
I already left that behind for 256-bit
>not running Linux (for Playstation 2) on a PS2 for an 128-bit computing experience
>tfw can only afford 8^2 bit computer
Does aarch64 count?
>he's not running IA-64
explain you'reselve?
>>61375538
>tfw we could have had superior 64 bit architecture but got stuck with AMD64 flaccid shit thanks to x86 babies needing their backwards compatibility
>>61372349
ramlet
my cpu does support 64 bit instructions though