Greetings good peoples of the newsgroups...

Up until now, I've been using a relatively old Pentium4 based
computer.  Nice and simple, nothing too fancy.  But it's looking like
I'll have the opportunity shortly to step up to a somewhat more modern
dual-core AMD 64-bit system.

However, being pretty much clueless about anything other than the basic
simple single-core 32-bit Intel Pentiums, I'm wondering if someone can
share their experience with what changes I'll need to make, and what to
watch out for.

I still intend to have a mooch around google, but last time I listened
in on the AMD and SMP debates, I came away more confused than I
started.  So knowing me I'll put in all the wrong search  terms, and the
only results I'll find will be out-dated and good for little more than
confusing me even further.  A response from someone here that I can use
to filter my impressions and misunderstandings would be mighty
helpful.  


Fredderic

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Government satellites recorded Fredderic saying:
> Greetings good peoples of the newsgroups...
>
> Up until now, I've been using a relatively old Pentium4 based
> computer.  Nice and simple, nothing too fancy.  But it's looking like
> I'll have the opportunity shortly to step up to a somewhat more modern
> dual-core AMD 64-bit system.
>
> However, being pretty much clueless about anything other than the basic
> simple single-core 32-bit Intel Pentiums, I'm wondering if someone can
> share their experience with what changes I'll need to make, and what to
> watch out for.
<snip>

You'll probably be disappointed by my brevity, none the less, as an
home user on a 64bit ASUS, here's what I think: get it, put a 32bit
OS on and don't worry about the hype. 64bit is only very useful if
you're a huge number crunching kinda guy.

--
sk8r-365

http://goodbye-microsoft.com/

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 07:57:09 -0600,
sk8r-365 <sk8r-365@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org> wrote:

> Government satellites recorded Fredderic saying: 
> You'll probably be disappointed by my brevity, none the less, as an
> home user on a 64bit ASUS, here's what I think: get it, put a 32bit
> OS on and don't worry about the hype. 64bit is only very useful if
> you're a huge number crunching kinda guy.

Okay, so you're saying to just install the 686 kernel builds on it like
I do now, and it'll work...?

Hmmm.....  Thanks for that...

In that case, I'll probably slap on what I'm used to to get the system
up and going, and look at the amd64 architecture at a later date.


Fredderic

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Government satellites recorded Fredderic saying:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 07:57:09 -0600,
> sk8r-365 <sk8r-365@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org> wrote: 
>
> Okay, so you're saying to just install the 686 kernel builds on it like
> I do now, and it'll work...?

Oh yeah. Read this:

uname -a
Linux sk8r 2.6.18-4-686 #1 SMP Wed May 9 23:03:12 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux

cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor       : 0
vendor_id       : AuthenticAMD
cpu family      : 15
model           : 44
model name      : AMD Sempron(tm) Processor 3000+
stepping        : 2
cpu MHz         : 1808.786
cache size      : 128 KB
fdiv_bug        : no
hlt_bug         : no
f00f_bug        : no
coma_bug        : no
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 1
wp              : yes
bogomips        : 3619.95

>
> Hmmm.....  Thanks for that...
>
> In that case, I'll probably slap on what I'm used to to get the system
> up and going, and look at the amd64 architecture at a later date.

Debian Etch works like a charm and all my (old) 32bit apps like Q3A
run beautifully. Plus, support for things like flash, and others,
aren't fully 64bit supported as yet.

--
sk8r-365

http://goodbye-microsoft.com/

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 00:52:07 +1000, Fredderic wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 07:57:09 -0600,
> sk8r-365 <sk8r-365@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org> wrote:
> 
>
> Okay, so you're saying to just install the 686 kernel builds on it like
> I do now, and it'll work...?
>
> Hmmm.....  Thanks for that...
>
> In that case, I'll probably slap on what I'm used to to get the system
> up and going, and look at the amd64 architecture at a later date.
>
>
> Fredderic

I use 64 bit myself.  The only thing that doesn't work is flash.  There is
a way to make it work, but I haven't gone through the trouble.

stonerfish

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Government satellites recorded jellybean stonerfish saying:
> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 00:52:07 +1000, Fredderic wrote:
>
>
> I use 64 bit myself.  The only thing that doesn't work is flash.  There is
> a way to make it work, but I haven't gone through the trouble.
>

I have flash working (for my wife) but I could care less.

Regarding 64bit: what increased benefit did you find over 32bit?
Can you play 32bit games without chroot? If you use it, does OOo
calc and USB printing function correctly now? What of Abiword, too?
--
sk8r-365

http://goodbye-microsoft.com/

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:36:40 +1000, Fredderic wrote:

> Greetings good peoples of the newsgroups...
>
> Up until now, I've been using a relatively old Pentium4 based computer.
> Nice and simple, nothing too fancy.  But it's looking like I'll have the
> opportunity shortly to step up to a somewhat more modern dual-core AMD
> 64-bit system.
>
> However, being pretty much clueless about anything other than the basic
> simple single-core 32-bit Intel Pentiums, I'm wondering if someone can
> share their experience with what changes I'll need to make, and what to
> watch out for.
>
> I still intend to have a mooch around google, but last time I listened
> in on the AMD and SMP debates, I came away more confused than I started.
>  So knowing me I'll put in all the wrong search  terms, and the only
> results I'll find will be out-dated and good for little more than
> confusing me even further.  A response from someone here that I can use
> to filter my impressions and misunderstandings would be mighty helpful.
> 
>
>
> Fredderic

Irecently moved up to an AMD x2 64 6000 running Fedora 7 X86_64. The only
real problem so far is no Adobe Flash. Everything else is fine. With
Firefox 2.004, Evolution 2.10.2, Pan 0.131 all open for a long time takes
about 600 MB. The system is much faster than what I replaced, as it
should be.
Harold

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Government satellites recorded Harold saying:
>
<snip>
> The system is much faster than what I replaced, as it
> should be.

Are you saying the system is faster with the 32 vs. 64 bit OS on
the same machine or that this machine is faster than the old one it
replaced?

--
sk8r-365

http://goodbye-microsoft.com/

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Am Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:39:00 -0600 schrieb sk8r-365:

> Regarding 64bit: what increased benefit did you find over 32bit?
> Can you play 32bit games without chroot? If you use it, does OOo
> calc and USB printing function correctly now? What of Abiword, too?

Put more than 1 GB into the box an you see and feel the difference, if you
have an 64 bit system you should use the features (e.g. RAM access etc.)

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:39:00 -0600, sk8r-365 wrote:

> Government satellites recorded jellybean stonerfish saying: 
>
> I have flash working (for my wife) but I could care less.
>
> Regarding 64bit: what increased benefit did you find over 32bit?

No benefit that I notice.  I use 64 because my processor is 64.

> Can you play 32bit games without chroot?

This box is 64bit ubuntu.  The games on the repositories work ( most of the
ones I tested, but the only ones I play are frozen-bubble, supper-tux and
tux-racer.  I have installed a 32bit binary game (wolfenstein enemy
territory)  and it works when my kids use it.

> If you use it, does OOo
> calc and USB printing function correctly now? What of Abiword, too?

I don't know what OOo calc is.  I don't have a printer, but scanner,
camera and ipod all work. I use open office for formatted text or
spreadsheet as I don't have abiword installed.


stonerfish

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]