amd64 Re: New Release

["George Georgalis" <george@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 08:52:10AM -0700, Danial Thom wrote:
>> 
>> As a stupid user I wonder what it takes
>> generally to support the AMD 64 
>> bit extension, what are the typical issues in
>> supporting both 32 and 64 
>> bit code? Links would be very welcome too :-)
>
>A better question is what does it take to do it
>well, or whether its worthwhile. In FreeBSD, the
>amd64 is so clunky its unusable on a server, IMO.
>I shiver at the thought of trying linux, or
>windows, but I am curious. Is there a way with
>GCC 3+ to utilize the extra registers without
>running in full-blown 64bit mode? 

Linux on amd64 (3400+/400) is very good. Takes about
2 seconds (casual observation) to go from 1000Mhz to
2200Mhz (in 4 steps), when a load shows up and vice
versa. Don't know the numbers, but hot air comes
out when it's running and it's *very* cool at the
slow speed. Also the 60Mb/sec nvidia sata is sweet.
(I've not been able to resolve mplayer video, vlc
audio, and (analog) audio recording though, I think
that's all related to the arch, because the chipsets
are 'supported'.) Don't know about using gcc 3+
for 'amd64' registers, interesting idea, probably
happens, eg I configure powerstep in the kernel but
I think I run 32 bit binaries too, I think.

You need a new MS OS to use the processor features,
including powerstep, (assuming it actually works in
windows), so it runs hot in dfly and w2000.

// George

-- 
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:george@xxxxxxxxx