Thanks, can you give me a quick brief of the major issue KDE has with 64. At the same time I will search the KDE bug database under the 64bit criteria for an idea...Well that's only if it does not error out too many results or output too large. Scott :-) jpff wrote:

I would chose (and have chosen) AMD, but then I use my computers for music and the underflow/denormalised numbers problem in Intel hardware is a reason for not wanting Intel anyway. I have been running on AMD64x2 on my work workstation without any significant problems. On the other hand the KDE-loaded AMD64x2 has had a catalog of problems which I keep meaning to ask about here. ==John ffitch

On Monday 14 May 2007, jpff said:

I do not know that it is KDE that is the problem -- personally I do not use KDE or Gnome -- but the machine in question has a number of oddities

1: Cursor kept disappearing; changed to software cursor and now OK. Seems that was a hardware bug on the motherboard

2: xdm or kdm will not run directly from booting in level5. Every character typed causes the screen resolution to change. Booting at level3, and running kdm from a room window seems to overcome this!

3: Audacity always crashes on exit, and on use of a plugin or effect. This works OK on my AMD64x2 on my desk, except that spectral display fails on all 64bit AMD machines in the latest version (OK on last version)

That all sounds like a graphics driver problem. I and many others here have KDE on 64 bit dual core and sing../lib64/firefox/firefox.shle core machines and neither glitch 1 or 2. I can't comment on audacity.

Those are the most annoying things so far.

I should repeat that I run another AMD64x2 and my home machine is AMD64 as well (pre-dual core), and apart from the loss of flash in browsers is no problem. And the only loss in flash is not having the graphs for the cricket matches.

Flash should work since it runs inside a 32 bit nspluginviewer binary that we ship, in Konqueror. It works in firefox as well but I don't know what the mechanism used there is. Will -- Desktop Engineer Interfaces and Applications Team -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On 5/13/07, M Harris wrote:

... and I'll tell you why--- because the hardware and software markets have not converged (IMO) for 64 bit processors. To put this differently... its still bleeding edge. To be frank about it... the 64bit linux stuff just isn't ready yet... there are way to many things that I am seeing on the lists that do not work well (or at all) in 64bit. For my money its going to be IA32 for some time.

This really isn't a problem for rpm based systems with multilib, only really debian based systems where you don't have the option of running 32bit software on your 64bit software. As for 32 bit for some time that completely ignores the fact that 4gb ram is not going to be sufficient for much longer, it's already the normal amount to get in new machines. If you need more ram (which games will require in a year or so's time) you'll need 64bit. _ Benjamin Weber -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

I am inclined to agree with you...there currently is Intel S775 Core 2 Q 6600 Quad Core CPU available now... Specks are interesting where origami meets HT. How ever there is a definite logic that 64 bit processors are here to stay and will provide the next generation but as you rightly say application development lags. Perhaps I should ask which processor do I commit to now OR in 12 months. We will probably both have varying opinions. The major differences of performance not really specifically relevant to clock AMD commitment to Suse Linux in add-on CPU Monitoring http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_871_13118,0... OR 64 bit may be == IBM PS2 where the hardware was made before the O/S and an O/S to take advantage of the PS2 Architecture Never made it to mainstream ( IBM Micro-channel) Think I will commit in another 12 months, but many thanks your advice. Scott :-) M Harris wrote:

On Saturday 12 May 2007 22:40, Registration Account wrote:

...

Given the choice when getting a new PC would you choose Intel Core 2 duo or AMD Athlon 64bit x 2 CPU With 1000 and 1 benchmarks and both are similar cost to me - can you help.

That's easy...

... Intel Core 2 Duo.

... and I'll tell you why--- because the hardware and software markets have not converged (IMO) for 64 bit processors. To put this differently... its still bleeding edge. To be frank about it... the 64bit linux stuff just isn't ready yet... there are way to many things that I am seeing on the lists that do not work well (or at all) in 64bit. For my money its going to be IA32 for some time. I as yet do not own a duo core system... I've been waiting because multiple core processors are going to be the rage... and (2) is going to be so old hat very soon... so I'm holding out just a bit. Of course the Mac is now using the Intel Core 2 Duo (my sister has one... loves it). I'm very tempted to make my next machine a Mac... then again I am also waiting to see what Mike Dell is going to do with his linux preloads... :)