MS Bob 11 Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 According to this page and confirmed by Tim Sneath, only 32-bit IE9 has Chakra JIT engine which explains why 32-bit IE9 performs better than 64-bit IE9. I guess even Flash going 64-bit in beta, 64-bit IE is still not a viable option if it comes with a slower JS engine. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unix2 Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Wikipedia does not specify which version have the Js engine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakra_(JScript_engine) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webcivilian Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 (edited) According to this page and confirmed by Tim Sneath, only 32-bit IE9 has Chakra JIT engine which explains why 32-bit IE9 performs better than 64-bit IE9. I guess even Flash going 64-bit in beta, 64-bit IE is still not a viable option if it comes with a slower JS engine. :( It does have the Chakra JIT engine but the 32-bit is very optimized. If read the first few line of the article it does says that. Edit: I was wrong 64-bit doesn't have any JIT engine at all. 64-Bit IE FAQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObiWanToby Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Seems odd to cripple 64bit. At the same time, 32 bit browsers work fine. Do other platforms (OSX and Linux) even show an improvement by moving to 64bit? Math or memory usage? Browsers are certainly becoming more and more important, if 64bit helps, then well, this is a big mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mockingbird Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 This is correct. Internet Explorer 9 64-bit does not have Chakra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherITguy Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 We have in part to thank companies like adobe for this, and to think i was looking forward to X64 IE9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webcivilian Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Seems odd to cripple 64bit. At the same time, 32 bit browsers work fine. Do other platforms (OSX and Linux) even show an improvement by moving to 64bit? Math or memory usage? Browsers are certainly becoming more and more important, if 64bit helps, then well, this is a big mistake. No major vendor has 64-bit final browser as all are currently betas except for Safari and IE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo1911 Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Then whats the point of developing IE9 X64? Half assed job from Microsoft as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherITguy Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 @ SANKE1 typical commnet, have you even fired up IE 9 X64? it is stupid fast, for me 90% of the sites work fine on it, but flash which is important doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unix2 Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 This is correct. Internet Explorer 9 64-bit does not have Chakra. Microsoft should focus his energy in 64bit only, let make it like Apple that force everybody to upgrade. If Microsoft continues supporting legacy 32bit processors, part of their customers never going to upgrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webcivilian Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Microsoft should focus his energy in 64bit only, let make it like Apple that force everybody to upgrade. If Microsoft continues supporting legacy 32bit processors, part of their customers never going to upgrade. Microsoft is supporting the 64bit IE. When you install IE on 64-bit Vista or Windows 7. Both 64-bit and 32-bit versions get installed. They have chosen to make 32-bit default because of add-ons. You can force IE to run in 64-bit mode but you will loose some add-on support. IE9 in 64-bit is 8 times faster than IE8. Currently there aren't many add-ons that support 64-bit browsers. Flash is an example. (Flash-64 has been in beta since last year) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Zlip792 MVC Posted March 13, 2011 MVC Share Posted March 13, 2011 I also shocked once, I read about it. Maybe Mozilla Firefox 5 will become first nice 64-bit browser but again IE9 s major step from IE8. God thing at least they now support standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osm0sis Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Yeah I fail to see how this is a big deal tux, the article you link to explains the reasons and I believe they are pretty sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexalex Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 According to Microsoft : ?The 64-bit IE 9 RC doesn?t use the Chakra JIT does it? It uses the older, far less efficient one, right?? Sneath replied, ?That?s correct?we put all our JIT compiler investment in this release of Chakra into the 32-bit compiler, since that?s the one that is near-universally used today. The 32-bit browser is the default even on 64-bit systems, since almost all add-ons are 32-bit only at this time. The 64-bit version provides no real advantage, since no browser scenario requires access to >2GB of user memory in a single process.? Chrome 10 vs. Internet Explorer 9 Reconsidered : http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/chrome-10-vs-internet-explorer-9-reconsidered/792?pg=2&tag=mantle_skin;content Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo1911 Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 @ SANKE1 typical commnet, have you even fired up IE 9 X64? it is stupid fast, for me 90% of the sites work fine on it, but flash which is important doesn't. Typical reply. Do you judge persons from their display pic alone? I am using X64 and this news was a shcocker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethec Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Then whats the point of developing IE9 X64? Half assed job from Microsoft as usual. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ieinternals/archive/2009/05/29/q-a-64-bit-internet-explorer.aspx Please read this (especially the last question) before saying such nonsense. :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheatyface Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Typical reply. Do you judge persons from their display pic alone? I am using X64 and this news was a shcocker. :dontgetit: If you've been using the 64bit version of IE and you didn't notice the difference then it isn't too big an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakem1 Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 :dontgetit: If you've been using the 64bit version of IE and you didn't notice the difference then it isn't too big an issue. :laugh: +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George P Global Moderator Posted March 13, 2011 Global Moderator Share Posted March 13, 2011 :dontgetit: If you've been using the 64bit version of IE and you didn't notice the difference then it isn't too big an issue. zing! Honestly you can run 32bit version of IE9 on 64bit win7 without any issue and since this hasn't come up till now (IE9 ahs been in dev for 12 months!) it seems no one saw much of a difference to complain. Either way it's been hinted that the IE team will jump right back into dev the next version of IE at MiX next month, that version will probably see the 64bit side get most of the work. I agree with them though, in what crazy situation would you need >2GB for a browser process? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subject Delta Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Although I don't use IE9 all that often, this is pretty poor from Microsoft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MS Bob 11 Posted March 13, 2011 Author Share Posted March 13, 2011 They should at least make it more prominent. Many users who don't know this are likely to use 64-bit IE9 thinking now 64-bit Flash is almost here (still not release version), there aren't any issues with 64-bit IE9 and then they would really be experiencing poor JavaScript performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Gibs Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Honestly you can run 32bit version of IE9 on 64bit win7 without any issue and since this hasn't come up till now (IE9 ahs been in dev for 12 months!) it seems no one saw much of a difference to complain. Look at who made the first post. Judging by the amount of ranting he's done on Windows 7 and IE9...I'm pretty sure he won't be using any of them. Although I don't use IE9 all that often, this is pretty poor from Microsoft Why? Which other browser maker has a 64-bit browser? Chrome? Nope (not on Windows anyways) Opera? Nope Safari? Not on Windows (Mac may be 64bit but not sure) Firefox 4? Yes I would rather they get the 32bit version (that 99.99% of people use) working and released and then work on the 64bit. Don't get me wrong I much prefer 64bit over 32 but the world isn't going to switch overnight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subject Delta Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Why? Which other browser maker has a 64-bit browser? Chrome? Nope (not on Windows anyways) Opera? Nope Safari? Not on Windows (Mac may be 64bit but not sure) Firefox 4? Yes I would rather they get the 32bit version (that 99.99% of people use) working and released and then work on the 64bit. Don't get me wrong I much prefer 64bit over 32 but the world isn't going to switch overnight. And it's not going to switch any sooner if lazy coders purposely neuter their products because they can't be bothered to work on the development. The simple answer is either provide it, or don't provide it at all. Never do an half-assed job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epk Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Wow, this sucks. Was it really all that extra work to add it to the 64bit version as well. Kinda defeats the pourpose of running it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Gibs Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 And it's not going to switch any sooner if lazy coders purposely neuter their products because they can't be bothered to work on the development. The simple answer is either provide it, or don't provide it at all. Never do an half-assed job. And like GP007 has pointed out, if the impact was so big I'm sure this would have been brought up before. But it hasn't. And like he also pointed out they might be working on the 64bit version later on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts