Olm-e said : > ok, thanks for the rather clear answer ... > > from experience, I only have tested and witnessed (huge) difference in > video compression time (i.e. with ffmpeg2theora) on 64bit compared to > 32bit installations ... on sound parts, I must admit I have not realy > made tests to compare...
Ok, could you make some benchmarks if you have time? like... for example how ffmpeg2theora, ffmpeg, oggenc, compare on the same 64bits machine with: - amd64 kernel on a 386 Debian OS - amd64 kernel on a amd64 Debian OS > So we will wait for the things from Karsten to happen, of course it is > not so urgent I guess, and we'll install 32bit versions on thoses system > for now... I noticed that there is a big difference already when you use a kernel correctly tuned to your CPU. We're waiting now for 2.6.29 to be final, and we'll provide a new RT kernel based on it. We will provide at least a 686 version and an amd64 version. > We'll stay the eyes open for possible code sprint funding, > (did you tried http://www.nlnet.nl/ ? ) We did not try, that could be a good idea if we find enough partner organisations to work on this. a. > > thanks for all, > > Olivier. > > > Aymeric Mansoux wrote: > > Hello Olivier, > > > > Olm-e said : > > > >> we are a bunch of people here in brussels wanting to get pure-dyne on > >> 64bit systems. (we are "organising" in a "brussels audio linux user > >> group" involving the 2 independant radio "radio panik" and "radio > >> campus" as well as ConstantVZW and Okno.be f.ex. ) > >> could you tell how this would be done ? > >> is there some script around that we could modify to have it build ? > >> would one 64bit machine put on a fix IP here be of some help for you to > >> make it happens (if of course you have the time/motivation) ? > >> > >> in short : how can we help on that part ? > >> > > > > Ok, 1st of all, pure:dyne as it is now, in its 32bit version, runs > > perfectly fine on intel 64bit CPU with multiple cores. We have also > > started working on new kernels that will be available soon and that take > > advantages of features from more recent CPU, while running in a 32bit > > system. > > > > When it comes to having a full 64bit system, karsten is trying one at > > the moment, and to be honest without any proper benchmark, it is hard to > > tell the difference. Few applications take advantage of it and the gain > > is more about precision rather than noticable performance boost. > > On the other hand, beyond the 64bit aspect, packaging for such a > > platform would mean that we can directly compile with better GCC > > optimisations, for example, and this "could" (I said could :) in some > > cases lead to noticable performance gain. That why we are interested in > > this. > > > > In terms of infrastructure, thanks for your offer. As it is now, we have > > already everything we need to make some tests, but what is really > > missing is time and people to look into it. Basically what we would > > really need is funding so we can organise a code sprint and work on this > > to get the ball rolling. We have the experience and we've been talking > > with 64Studio for a while now about merging some efforts, so that would > > be a good occasion to finally get together and see what can be done. > > > > Otherwise, as it is now, the roadmap for the next milestone is to > > consolidate what we have done so far, make the live instalattion easier, > > USB boot on mactel, package different kernels optimised for different > > intel CPU and work on all kind of things related to workshops. > > > > > > a. > > > > > > > > > >> thanks, > >> > >> Olivier M. > >> ogeem.be > >> okno.be > >> > >> --- > >> [email protected] > >> irc.goto10.org #pure:dyne > >> > >> > > > > > > > --- > [email protected] > irc.goto10.org #pure:dyne > --- [email protected] irc.goto10.org #pure:dyne
