Lee Bengston wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Gerry Creager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Curt, WE7U wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2008, Lee Bengston wrote:
The only problems I have encountered with 64 bit linux versions is the
lack of 64 bit plugins like java. On my core 2 duo laptop, I didn't
notice much speed difference between the 64 and 32 bit versions, so I
just went with the 32.
Really? It's reading/writing 8 bytes at a time instead of 4 to your
memory. It should be faster.
64 bit was faster, but 32 still was pretty fast as well.
My Core2Duo laptop is a real dog for performance. I run the 64 bit Fedora
on it but it's about to get a scrub and grow CentOS 5.2, for overall
compatibility with the rest of my shop. Maybe that'll prove a bit better,
but I doubt it. I believe there are problems in the processor
implementation going deeper than the firmware/BIOS I'll have to solve. My
next laptop will be a Mac.
My Core2Duo (work) laptop (1.8GHz) isn't bad. There are different
models of Core2Duo processors - with varying levels of cache. There's
also the Pentium Dual Core, which has the least cache of them all. I
tried Kubuntu 64 bit first, and I was able to install 32 bit java on
it, but it was a bit of a PITA as I recall. When I switched to
openSUSE 10.3, I just went with 32 bit from the beginning to avoid the
plug-in issues, and it was not that much slower than Kubuntu 64 bit.
I'm kind of surprised to hear that a Core2Duo was a dog. I also have
two home-built Core 2 Duo desktops using the dirt-cheap ECS
motherboards from Fry's (implying they might run even better with
different boards), and they both fly. One is a WinXP box, and the
other is running Sabayon 3.5. Xastir from CVS compiled fine in
Sabayon, by the way.
Lee - K5DAT
Murphy, TX
_______________________________________________
Xastir mailing list
Xastir@xastir.org
http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir
Well, everything is faster than what I had back in 1991. ;-) It was a
386 running with 1 MB of ram, yes, I said o-n-e MB. It had a 10 MB MFM
HDD that someone gave me an RLL driver to make it a 20 MB. The 486 was
still a pipe dream for me. I was running windows 2. Tried to upgrade to
version 3, but I didn't have enough free memory. But it ran my book
keeping software and inventory control. It could sometimes take Lotus
over a minute to find an item in the inventory. That list only had about
11,000 items back then.
My point is, the faster the computer, the more the software demands. I
bet it would take 3 months to run through my inventory list if it used
todays software on that old hardware.
I wish I could find my old DOS disks to try some of my old games. Bet
they would run so fast now noone could possibly play them. One was Duke
Nukum. That was such a fun game, and so easy to get through the levels.
Then when windows 95 came out, it wouldn't run right, it ran to slow. Oh
well.
Steve/WM5Z
_______________________________________________
Xastir mailing list
Xastir@xastir.org
http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir
