Re: AMD64 vs i386
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 08:58:34AM -0400, Arend P. van der Veen wrote: Hi All, I have a general question. We have access to some new AMD64 based Dell Servers with 2 Core Duo Xeons. We are currently using i386 Dell Servers with a core duo processor. I recall from my MS Windows days that when there was the shift from 16-bit to 32-bit processors it did take a while for applications to support 32 bit. Sometimes 16-bit applications actually ran slower on the 32-bit hardware. I know this is a loaded question: - Will the AMD64 based FreeBSD 6.2 distribution with applications such as Postgresql, Apache, Python, Tomcat and SBCL be able to take advantage of the 64-bit quad processor? This is a very frequently asked question, so you might like to do a bit of research in the archives or on google. Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 08:58:34AM -0400, Arend P. van der Veen wrote: - Will the AMD64 based FreeBSD 6.2 distribution with applications such as Postgresql, Apache, Python, Tomcat and SBCL be able to take advantage of the 64-bit quad processor? Yes, if you compile them natively on AMD64. Whether this results in speedups depends on a lot of factors. Instruction words on AMD64 are longer than i386, so binaries tend to be bigger, but on the other hand you've got more general purpose registers. The general consensus seems to be that you _need_ AMD64 if you routinely run out of address space. In other situations it can be nice to have, but it depends on the apps and the workload. I've been using an AMD64 system as my main desktop machine for years without problems. There are some ports that won't work, but that's mostly x86 binaries like the flash plugin and nvidia drivers. Both of which I can well live without. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpfMxLXAP3eR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: AMD64 vs i386 on a Dual Opteron Box
On 10/12/05, Nathan Vidican [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We've been encountering some difficulty between OpenLDAP/nss/pam/FreeBSD/samba over the past few months and really since inception. After countless recompiles of samba, working with samba and openldap code, we've traced it to being an issue somwhere between freebsd and openldap using threads, a clean compile of openldap without using threads runs fine, but still seem to have inconsistency with nss portions of it. The conscencus accross a few different threads on various mailing lists seems to be to try running FreeBSD/i386 instead, therefore assuming perhaps that there are some issues with threading/openldap/nss_ldap on the AMD64/64-bit platform. We're currently running 5.3-RELEASE, I'm going to attempt 5.4-RELEASE/amd64 first, if the issues still arises, the next step would be to try 5.4-RELEASE/i386, and if the problem still exists... then back to trying to debug the whole situation. So, given the above information, my question is this: Knowing FreeBSD i386 can be run on AMD64 hardware, is there any disadvantage other than the obvious 64-bit support? We're using dual AMD Opteron based machines with 2GB ECC registered memory, so memory capacity shouldn't be an issue running 32bit, but how about smp support? Also, if anyone might have another idea or option to go with towards fixing the openldap/freebsd issue, that'd be even better still - but to be honest I lack the skills, time, and hardware neccessary to accomplish this on my own. I'm hoping that something between 5.3-RELEASE and 5.4-RELEASE can resolv the issue, or at least to isolate it to FreeBSD/OpenLDAP/Samba/nss_ldap/? as the cause. In short, i386 on AMD64 good, bad, why? -- Nathan Vidican [EMAIL PROTECTED] Windsor Match Plate Tool Ltd. http://www.wmptl.com/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] i386 is _exactly_ as good on amd64 as it is on i386. Still amd64 is even better. If you can afford to lose a couple of days more, try 6.0-RC1/amd64. It fixes many things, and we'll try and help you debug your setup from there. In his statements Scott Long almost makes an impression that 6.0-RELEASE will be more stable than 4.11 and 5.4. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 on a Dual Opteron Box
Thanks, I did not realize that there was an RC1 out for 6.0 already. Any ideas how far off 6.0-RELEASE may be? Realistically the O/S has become the least important issue on these servers; they're basically ldap/nss clients sharing data via samba from UFS file systems... a drop-in replacement to an NT fileserver/domain controller. I'll see what I can do to maybe get 6.0-RC1 running on a desktop in here somewhere today... even if just to demo it for myself. I'm running Novell's NLD (Novell Linux Desktop; based on Suse Desktop) now on my laptop (the machine which I write this email from now)... I'd MUCH rather be running FreeBSD, but the videocard has issues, and nVidia (bless their hearts) has released binary drivers for FreeBSD, but only for FreeBSD/i386... :( - I have emailed, and nagged to get them to compile/post for amd64, but to no avail thus far. I would love to have FreeBSD on this thing though... -- Nathan Vidican [EMAIL PROTECTED] Windsor Match Plate Tool Ltd. http://www.wmptl.com/ Andrew P. wrote: On 10/12/05, Nathan Vidican [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We've been encountering some difficulty between OpenLDAP/nss/pam/FreeBSD/samba over the past few months and really since inception. After countless recompiles of samba, working with samba and openldap code, we've traced it to being an issue somwhere between freebsd and openldap using threads, a clean compile of openldap without using threads runs fine, but still seem to have inconsistency with nss portions of it. The conscencus accross a few different threads on various mailing lists seems to be to try running FreeBSD/i386 instead, therefore assuming perhaps that there are some issues with threading/openldap/nss_ldap on the AMD64/64-bit platform. We're currently running 5.3-RELEASE, I'm going to attempt 5.4-RELEASE/amd64 first, if the issues still arises, the next step would be to try 5.4-RELEASE/i386, and if the problem still exists... then back to trying to debug the whole situation. So, given the above information, my question is this: Knowing FreeBSD i386 can be run on AMD64 hardware, is there any disadvantage other than the obvious 64-bit support? We're using dual AMD Opteron based machines with 2GB ECC registered memory, so memory capacity shouldn't be an issue running 32bit, but how about smp support? Also, if anyone might have another idea or option to go with towards fixing the openldap/freebsd issue, that'd be even better still - but to be honest I lack the skills, time, and hardware neccessary to accomplish this on my own. I'm hoping that something between 5.3-RELEASE and 5.4-RELEASE can resolv the issue, or at least to isolate it to FreeBSD/OpenLDAP/Samba/nss_ldap/? as the cause. In short, i386 on AMD64 good, bad, why? -- Nathan Vidican [EMAIL PROTECTED] Windsor Match Plate Tool Ltd. http://www.wmptl.com/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] i386 is _exactly_ as good on amd64 as it is on i386. Still amd64 is even better. If you can afford to lose a couple of days more, try 6.0-RC1/amd64. It fixes many things, and we'll try and help you debug your setup from there. In his statements Scott Long almost makes an impression that 6.0-RELEASE will be more stable than 4.11 and 5.4. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 on a Dual Opteron Box
On 10/12/05, Nathan Vidican [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, I did not realize that there was an RC1 out for 6.0 already. Any ideas how far off 6.0-RELEASE may be? Realistically the O/S has become the least important issue on these servers; they're basically ldap/nss clients sharing data via samba from UFS file systems... a drop-in replacement to an NT fileserver/domain controller. I'll see what I can do to maybe get 6.0-RC1 running on a desktop in here somewhere today... even if just to demo it for myself. I'm running Novell's NLD (Novell Linux Desktop; based on Suse Desktop) now on my laptop (the machine which I write this email from now)... I'd MUCH rather be running FreeBSD, but the videocard has issues, and nVidia (bless their hearts) has released binary drivers for FreeBSD, but only for FreeBSD/i386... :( - I have emailed, and nagged to get them to compile/post for amd64, but to no avail thus far. I would love to have FreeBSD on this thing though... The last 6.0-BETA was as stable as it gets in 90% of cases. We all hope that 6.0-RELEASE is about 10-15 days off. I run 6.0 on desktops and servers since BETA2 - and I have absolutely no issues whatsoever. None. Except for unbelievably fast disk performance. It's wonderful. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs. i386
On Fri, 5 Aug 2005 19:46:48 -0500 Joseph Sniderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can I install the i386 version of FreeBSD on an AMD64(athelon64) based computer? Yes! Best of luck, Andrew Gould ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs. i386
Joseph Sniderman wrote: Can I install the i386 version of FreeBSD on an AMD64(athelon64) based computer? Yes, but what what libs and programs you may install that are i386 based as opposed to 64-bit. You can seriously 'screw' up your system by having several programs be unrunnable if you mix and match 32-bit stuff with 64-bit stuff too much. Also, note that if you're using 32-bit stuff you aren't fully utilizing your 64-bit hardware. And btw, it's Athlon. Good luck, -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs. i386
On Saturday 06 August 2005 21:37, Garrett Cooper wrote: Joseph Sniderman wrote: Can I install the i386 version of FreeBSD on an AMD64(athelon64) based computer? Yes, but what what libs and programs you may install that are i386 based as opposed to 64-bit. You can seriously 'screw' up your system by having several programs be unrunnable if you mix and match 32-bit stuff with 64-bit stuff too much. You only need to mix 32-bit and 64-bit software when you are running the AMD64 version. This is because some binaries are 32-bit only and some ports only work for 32-bit. The AMD64 version has optional compatibility with 32-bit i386 software. AFAIK there is no such compatibility the other way around. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 01:17:35AM -0400, Kenneth Culver wrote: Quoting Doug White [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Me either. -current actually supports running i386 binaries in amd64 mode. Thats one of the processor's features. :-) You can't run amd64 binaries when booted into an i386 OS, of course. Yeah you can run x86 but you cant' go into regular 32 bit mode that's all. ENOPARSE, can you please restate this? -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
Quoting David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 01:17:35AM -0400, Kenneth Culver wrote: Quoting Doug White [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Me either. -current actually supports running i386 binaries in amd64 mode. Thats one of the processor's features. :-) You can't run amd64 binaries when booted into an i386 OS, of course. Yeah you can run x86 but you cant' go into regular 32 bit mode that's all. ENOPARSE, can you please restate this? I think what I meant is that once the kernel puts the CPU into amd64 mode, it can't go back into regular x86 mode. It can run x86 binaries but it's not fully back in x86 mode, and I think some of the x86 instructions are gone in 64-bit mode, so it has to emulate them somehow. From what I understand 32-bit binaries run slightly slower when the cpu is in 64-bit mode because of this. From what I've read, you can't make a kernel go back into normal x86 mode until you reboot. You probably know about all this better than I do, it's been a long time since I read any tech specs for the cpu. Ken ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
Well I just got an email back from the manufacturer of the AMD64 laptop I wanted to buy. Im not sure how it works when switching 64 to i386, but they say it's not supported in the BIOS(I assume this is where it is suppose to be changed) So now I come to a cross roads: 1. Buy a 1.7 Centrino 2. Buy a P4 2.8GHz w/ HT 3. Buy the AMD64 laptop What is the state of the AMD64 version of BSD? Other than that im leaning toward the 1.7GHz Centrino, but I hear a lot of problems with FreeBSD working right with Centrino, is this correct? What are the issues? -Original Message- From: Brooks Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 6:29 AM To: Kenneth Culver Cc: Michal Pasternak; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Remi; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; David O'Brien Subject: Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 06:03:52PM -0400, Kenneth Culver wrote: So far my athlon 64 3200+ has been one of the coolest running processors I've ever owned... although I've never used it in a laptop, my friend's p4 2.8 is running a lot hotter... Yes, current AMD64 CPUs are fairly lower power even without the low-power models. We're seeing 1U dual Opteron boxes running at less then 100F under load. -- Brooks -- Any statement of the form X is the one, true Y is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 16:58, Remi wrote: toward the 1.7GHz Centrino, but I hear a lot of problems with FreeBSD working right with Centrino, is this correct? What are the issues? Works fine here (Dell Inspiron 8600). - - Modem doesn't work (no suprise) - - Suspend doesn't go below S1 - -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFA4R9o5ZPcIHs/zowRAgigAKCa+6ZaUYw/X1sE0RxI6vmjNYyXzACdERi6 9MhT60mgl+UoJwqWejJNX+E= =mV0/ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
Remi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well I just got an email back from the manufacturer of the AMD64 laptop I wanted to buy. Im not sure how it works when switching 64 to i386, but they say it's not supported in the BIOS(I assume this is where it is suppose to be changed) So now I come to a cross roads: 1. Buy a 1.7 Centrino 2. Buy a P4 2.8GHz w/ HT 3. Buy the AMD64 laptop What is the state of the AMD64 version of BSD? Other than that im leaning toward the 1.7GHz Centrino, but I hear a lot of problems with FreeBSD working right with Centrino, is this correct? What are the issues? You can't change the cpu speed while running at the Moment, I don't see any other iusses at the Moment with my Notebook (IBM T40). Arne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
Quoting Remi [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Well I just got an email back from the manufacturer of the AMD64 laptop I wanted to buy. Im not sure how it works when switching 64 to i386, but they say it's not supported in the BIOS(I assume this is where it is suppose to be changed) So now I come to a cross roads: 1. Buy a 1.7 Centrino 2. Buy a P4 2.8GHz w/ HT 3. Buy the AMD64 laptop What is the state of the AMD64 version of BSD? Other than that im leaning toward the 1.7GHz Centrino, but I hear a lot of problems with FreeBSD working right with Centrino, is this correct? What are the issues? It runs OK, with some minor nits compared to x86 version. I'm not sure what the laptop maker is talking about... but if you boot the x86 version of FreeBSD, it'll work. I think they meant you can't switch from amd64 to x86 after already booting an OS. Ken ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 02:36:27PM +0200, Arne Schwabe wrote: You can't change the cpu speed while running at the Moment, I don't see any other iusses at the Moment with my Notebook (IBM T40). I too have an IBM T40. It gives me much love, daily. BMS ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Kenneth Culver wrote: It runs OK, with some minor nits compared to x86 version. I'm not sure what the laptop maker is talking about... but if you boot the x86 version of FreeBSD, it'll work. I think they meant you can't switch from amd64 to x86 after already booting an OS. Me either. -current actually supports running i386 binaries in amd64 mode. Thats one of the processor's features. :-) You can't run amd64 binaries when booted into an i386 OS, of course. -- Doug White| FreeBSD: The Power to Serve [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.FreeBSD.org ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
Just to clarify exactly what you mean. I can the x86 version of BSD with no changes to the BIOS, jumpers or anything on an AMD64? Sorry in advanced if this is a stupid question, Ive never dealt with anything but x86 -Original Message- From: Kenneth Culver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 7:31 AM To: Remi Cc: 'Brooks Davis'; 'Michal Pasternak'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'David O'Brien' Subject: RE: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD Quoting Remi [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Well I just got an email back from the manufacturer of the AMD64 laptop I wanted to buy. Im not sure how it works when switching 64 to i386, but they say it's not supported in the BIOS(I assume this is where it is suppose to be changed) So now I come to a cross roads: 1. Buy a 1.7 Centrino 2. Buy a P4 2.8GHz w/ HT 3. Buy the AMD64 laptop What is the state of the AMD64 version of BSD? Other than that im leaning toward the 1.7GHz Centrino, but I hear a lot of problems with FreeBSD working right with Centrino, is this correct? What are the issues? It runs OK, with some minor nits compared to x86 version. I'm not sure what the laptop maker is talking about... but if you boot the x86 version of FreeBSD, it'll work. I think they meant you can't switch from amd64 to x86 after already booting an OS. Ken ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
Quoting Doug White [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Kenneth Culver wrote: It runs OK, with some minor nits compared to x86 version. I'm not sure what the laptop maker is talking about... but if you boot the x86 version of FreeBSD, it'll work. I think they meant you can't switch from amd64 to x86 after already booting an OS. Me either. -current actually supports running i386 binaries in amd64 mode. Thats one of the processor's features. :-) You can't run amd64 binaries when booted into an i386 OS, of course. Yeah you can run x86 but you cant' go into regular 32 bit mode that's all. Ken ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
Quoting Remi [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Just to clarify exactly what you mean. I can the x86 version of BSD with no changes to the BIOS, jumpers or anything on an AMD64? Sorry in advanced if this is a stupid question, Ive never dealt with anything but x86 Yeah, no changes anywhere. I have my machine set to triple-boot. First Hard drive is windows, second is x86 freebsd, 3rd is amd64 freebsd. I can boot each of the x86 OS's just like my computer was a normal x86, and I can boot the amd64 with no bios or jumper changes. Ken ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
On 06/27/04 03:06, Remi wrote: See that's I'm thinking, the raw performance is very attractive to me!! So what's this about a p4 1.7 outperforming a 2.8? You got link to benchmarks? -Original Message- From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 8:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Remi; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 08:30, David O'Brien wrote: I have a choice between AMD64 3200+ and a P4 2.8GHz with HT. Which one would you guys recommend to run FreeBSD. Obviously the i386 would be easier to run, so I guess my question is what is the state of the AMD64 FreeBSD version? You do know you can run FreeBSD/i386 on the Athlon64 3200+ laptop, right? :-) A 3200+ running 32-bit FreeBSD will out-perform the P4 2.8GHz running the same OS. A Pentium-M 1.7Ghz will outperform a 2.8Ghz P4 too ;) If battery life is important to you I'd suggest not getting an AMD64. For raw performance it's pretty nice though :) He said Pentium-M. It's a completely different processor than the Pentium 4-M. Designed for mobile computing, it is best described as combining the best features of the Pentium 3 (short(er) pipeline, etc.) and the Pentium 4 (better branch predictor, etc.) with high-end power saving features to form a third processor far superior to the previous two. Here's a first look at the chip: http://www.tomshardware.com/mobile/20030205/ Some benchmarks where a 1.6GHz Pentium-M destroys a 2.2GHz Pentium 4-M: http://www.tomshardware.com/mobile/20030205/centrino-13.html http://www.tomshardware.com/mobile/20030205/centrino-14.html Battery life in the 6+ hour range is common with Pentium-M laptops. Here's the first look results (note the Pentium 4-M had a battery with over 20% greater capacity!): http://www.tomshardware.com/mobile/20030205/centrino-17.html If you value battery life, go with the Pentium-M. If you *most highly* value performance, the Athlon64 is probably the way to go. Jon ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
Quoting Michal Pasternak [EMAIL PROTECTED]: David O'Brien [Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 04:00:26PM -0700]: You do know you can run FreeBSD/i386 on the Athlon64 3200+ laptop, right? :-) A 3200+ running 32-bit FreeBSD will out-perform the P4 2.8GHz running the same OS. ... but will it outperform it also by heat dissipation? -- m ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] So far my athlon 64 3200+ has been one of the coolest running processors I've ever owned... although I've never used it in a laptop, my friend's p4 2.8 is running a lot hotter... Ken ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 06:03:52PM -0400, Kenneth Culver wrote: So far my athlon 64 3200+ has been one of the coolest running processors I've ever owned... although I've never used it in a laptop, my friend's p4 2.8 is running a lot hotter... Yes, current AMD64 CPUs are fairly lower power even without the low-power models. We're seeing 1U dual Opteron boxes running at less then 100F under load. -- Brooks -- Any statement of the form X is the one, true Y is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 pgpw4hEqoYIyH.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
See that's I'm thinking, the raw performance is very attractive to me!! So what's this about a p4 1.7 outperforming a 2.8? You got link to benchmarks? -Original Message- From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 8:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Remi; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 08:30, David O'Brien wrote: I have a choice between AMD64 3200+ and a P4 2.8GHz with HT. Which one would you guys recommend to run FreeBSD. Obviously the i386 would be easier to run, so I guess my question is what is the state of the AMD64 FreeBSD version? You do know you can run FreeBSD/i386 on the Athlon64 3200+ laptop, right? :-) A 3200+ running 32-bit FreeBSD will out-perform the P4 2.8GHz running the same OS. A Pentium-M 1.7Ghz will outperform a 2.8Ghz P4 too ;) If battery life is important to you I'd suggest not getting an AMD64. For raw performance it's pretty nice though :) - -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFA3j2V5ZPcIHs/zowRAoZpAKCnZMb/Kxk9wElcBhktj9NPDPsPggCgh6b2 iasKpu5F998wHLaC5flWA+E= =QBEE -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 02:37:54PM -0700, Remi wrote: Im in the market for a new laptop. Right now I'm looking at HyperSonic laptops. I have a choice between AMD64 3200+ and a P4 2.8GHz with HT. Which one would you guys recommend to run FreeBSD. Obviously the i386 would be easier to run, so I guess my question is what is the state of the AMD64 FreeBSD version? You do know you can run FreeBSD/i386 on the Athlon64 3200+ laptop, right? :-) A 3200+ running 32-bit FreeBSD will out-perform the P4 2.8GHz running the same OS. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
David O'Brien [Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 04:00:26PM -0700]: You do know you can run FreeBSD/i386 on the Athlon64 3200+ laptop, right? :-) A 3200+ running 32-bit FreeBSD will out-perform the P4 2.8GHz running the same OS. ... but will it outperform it also by heat dissipation? -- m ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 08:30, David O'Brien wrote: I have a choice between AMD64 3200+ and a P4 2.8GHz with HT. Which one would you guys recommend to run FreeBSD. Obviously the i386 would be easier to run, so I guess my question is what is the state of the AMD64 FreeBSD version? You do know you can run FreeBSD/i386 on the Athlon64 3200+ laptop, right? :-) A 3200+ running 32-bit FreeBSD will out-perform the P4 2.8GHz running the same OS. A Pentium-M 1.7Ghz will outperform a 2.8Ghz P4 too ;) If battery life is important to you I'd suggest not getting an AMD64. For raw performance it's pretty nice though :) - -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFA3j2V5ZPcIHs/zowRAoZpAKCnZMb/Kxk9wElcBhktj9NPDPsPggCgh6b2 iasKpu5F998wHLaC5flWA+E= =QBEE -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
