Determine word size of my processor

Your assumption about sizeof(int) is untrue; see this.

Since you must know the processor, OS and compiler at compilation time, the word size can be inferred using predefined architecture/OS/compiler macros provided by the compiler.

However while on simpler and most RISC processors, word size, bus width, register size and memory organisation are often consistently one value, this may not be true to more complex CISC and DSP architectures with various sizes for floating point registers, accumulators, bus width, cache width, general purpose registers etc.

Of course it begs the question why you might need to know this? Generally you would use the type appropriate to the application, and trust the compiler to provide any optimisation. If optimisation is what you think you need this information for, then you would probably be better off using the C99 'fast' types. If you need to optimise a specific algorithm, implement it for a number of types and profile it.

an int should be one word right?

As I understand it, that depends on the data size model. For an explanation for UNIX Systems, 64-bit and Data Size Neutrality. For example Linux 32-bit is ILP32, and Linux 64-bit is LP64. I am not sure about the difference across Window systems and versions, other than I believe all 32-bit Window systems are ILP32.

How do I determine the word size of my CPU?

That depends. Which version of C standard are you assuming. What platforms are we talking. Is this a compile or run time determination you're trying to make.

The C header file <limits.h> may defines WORD_BIT and/or __WORDSIZE.

sizeof(int) is not always the "word" size of your CPU. The most important question here is why you want to know the word size.... are you trying to do some kind of run-time and CPU specific optimization?

That being said, on Windows with Intel processors, the nominal word size will be either 32 or 64 bits and you can easily figure this out:

• if your program is compiled for 32-bits, then the nominal word size is 32-bits
• if you have compiled a 64-bit program then then the nominal word size is 64-bits.

This answer sounds trite, but its true to the first order. But there are some important subtleties. Even though the x86 registers on a modern Intel or AMD processor are 64-bits wide; you can only (easily) use their 32-bit widths in 32-bit programs - even though you may be running a 64-bit operating system. This will be true on Linux and OSX as well.

Moreover, on most modern CPU's the data bus width is wider than the standard ALU registers (EAX, EBX, ECX, etc). This bus width can vary, some systems have 128 bit, or even 192 bit wide busses.

If you are concerned about performance, then you also need to understand how the L1 and L2 data caches work. Note that some modern CPU's have an L3 cache. Caches including a unit called the Write Buffer

"Additionally, the size of the C type long is equal to the word size, whereas the size of the int type is sometimes less than that of the word size. For example, the Alpha has a 64-bit word size. Consequently, registers, pointers, and the long type are 64 bits in length."

source: http://books.msspace.net/mirrorbooks/kerneldevelopment/0672327201/ch19lev1sec2.html

Keeping this in mind, the following program can be executed to find out the word size of the machine you're working on-

#include <stdio.h>

int main ()

{

    long l;
    
    short s = (8 * sizeof(l));
    
    printf("Word size of this machine is %hi bits\n", s);
    
    return 0;
}

Many thinks of memory as an array of bytes. But CPU has another view of it. Which is about memory granularity. Depending on architecture, there would be 2, 4, 8, 16 or even 32 bytes memory granularity. Memory granularity and address alignment have great impact on performance, stability and correctness of software. Consider a granularity of 4 bytes and an unaligned memory access to read in 4 bytes. In this case every read, 75% if address is increasing by one byte, takes two more read instructions plus two shift operations and finally a bitwise instruction for final result which is performance killer. Further atomic operations could be affected as they must be indivisible. Other side effects would be caches, synchronization protocols, cpu internal bus traffic, cpu write buffer and you guess what else. A practical test could be run on a circular buffer to see how the results could be different. CPUs from different manufacturers, based on model, have different registers which will be used in general and specific operations. For example modern CPUs have extensions with 128 bits registers. So, the word size is not only about type of operation but memory granularity. Word size and address alignment are beasts which must be taken care about. There are some CPUs in market which does not take care of address alignment and simply ignore it if provided. And guess what happens?

As others have pointed out, how are you interested in calculating this value? There are a lot of variables.

sizeof(int) != sizeof(word). the size of byte, word, double word, etc have never changed since their creation for the sake of API compatibility in the windows api world at least. Even though a processor word size is the natural size an instruction can operate on. For example, in msvc/cpp/c#, sizeof(int) is four bytes. Even in 64bit compilation mode. Msvc/cpp has __int64 and c# has Int64/UInt64(non CLS compliant) ValueType's. There are also type definitions for WORD DWORD and QWORD in the win32 API that have never changed from two bytes, four bytes, and eight bytes respectively. As well as UINT/INT_PTR on Win32 and UIntPtr/IntPtr on c# that are guranteed to be big enough to represent a memory address and a reference type respectively. AFAIK, and I could be wrong if arch's still exist, I don't think anyone has to deal with, nor do, near/far pointers exist anymore, so if you're on c/cpp/c#, sizeof(void*) and Unsafe.SizeOf{IntPtr}() would be enough to determine your maximum "word" size I would think in a compliant cross-platform way, and if anyone can correct that, please do so! Also, sizes of intrinsic types in c/cpp are vague in size definition.

C data type sizes - Wikipedia