Can I install my existing 32 bit opensuse dvd on my new Sempron 3000+? Looking through the archive, it seems that I should download the x86-64 version and use that instead. Confused. Any help most appreciated. Steve.
Primm wrote:
Can I install my existing 32 bit opensuse dvd on my new Sempron 3000+? Looking through the archive, it seems that I should download the x86-64 version and use that instead.
Confused. Any help most appreciated. Steve.
The boxed set contains both versions. The free download OpenSUSE versions are either 32 or 64 bit. I've downloaded both, because I have both 32 & 64 bit computers here.
On Sunday 03 September 2006 13:50, James Knott wrote:
Primm wrote:
Can I install my existing 32 bit opensuse dvd on my new Sempron 3000+? Looking through the archive, it seems that I should download the x86-64 version and use that instead.
Confused. Any help most appreciated. Steve.
The boxed set contains both versions. The free download OpenSUSE versions are either 32 or 64 bit. I've downloaded both, because I have both 32 & 64 bit computers here.
OK. So which do I choose for the sempron? 32 or 64?
On Sunday 03 September 2006 13:57, Primm wrote:
On Sunday 03 September 2006 13:50, James Knott wrote:
Primm wrote:
Can I install my existing 32 bit opensuse dvd on my new Sempron 3000+? Looking through the archive, it seems that I should download the x86-64 version and use that instead.
Confused. Any help most appreciated. Steve.
The boxed set contains both versions. The free download OpenSUSE versions are either 32 or 64 bit. I've downloaded both, because I have both 32 & 64 bit computers here.
OK. So which do I choose for the sempron? 32 or 64?
That depends. Not all Semprons are 64 bit capable. It also depends on what you intend to do with it. If it is a 64 bit capable processor, I would install the 64 bit version
Primm wrote:
On Sunday 03 September 2006 13:50, James Knott wrote:
Primm wrote:
Can I install my existing 32 bit opensuse dvd on my new Sempron 3000+? Looking through the archive, it seems that I should download the x86-64 version and use that instead.
Confused. Any help most appreciated. Steve. The boxed set contains both versions. The free download OpenSUSE versions are either 32 or 64 bit. I've downloaded both, because I have both 32 & 64 bit computers here.
OK. So which do I choose for the sempron? 32 or 64?
If it's a 64 bit CPU, it's your choice. The 32 bit version will run fine, though you won't get any benefit of the 64 bit CPU. If you go with the 64 bit version, you may need to install a 32 bit browser, as the pluggins are currently 32 bit. I installed the 64 bit version on my AMD 64 bit CPU and can now take advantage of the 64 bit capabilities in performance apps such as vi and solitaire. ;-)
On 03/09/06, James Knott
Primm wrote:
Can I install my existing 32 bit opensuse dvd on my new Sempron 3000+? Looking through the archive, it seems that I should download the x86-64 version and use that instead.
Confused. Any help most appreciated. Steve.
The boxed set contains both versions. The free download OpenSUSE versions are either 32 or 64 bit. I've downloaded both, because I have both 32 & 64 bit computers here.
Yes, you *can* use 32-bit versions of software on a 64-bit box. If you run a 64-bit OS then unless you want to do a bit of fiddling (or the fiddling has been done for you), you have to run 64-bit software too. Obviously, mostly it's better to use 64-bit versions, but if you do you may experience small (but decreasing) problems due to software such as flash that doesn't have 64-bit versions yet. Jeff
On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 12:33 +0200, Primm wrote:
Can I install my existing 32 bit opensuse dvd on my new Sempron 3000+? Looking through the archive, it seems that I should download the x86-64 version and use that instead.
On the current ones you can install either. I have two of those, running as web/mail servers, one running Debian 32bit and the other running Debian AMD64 - both run fine and performance is very very good. On my notebook (Turion64) I'm running 32bit SUSE 10.1. I had 64bit before, but there are, to my taste, just too many things that aren't right enough, and the applications I use a lot are all 32bit and run slower than in a 32bit linux (Adobe Reader, OOo, FireFox, etc). I'll try the next version in 64bit and see how it goes. Hans
On Sunday 03 September 2006 16:37, Hans du Plooy wrote:
On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 12:33 +0200, Primm wrote:
Can I install my existing 32 bit opensuse dvd on my new Sempron 3000+? Looking through the archive, it seems that I should download the x86-64 version and use that instead.
On the current ones you can install either. I have two of those, running as web/mail servers, one running Debian 32bit and the other running Debian AMD64 - both run fine and performance is very very good.
On my notebook (Turion64) I'm running 32bit SUSE 10.1. I had 64bit before, but there are, to my taste, just too many things that aren't right enough, and the applications I use a lot are all 32bit and run slower than in a 32bit linux (Adobe Reader, OOo, FireFox, etc).
I'll try the next version in 64bit and see how it goes.
Hans
Hi. It is possible to install either on the box I have. The 'too many things just not right' sends me in the 32 bit direction. It's mainly going to be apache, nfs and mysql server. It may have to double up as a user machine if there are a lot of users too. What would you go for then? Steve.
On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 18:31 +0200, Primm wrote:
On Sunday 03 September 2006 16:37, Hans du Plooy wrote:
On my notebook (Turion64) I'm running 32bit SUSE 10.1. I had 64bit before, but there are, to my taste, just too many things that aren't right enough, and the applications I use a lot are all 32bit and run slower than in a 32bit linux (Adobe Reader, OOo, FireFox, etc).
I'll try the next version in 64bit and see how it goes.
Hans
Hi. It is possible to install either on the box I have. The 'too many things just not right' sends me in the 32 bit direction. It's mainly going to be apache, nfs and mysql server. It may have to double up as a user machine if there are a lot of users too. What would you go for then? Steve.
Lemme just be clear - the issues I had with 64bit was three versions ago, and just for desktop related stuff. On a server it's a no-brainer - 64bit unless you have to run some third party software that's giving you hassles. Hans
On Sunday 03 September 2006 21:57, Hans du Plooy wrote:
On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 18:31 +0200, Primm wrote:
On Sunday 03 September 2006 16:37, Hans du Plooy wrote:
On my notebook (Turion64) I'm running 32bit SUSE 10.1. I had 64bit before, but there are, to my taste, just too many things that aren't right enough, and the applications I use a lot are all 32bit and run slower than in a 32bit linux (Adobe Reader, OOo, FireFox, etc).
I'll try the next version in 64bit and see how it goes.
Hans
Hi. It is possible to install either on the box I have. The 'too many things just not right' sends me in the 32 bit direction. It's mainly going to be apache, nfs and mysql server. It may have to double up as a user machine if there are a lot of users too. What would you go for then? Steve.
Lemme just be clear - the issues I had with 64bit was three versions ago, and just for desktop related stuff. On a server it's a no-brainer - 64bit unless you have to run some third party software that's giving you hassles.
Hans
Thanks Hans and thanks everyone who helped me make the decision. Am downloading 10.1 x86-64 from opensuse as I write. I shall report back on the experience. Steve.
Lemme just be clear - the issues I had with 64bit was three versions ago, and just for desktop related stuff. On a server it's a no-brainer - 64bit unless you have to run some third party software that's giving you hassles. koffiejunkielistlurker@koffiejunkie.za.nety Hans
I tried my original 32 bit dvd in the new AMD whilst attempting to grab the x86-64 from opensuse (3 attempts at broken Md5's). On a user basis, one would not know it was a 64 bit box. eg KDE looks and feels just the same. The pleasant surprize comes with apache, mysql and php The database driven website which serves lot's of hi res jpg's really does fly under the new system. The jpg's appear at once rather than gradually from the top of the screen. I'm still not really sure why 64 bit is faster but I would certainly recommend it having compared both. Steve.
Lemme just be clear - the issues I had with 64bit was three versions ago, and just for desktop related stuff. On a server it's a no-brainer - 64bit unless you have to run some third party software that's giving you hassles. koffiejunkielistlurker@koffiejunkie.za.nety Hans
I tried my original 32 bit dvd in the new AMD whilst attempting to grab the x86-64 from opensuse (3 attempts at broken Md5's).
On a user basis, one would not know it was a 64 bit box. eg KDE looks and feels just the same. The pleasant surprize comes with apache, mysql and php The database driven website which serves lot's of hi res jpg's really does fly under the new system. The jpg's appear at once rather than gradually from the top of the screen.
I'm still not really sure why 64 bit is faster but I would certainly recommend it having compared both.
Every use of uint64_t in code will be emulated by gcc for 32-bit archs. Which seems, from the asm dump, costly. Jan Engelhardt --
On Thursday 07 September 2006 2:56 am, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Every use of uint64_t in code will be emulated by gcc for 32-bit archs. Which seems, from the asm dump, costly. While this is true, let me restate it. In a 32-bit application (under a 32-bit OS or a 64-bit OS), the application only has 8 32-bit registers, so the C language types: long long, int64_t, uint64_t will require multiple register loads as well as a couple of operations. So, in pseudo assembler code: int64_t x, y, rc; load x (low order 32 bits) into reg a1 load y (low order 32-bits) into reg a2. Add a1 and a2 storing result in reg a1 Store result into rc (low order 32-bits) load x (high order 32 bits) into reg a1 load y (high order 32-bits) into reg a2. Add with carry a1 and a2 storing result in a1. Store a1 into rc (high order 32-bits). In this case, you've got to do 4 loads, 2 adds and 2 stores. In a 64-bit system there are 2 loads, 1 operation, 1 store. -- Jerry Feldman
Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9
On Thursday 07 September 2006 17:09, Jerry Feldman wrote:
On Thursday 07 September 2006 2:56 am, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Every use of uint64_t in code will be emulated by gcc for 32-bit archs. Which seems, from the asm dump, costly.
While this is true, let me restate it. In a 32-bit application (under a 32-bit OS or a 64-bit OS), the application only has 8 32-bit registers, so the C language types: long long, int64_t, uint64_t will require multiple register loads as well as a couple of operations. So, in pseudo assembler code: int64_t x, y, rc; load x (low order 32 bits) into reg a1 load y (low order 32-bits) into reg a2. Add a1 and a2 storing result in reg a1 Store result into rc (low order 32-bits) load x (high order 32 bits) into reg a1 load y (high order 32-bits) into reg a2. Add with carry a1 and a2 storing result in a1. Store a1 into rc (high order 32-bits). In this case, you've got to do 4 loads, 2 adds and 2 stores. In a 64-bit system there are 2 loads, 1 operation, 1 store. --
Hi So to answer my original thread question (in simple terms) are you saying that fewer loads, operations and stores makes the 64 bit faster? The less the processor has to do the faster it will finish the task? Steve.
So to answer my original thread question (in simple terms) are you saying that fewer loads, operations and stores makes the 64 bit faster? The less the processor has to do the faster it will finish the task? In general yes with a caveat. First, an application built in 64-bit mode is not always faster than the same application running in 32-bit mode, but in many cases this will be
On Thursday 07 September 2006 12:07 pm, Primm wrote:
true. To answer your original question, IMHO definitely install the 64-bit
OS. And as a previous poster mentioned, his graphics are rendering much
faster. Probably, the reason for that is the expanded xmm stuff.
Just a note that Firefox on SuSE 10.1:
Help reports Mozilla/5.0 (X11: U; Linux i686 (x86_64)
But a file reports it as a 32-bit executable, which is good because most of
the plugins are only 32-bit today.
gaf@gaflap:~> file /usr/lib/firefox/firefox-bin
/usr/lib/firefox/firefox-bin: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386,
version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.4, dynamically linked (uses shared
libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.4, stripped
--
Jerry Feldman
I'm still not really sure why 64 bit is faster but I would certainly recommend it having compared both.
Every use of uint64_t in code will be emulated by gcc for 32-bit archs. Which seems, from the asm dump, costly.
Hi Jan, hi everybody. Sorry, but no idea what this means. Have googled around uint64_t for a while but the articles are too technical for me to be able to understand. Do you that stuff like Firefox? Steve
Sorry, but no idea what this means. Have googled around uint64_t for a while but the articles are too technical for me to be able to understand. The unit64_t is a 64-bit integer data type defined by the C and C++
On Thursday 07 September 2006 12:01 pm, Primm wrote:
programming standards and is only of interest to programmers.
In general, a number is represented in a computer as either an integer (or a
whole number), or as a floating point (eg. decimal) number. Floating point
is essentially what some non-programmers might know as scientific notation.
A floating point number has a mantissa, an exponent, and a sign (+ or -).
Both integers and floating point have hardware (called registers) where the
numbers can be operated on. when we talk 32-bit and 64-bit we generally
mean addresses (or places in memory where things can be stored), or
integers. The maximum unsigned decimal value that can be stored in a 32-bit
register is 4294967295, and a maximum unsigned decimal value that can be
stored is 18446744073709551615. What this means in very general terms of
memory is that a program can only address 4GB of memory in a 32-bit system.
remember, this 4GB limit also applies to disk files and other things.
--
Jerry Feldman
I'm still not really sure why 64 bit is faster but I would certainly recommend it having compared both. In addition to the linear memory model, and the use of 64-bit integers and
On Thursday 07 September 2006 2:42 am, Primm wrote:
pointers, there are now 16 128-bit XMM registers (8 in legacy 32-bit).
In 32-bit mode there are only 8 general purpose 32-bit registers where in
64-bit mode there are 16 64-bit registers. But, it is really the media
instructions that appear to be giving you the big win.
--
Jerry Feldman
participants (7)
-
Anders Johansson
-
Hans du Plooy
-
James Knott
-
Jan Engelhardt
-
Jeff Rollin
-
Jerry Feldman
-
Primm