RAM not recognized

[Paul A. Procacci]

Robert Huff wrote:
> RW writes:
>
>   
>>  And also bear in mind that amd64 uses memory less efficiently
>>  than i386
>>     
>
> 	Would you care to elaborate?  (A pointer will do.)
>
>
>
> 				Robert Huff
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>   
The only 'less efficient' thing 64-bit programs have, are larger 
pointers as well as other potenial data items.  Though I'm not sure I'd 
consider this 'less efficient'.
Ok, so we have larger binaries and a bit more ram usage for the 
aforementioned, but isn't that all?  I'd guess to say yes, and if it is, 
then that's not so bad.  In fact, I don't think I'd even call is an 
inefficiency.

My 2 cents.