Re: [Fwd: Re: my new superdesktop...]

[Jonathan Berry <berryja@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:36:18 -0500, Brian Chase <networkr0@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Comments, updates?
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> 
> I've tried numerous distro's for my dual Opteron Tyan S2882 board, each
> with their own shortfalls.
> 
> Not real happy with my choice for AMD64, mainly because the availability
> of software is quite limited, and things like java and flash are either
> difficult to get working, or unavailable for the platform.
> Understanding that my main use will be a terminal server, I'm kinda
> regretting not getting a dual Xeon for just a nice robust 32 bit box
> that runs everything and gives me lots of choices.  Even though I've
> really come to like Debian, the AMD64 port is difficult to install when
> compared to Redhat based x86-64 or Suse distro's and it won't be
> released into "stable" for at least a couple more years, a snails pace
> compared to other Linux distro's release schedule.
> 
> The only reason, IMHO, to run out and grab a AMD64 platform today is for
> simulation or some other VERY computationally intensive task, like a
> QualNet Network Simulation, high end database server or something.
> Interested in hearing others' experiences along these lines.
> 
> Brian

Hi Brian,
I have really enjoyed my AMD64 laptop that I bought a few months ago
(Compaq R3000Z).  It runs great, and I eventually want to put together
an AMD64 desktop, though it may be a while.  The nForce4 chipset looks
quite nice.  I've only tried Fedora Core's x86_64 OS and have been
quite pleased with it.  It does everything except for built-in
wireless (Broadcom).  I haven't tried many distros (due to lack of HD
space), but FC (currently 2, I'll upgrade to 3 soon) has been a rock
solid distro for me.
To me, the decision to buy an AMD64 was because I wanted an AMD laptop
and the 64's were about the same as many of the 32-bit laptops (both
AMD and Intel).  And I'll be ready for when 64-bit becomes the
standard.  The best part about AMD64 is that it runs i386 stuff just
as well!  Sure, a dual Zeon may run 32-bit apps quite well, but AMD64
also runs 32-bit well, and I'd say are much less expensive.  You have
a solid 32-bit machine if you want to use it as such untill 64-bit is
better supported.  But you can still run 32-bit apps when running a
64-bit OS!  How great is that?  Everything that is outside the kernel
is supported, 32-bit and 64-bit, as long as you don't try to mix
64-bit apps and 32-bit plugins (like Flash; I just use 32-bit Firefox
so I can use plugins).
64-bit is the future (that seems to be a safe prediction), so my AMD64
machine should be around longer than any 32-bit computer.  IA64 seems
to be dying, and I don't know what Intel will do, whether try to
squeeze more out of their 32-bit CPUs or go to an AMD64 based
instruction set architecture, or try to develop yet another 64-bit ISA
of their own, but it seems there will be a point where 64-bit should
take over.
Intel's HyperThreading is impressive, I'll give them that, but AMD has
64-bit and will be delivering dual core soon.  I'm thinking dual core
(which Intel is also developing) will beat out HT performance, though
they probably will be more expensive than their single core
counterparts.  But when next generation hardware is in the same price
bracket as current generation (and is backward compatible), then why
not go with next generation?
It was an easy decision for me : ).

Jonathan

-- 

amd64-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/amd64-list