Alex White wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 19:40 -0500, Ryan Lum wrote:
>
>
> <snipped>
>
>> My question is: is the hardware support for
>>
>>> x86_64 as good as i386. I just installed i386 4.1 without a hang or
>>> any
>>> problems.
>>
>>
>>
>> Personally, if I was going to run a server, I would use the x86_64
>> distro ... but if I was going to run a workstation, I would use the i386
>> distro.
>> To be perfectly honest, if i386 is stable for you and x86_64 is not, I
>> would recommend you use the i386 distro ... in my experience, the
>> difference between the two is not really that noticeable when using the
>> system.
>
>
> <snipped>
>
> So then, can anyone point me to documentation or experience that would
> lead one to choose x86_64 over i386 on a workstation or desktop?
> Perceived or otherwise performance gains would be nice, I'm just
> looking for some "why" type stuff if anyone would like to share their
> experience and or decision making scenarios with me. This can be done
> off list or on maybe it would benefit some others?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Alex White
One reason for going 64-bit is larger address space for applications. If
you are not doing high-resolution Finite-Element analysis or C.F.D. or
astro-physics, the i386 would probably be OK. Of course, there is then
the question of 'Why did you buy an Opteron/Athlon64, only to run a
32-bit OS ?' :-) I am also on the SuSE AMD64 list & they are having
their share of problems with their current release (9.3). I have been
wanting to build a simple Opteron compute server for about a year now,
but have been scared off by the apparent lingering stability issues in
SuSE 9.2 & 9.3. That's one of the reasons I am here now, trying to see
if things are better w/ CentOS :-).
--
William A. Mahaffey III
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember, ignorance is bliss, but
willful ignorance is LIBERALISM !!!!
