On 11/19/2009 04:35 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 13:34 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: >> On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 19:47 -0600, King InuYasha wrote: >>> Netbooks are entirely 32-bit currently, and a majority of low end >>> desktops are still 32-bit only. >> >> I don't think your second assertion is true. I'm not aware of any >> currently-sold desktop processor, no matter how low end, which is not >> x86-64 capable. The very cheapest processor you can buy from my friendly >> local dealer is a 'Celeron 430', which is x86-64 capable. The last >> processor Intel released which was not x86-64 capable, so far as I can >> figure out, was the Celeron D 310, released December 2005. The last >> non-x86-64-capable chip AMD released was the 'Paris' Sempron family, >> which came in July 2004. The subsequent 'Palermo' Sempron family, >> released February 2005, had x86-64 support. >> >> If you're talking about already-existing systems rather than newly sold >> ones, there's more of a case there, but even so we've been in a >> 64-bit-capable world aside from netbook Atom CPUs for over four years >> now. > > oh, damn. Forgot the first Intel Core mobile families. Core Solo and > Core Duo are 32-bit only. The last of those showed up in January 2007, > so quite a bit more recent. > The netbook-grade Atoms mentioned a few times in this thread are certainly newer than that. --CJD -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
