Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD

2004-07-02 Thread Kenneth Culver
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

2004-07-02 Thread David O'Brien
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

2004-06-29 Thread Kenneth Culver
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

2004-06-29 Thread Kenneth Culver
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

2004-06-29 Thread Remi
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

2004-06-29 Thread Doug White
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

2004-06-29 Thread Bruce M Simpson
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

2004-06-29 Thread Kenneth Culver
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

2004-06-29 Thread Arne Schwabe
"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

2004-06-29 Thread Daniel O'Connor
-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

2004-06-29 Thread Remi
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

2004-06-28 Thread Brooks Davis
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

2004-06-28 Thread Kenneth Culver
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

2004-06-28 Thread Jon Noack
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

2004-06-27 Thread Remi
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

2004-06-26 Thread Daniel O'Connor
-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

2004-06-26 Thread Michal Pasternak
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

2004-06-26 Thread David O'Brien
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]"