Re: [POLL] To continue 64 or not?
Hi Andrew:
My workstation (not server) is operated by amd64 and I could not achieve the
same at the half floating point of 32bit.
I see two reasons to move to 64 bit: crunking numbers (as in my case) or games
(or other particularly demanding animated graphics).
Otherwise, why moving to the more energy-demanding 64bit when all you mention
you are aimed at running, runs perfectly at the more modest hardware of
32bit?
Cheers
francesco
On Thursday 31 August 2006 21:11, Andrew Robinson wrote:
> Looking for some constructive feedback on other people's experiences
> with amd64 as a workstation. I have been only using it a few weeks,
> and the setup is a pain due to the amount of 32 bit only programs. I
> am having some issues with:
>
> Eclipse + ExadelStudio plugin (plugin is 32-bit only)
> Firefox + Flash (Flash is 32-bit only)
> OpenOffice
> Cedega
> Wine
>
> Unfortunately, this makes up a decent percentage of what I run daily
> (especially eclipse). I am the type to sacrifice pain for new
> functionality, but this one has got me thinking, is it worth it?
>
> As a server I would think it would be great but as a workstation it
> seems to be a pain. The chroot jail works, but having to maintain the
> apt libraries (I am using etch, so they change fairly often), it more
> of a pain.
>
> For those that have the knowledge, I know that the 64 bit architecture
> is faster due to addressing and such, but is it that noticeable? Also,
> I have read that the 32 kernel still supports the dualcore nature of
> the amd64 even though running in 32 bit mode (is this true, my source
> wasn't 100% reliable).
>
> Just looking for some constructive feedback on other's opinions.
>
> -Andrew
Reply to: