Hi Andrew: My workstation (not server) is operated by amd64 and I could not achieve the same at the half floating point of 32bit.
I see two reasons to move to 64 bit: crunking numbers (as in my case) or games (or other particularly demanding animated graphics). Otherwise, why moving to the more energy-demanding 64bit when all you mention you are aimed at running, runs perfectly at the more modest hardware of 32bit? Cheers francesco On Thursday 31 August 2006 21:11, Andrew Robinson wrote: > Looking for some constructive feedback on other people's experiences > with amd64 as a workstation. I have been only using it a few weeks, > and the setup is a pain due to the amount of 32 bit only programs. I > am having some issues with: > > Eclipse + ExadelStudio plugin (plugin is 32-bit only) > Firefox + Flash (Flash is 32-bit only) > OpenOffice > Cedega > Wine > > Unfortunately, this makes up a decent percentage of what I run daily > (especially eclipse). I am the type to sacrifice pain for new > functionality, but this one has got me thinking, is it worth it? > > As a server I would think it would be great but as a workstation it > seems to be a pain. The chroot jail works, but having to maintain the > apt libraries (I am using etch, so they change fairly often), it more > of a pain. > > For those that have the knowledge, I know that the 64 bit architecture > is faster due to addressing and such, but is it that noticeable? Also, > I have read that the 32 kernel still supports the dualcore nature of > the amd64 even though running in 32 bit mode (is this true, my source > wasn't 100% reliable). > > Just looking for some constructive feedback on other's opinions. > > -Andrew -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
