Hello all,
I will be getting my very first 64-bit x86 system tomorrow and I don't
know anything about the platform at the software level. The last time
I touched an AMD based system was in the socket 7 days.
HELP!, what do I do with the extra 32-bits of CPU goodness? :-)
$200 bucks got me a Athl
On Apr 6, 2006, at 1:30 AM, Nikolas Britton wrote:
$200 bucks got me a Athlon 64 3000+ Venice and a ASUS A8V Motherboard.
I'll be converting my Pentium 4 2.26GHz desktop system that has
FreeBSD 6.1-PRERELEASE i386 on it, gcc is currently set to build with
-march=pentium2 and -mtune=pentium4 via
> If your running a desktop, I'd recommend sticking with 32-bit. For a
> server doing a lot of I/O, go with 64-bit. The Athlon will run very
> fast in both modes, but your software compatibility is better in i386
> mode.
Interesting comment - I have a server at home with a pair of Opteron
On Apr 6, 2006, at 10:38 AM, Pete French wrote:
I was thinking of moving this to amd64, but was kind of put off by
results
from a test system I setup using an Athlon 64 3700+ to talk to this
machine. The opteron box is currently running 6.1-PRE/i386, and the
3700 is
Let me comment that my
> Let me comment that my 64-bit commentary about I/O is based on
> experience with Opterons, which have excellent I/O bandwidth. The
> Intel EM64T boxes do ok, too, but I have no experience with other 64-
> bit CPUs. The opterons are just a notch above anything else that
> I've used.
Ah,
On Thu, 2006-Apr-06 15:38:20 +0100, Pete French wrote:
>I was thinking of moving this to amd64, but was kind of put off by results
>from a test system I setup using an Athlon 64 3700+ to talk to this
>machine. The opteron box is currently running 6.1-PRE/i386, and the 3700 is
>runiing either Window
Skipping all of your technical questions I'll tell you my experience. The
only regret i have is one that makes me sometimes wish I'd not upgraded my
desktop 64 bit... the dri drivers for xorg lock up my box (ATI card). This
has been a thorn in my side for over 6 months now, but I just haven't had
t
Sex, 2006-04-07 às 00:18 -0400, Tim Middleton escreveu:
> Skipping all of your technical questions I'll tell you my experience. The
> only regret i have is one that makes me sometimes wish I'd not upgraded my
> desktop 64 bit... the dri drivers for xorg lock up my box (ATI card). This
> has been a
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote:
PJ> >I know that what I should do is install i386 on the client and test again,
but
PJ> >doing that will lose my only 64 bit environment so I am loathe to do so.
Any
PJ> >comments ?
PJ>
PJ> Backup your amd64 environment and install i386. You can re-insta
On Sat, 2006-Apr-08 20:41:36 +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
>On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>PJ> Backup your amd64 environment and install i386. You can re-install
>PJ> the amd64 once the testing is finished. The best benchmark is always
>PJ> your own application.
>
>Or, even better, us
Quoting Peter Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Sat, 2006-Apr-08 20:41:36 +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote:
PJ> Backup your amd64 environment and install i386. You can re-install
PJ> the amd64 once the testing is finished. The best benchmark is always
PJ> yo
Chris H. wrote:
Quoting Peter Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Sat, 2006-Apr-08 20:41:36 +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote:
PJ> Backup your amd64 environment and install i386. You can re-install
PJ> the amd64 once the testing is finished. The best benchma
On Sat, 2006-Apr-08 18:00:56 -0600, Scott Long wrote:
>Modern disks (I don't know how to define a cutoff to this term,
>unfortunately)
I got my first ZBR (zone-block recording) Seagate SCSI disk at work
about 20 years ago. I'm not sure when it became common.
>other day. I'm still not clear on w
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 06:00:56PM -0600 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> Modern disks (I don't know how to define a cutoff to this term,
> unfortunately) definitely put more bits onto the outer rim of the
> platter than the inner rim.
Pretty much any disk you'd current
Quoting "Matthew D. Fuller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 06:00:56PM -0600 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Modern disks (I don't know how to define a cutoff to this term,
unfortunately) definitely put more bits onto the outer rim of the
platter than the i
> Note that using different slices may change your results. All modern
> disks are faster near the outside (start of the disk) then the inside
> (I get more than 50% increase from inside to outside on one system).
I am thinking this will not be an issue, given that it is the performance
of the ne
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 13:22 -0500, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 06:00:56PM -0600 I heard the voice of
> Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
> >
> > Modern disks (I don't know how to define a cutoff to this term,
> > unfortunately) definitely put more bits onto the outer rim of
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 10:02:34AM -0400 I heard the voice of
Christian Lopez de Castilla Wagner, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> As you can see, the outside is more than twice as fast in this case.
> Just a guess, since both are IBM disks: You're using a
> Workstation/Server disk, which probably perfo
Chris H. wrote:
> Interesting to note (to me anyway) is my SCSI reports fastest on the outside
> whereas my (earlier reported) ATA reports faster in the center (middle).
You get better seek times on average in the center.
Maybe that affected your results?
--
Tuomo
... Nitpicking - not just a h
19 matches
Mail list logo
