Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Printable version Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Author Message
SordonOffline
15 Post subject: amd64 versus ia64  PostPosted: 05.01.2011, 22:12



Joined: 2010-09-13
Posts: 55

Status: Offline
I'm using a notebook with the following hardware
      Code:
Host/Kernel/OS  "ExtensaBox" running Linux 2.6.37-0.slh.1-aptosid-amd64 x86_64 [ aptosid 2010-03 Ἀπάτη - kde-lite - (201012262151) ]
CPU Info        (1) Intel Core2 Duo T5670 @ clocked at [ 1801.000 MHz ]                                                               
                (2) Intel Core2 Duo T5670 @ clocked at [ 1800.000 MHz ]                                                               
Videocard       Intel Mobile GM965/GL960 Integrated Graphics Controller  X.Org 1.7.7  [ 1280x800@60.0hz ]                             
Network cards   Broadcom NetLink BCM5787M Gigabit PCI Express                                                                         
                Intel PRO/Wireless 4965 AG or AGN [Kedron]
As you can see I installed aptosid as 64bit version.

Because I'm using an Intel processor wouldn't it be better to use an installation based on ia64 and not on amd64 (although there is no installation ISO provided)?

Despite my question my notebook is running without problems.

Best Regards,
Sordon


Last edited by Sordon on 05.01.2011, 22:28; edited 1 time in total
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
towoOffline
Post subject: RE: amd64 versus ia64  PostPosted: 05.01.2011, 22:16



Joined: 2010-09-13
Posts: 500
Location: Pößneck / Thüringen
Status: Offline
ia64 is for Itanium cpus, these are server cpus and a Core2 Duo is emt64, aka amd64.
So ia64 would never run on such cpu.
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
muchan
Post subject: RE: amd64 versus ia64  PostPosted: 05.01.2011, 22:19
Moderator


Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 468

amd64 arch is good for your processor.

Read about ia64 and x86-64, for example, the wikipedia pages
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itanium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
SordonOffline
Post subject: RE: amd64 versus ia64  PostPosted: 05.01.2011, 22:28



Joined: 2010-09-13
Posts: 55

Status: Offline
Thanks for your replies. I didn't know that the ia64 is a very different processor architecture. I was somehow under the false impression that ia64 is simply the Intel 64bit architecture for the 'mainstream' processors.
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
DonKultOffline
Post subject: RE: amd64 versus ia64  PostPosted: 06.01.2011, 00:29
Team Member


Joined: 2010-09-02
Posts: 482

Status: Offline
Your are not the only one. Smile
AMD was just the first company with a mainstream x86-64 cpu, so the arch is called amd64.
Good old x86-32 is still called i386 while technical it needs at least i486 cpus to work and aptosid only provides i686 kernels…

So, you see the names are for historical reasons not always optimal, but it could be worse:
While aptosid has a focus on i686 and amd64 cpu flavors debian provides many more flavors - and most of them either official or in ports as 32bit and 64bit… But pointersize isn't the only characteristic of a cpu -- big endian or little endian are splitting the cpu world (mips vs. mipsel for example), too and can be even more confusing: armel for example is called that way because its an arm processor with little endian -- but the debian flavor is still called only arm (which previously meant arm with big endian, which is now called armeb but death as a port)…

Oh, and if you ask now: Who cares for arm - I do, as i use two times more armel powered machines then i686 (which should be an amd64, but i am to lazy to reinstall - a common disease in aptosid world) on a normal day -- my phone and my server (armel) vs. my laptop (i686). Wink

_________________
MfG. DonKult
"I never make stupid mistakes. Only very, very clever ones." ~ The Doctor
 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
slhOffline
Post subject: RE: amd64 versus ia64  PostPosted: 06.01.2011, 00:40



Joined: 2010-08-25
Posts: 761

Status: Offline
...and even though Debian's "i386" formally hard-depends on i486, there are a few serious bugs in key packages known, which break on actual i486 hardware and effectively bump Debian's requirement to i586 microcode, given that almost no one actually tests i486 operations before the stable release goes gold.
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
DeepDayzeOffline
Post subject: Re: RE: amd64 versus ia64  PostPosted: 06.01.2011, 01:41



Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 616
Location: USA
Status: Offline
      slh wrote:
...and even though Debian's "i386" formally hard-depends on i486, there are a few serious bugs in key packages known, which break on actual i486 hardware and effectively bump Debian's requirement to i586 microcode, given that almost no one actually tests i486 operations before the stable release goes gold.


Now I see why that's a good reason why you recommend aptosid only for i586 and higher CPU architecture
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
nh2Offline
22 Post subject: amd64 Vs 686  PostPosted: 28.01.2011, 10:49



Joined: 2011-01-28
Posts: 25
Location: Tlemcen, Algeria
Status: Offline
By the way, what are the pros and cons of using amd64 when you have a emt64 CPU with less than 4 GiB of RAM?
I never install amd64 systems on such PCs but am I missing something?
I thought there were a Sidux manual topic answering these questions but I didn't find it...
 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
towoOffline
Post subject: RE: amd64 Vs 686  PostPosted: 28.01.2011, 12:09



Joined: 2010-09-13
Posts: 500
Location: Pößneck / Thüringen
Status: Offline
There is no real pro for 64bit, if you have less than 3,5 GiB of ram.
64bit do have a larger consumption of memory, so 64bit would be a contra on such machine.
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
dptOffline
Post subject: RE: amd64 Vs 686  PostPosted: 28.01.2011, 17:05



Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 281
Location: New Delhi
Status: Offline
There is no reason why you should have more than 4 GB RAM for running 64-bit unless you need the RAM.
Just because it is supported?

I am running 64-bit on machines with 1GB RAM and 2 GB RAM.

_________________
In a lunatic asylum, everyone thinks that he is the doctor.
 
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address  
Reply with quote Back to top
nh2Offline
Post subject: RE: amd64 Vs 686  PostPosted: 29.01.2011, 07:41



Joined: 2011-01-28
Posts: 25
Location: Tlemcen, Algeria
Status: Offline
You're right but it's not what I'm asking. I'd rather like to know what are the benefits and/or the drawbacks of choosing a 64 bit system if you have 1 or 2 GiB of RAM.
 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
DonKultOffline
Post subject: RE: amd64 Vs 686  PostPosted: 29.01.2011, 10:30
Team Member


Joined: 2010-09-02
Posts: 482

Status: Offline
Technical you have bigger pointersizes and different optimization codes for different instructions - so in theory some programs are faster on one or the other, but in real world: Just don't care, the difference is properly unnoticeable…

_________________
MfG. DonKult
"I never make stupid mistakes. Only very, very clever ones." ~ The Doctor
 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
dptOffline
Post subject: RE: amd64 Vs 686  PostPosted: 30.01.2011, 17:20



Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 281
Location: New Delhi
Status: Offline
A salesman selling higher bit processor will give multiplication example with large numbers
and tell you how quick you can do with higher-bit processor.

For same applications involving huge data processing, the time can be in fractions in higher-bit
processors.

Sometimes it just does not matter.But it does, especially if the software is written to optimize
in 64 bit.

Example:

A 32-seater needs 1 trip to carry 1-32 persons to destination, 2 trips to carry 33-64 persons.
A 64-seater needs 1 trip to carry 1-32 persons to destination, 1 trip to carry 33-64 persons.

_________________
In a lunatic asylum, everyone thinks that he is the doctor.
 
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address  
Reply with quote Back to top
DonKultOffline
Post subject: RE: amd64 Vs 686  PostPosted: 30.01.2011, 17:35
Team Member


Joined: 2010-09-02
Posts: 482

Status: Offline
Yeah, sure, but the same salesman will tell you that you can't life without at least 4 GB of RAM as 4 GB can carry twice as much as 2 GB…

64bit for an address means that as soon as you need to load it from disk you need to load twice as much for the same information. See the posts on iceweasel optimization if you really want to digg into it: http://glandium.org/blog/?p=1583

_________________
MfG. DonKult
"I never make stupid mistakes. Only very, very clever ones." ~ The Doctor
 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
dptOffline
Post subject: RE: amd64 Vs 686  PostPosted: 30.01.2011, 18:14



Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 281
Location: New Delhi
Status: Offline
Not if your information (data) is 64-bit or can be handled in 64 bits.
Then you use same amount of RAM.

Yes, 64-bit shall use more RAM in many cases, maximum twice in some cases as compared to 32 bit.
Not only RAM but HDD space too.

The boolean variable will use twice the RAM

_________________
In a lunatic asylum, everyone thinks that he is the doctor.
 
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address  
Reply with quote Back to top
Display posts from previous:     
Jump to:  
All times are GMT - 12 Hours
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Printable version Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Powered by Zafenio