Re: i386 or amd64?
On Sunday 13 July 2008 17:05, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am about to buy the mobo that Doug Tutty has: Asus M2N-SLI Deluxe,
> albeit with a more moderate AM2 processor: AMD Athlon X2 4050e 2.1GHz
> 45W 65nm Dual-Core.
>
> Question I have is what do I run on it, I would prefer restoring a
> current i386 system on it and then go on from there.
>
> So I found this:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2005/07/msg00311.html
>
> which lists 6 options:
>
> 1) Install i386 version and use that using 32bit kernel.
> 2) Install amd64 version and use that.
> 3) Install i386 with amd64 kernel package (i386 sarge includes that) and
> amd64-libs to allow running some 64bit programs and most 32bit
> (iptables/alsa-utils and other things that talk to some kernel
> interfaces have to be 64bit when used with a 64bit kernel I believe).
> 4) Install amd64 version and ia32-libs to allow running some 32bit
> programs and all 64bit.
> 5) Install i386 with an amd64 kernel package and a 64bit chroot to play
> with full 64bit stuff in. (I use this one at the moment).
> 6) Install amd64 with a i386 chroot to run 32bit packages in.
>
> I would prefer 1) but how does one do that?
>
> Hugo
Hi Hugo. Just go ahead and install the i386 version of your distro. It will
work with the 64bit processor with no problems.
I recently built a new machine, using an Asus M2N-X Plus mobo, with an AMD
Athlon64 3800 AM2 2.4GHz processor. I've installed i386 (32bit) versions of
Archlinux, Kubuntu Gutsy Gibbon, Fedora 8, and Kubuntu Breezy (upgraded to
Dapper) on it, and no problemos. I've got Sarge, Etch, and Lenny on another
machine, and they were all upgraded from my valuable Woody 3.0r2 cdroms, and
don't want to go through that hassle of upgrading to Etch from Woody on the
new machine. I've just found a supplier in France that has 3DVD sets for Etch
for 15€, so I'll get those, and save a bit of upgrading time, when I add Etch
to the new machine.
If you have sufficient harddrive space, why not install both the i386, and the
x86_64 versions, and you can compare them. I think for a 64 bit install there
are some packages (probably 3rd party ones) that you have to go through the
hoops a bit, to get them to work, which is probably why I've stayed with
i386.
When AMD brought out their first 64 bit processor (in 2003 IIRC) there was
much marketing hype as to how superior it was compared to 32 bit processors,
but I've also read that there is not a lot of difference between i386
(32bit), and x86_64, but having no experience in comparing the two, I'm
simply going on what I've heard.
Sunday afternoon/evening rambling over, and now back to mowing the grass. My
dog's looking at me in an expectant way, as he has a bunch of fun in the
garden when I'm mowing.
All the best.
Nigel.
Reply to: