From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1FOlNo-0001cK-Gx for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 00:51:28 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.5) with SMTP id k2U0nj0k022837; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 00:49:45 GMT Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.201]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k2U0hYqp001160 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 00:43:35 GMT Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 13so277776nzn for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:43:34 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ZIv01QWlXJwz4Z9nZSkOLPfaSq+wAOygDTCLSy8qPaXYCZ9zMzomXTtoHG+vXoUZedM+oSVAY6BS+pKzYcfbWKTcNr6DMoRDFBJ1UsSq2DJw0/iPqYGbLIQ/yrdi/upiQgzPPV4mznQ1YT65qg5Y4NVYWwsGQ8gV9atXXs1IN/k= Received: by 10.37.12.38 with SMTP id p38mr1803394nzi; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:43:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.154.3 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:43:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:43:34 -0800 From: "Lord Sauron" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [OT] Re: [gentoo-user] Intel Core Duo Processor - Anyone? In-Reply-To: <7573e9640603291634v2f22f489t4ca3448c3e683b09@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline References: <1143616641.29453.15.camel@neuromancer.home.net> <7573e9640603282355t7ab5a526tfd619e0c9c45a03@mail.gmail.com> <1143646905.21205.31.camel@neuromancer.home.net> <7573e9640603290845h3bedb131m209cc6323aee5848@mail.gmail.com> <442B0C32.3090609@gmail.com> <7573e9640603291634v2f22f489t4ca3448c3e683b09@mail.gmail.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by robin.gentoo.org id k2U0hYqp001160 X-Archives-Salt: 108898a7-3ffa-48be-a3c9-0ae16ad8e07f X-Archives-Hash: 62e5aa837811172aa93ccd6600135ff9 On 3/29/06, Richard Fish wrote: > On 3/29/06, michael@michaelshiloh.com wrote: > > How soon do you think we'll see laptops with the Dual Core Turion64? > > Summer. Got to have them out in time for back-to-school purchasing, right? > > > > > Elsewhere (perhaps on this list on a different topic) someone > > recommended not buying anything except for 64 bits (either AMD or Intel) > > from now on. Do you agree, in particular regarding laptops? > > No, but others are going to disagree with me! > > Nobody is currently producing laptops that can have over 4G of memory > (in fact, 2G is the max today in a laptop). And for my AMD desktop at www.alienware.com I beg to differ. I could have sworn I saw a laptop with more than 2G... where was it... wow! You appear to be right! Darn.. I could have SWORN I saw something with > 2G... > home, I don't see much difference between 64 and 32-bit programs. The > programs I am most interested in running fast are compression, > encryption, media encoding, and the like...standard desktop type uses. There is a big difference. You most likely aren't running with software compiled for 64-bit, or software that wasn't designed to take advantage of 64-bit, rather targeting 32-bit and just praying the compiler helps with the 64-bit part. It gets a bit technical, but there is a big difference between something made from the ground up as 64-bit versus something that was made 32-bit and just recompiled 64-bit. > Some things are slightly faster in 32-bit, some things are slightly > faster in 64-bit, but neither mode seems to have a definitive > advantage. Yes, with the unfairness of the compiler, that is true. It's a lot like if you had a car that could go 200MPH. Your driver may only hit 80MPH (the 32-bit code on a 64-bit chip), but then you get a driver trained for 200MPH driving, and then he actually hits 200MPH (the 64-bit code). It's like the good data in good data out / bad data in bad data out theory. > So unless and until you require more memory or specific applications, > I don't think you need to worry about 64-bit. Well, I think we must include bragging rights into our deliberation. That's a major part of it, too. Even though some people may never use more than a whole MHz of their PC, they still like to brag ; ) PS: I'm not one of them. If there were a law against computer abuse, I'd be locked up for life - It pains me to see a CPU idling. > -Richard > > -- > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list > > -- ========== GCv3.12 ========== GCS d-(++) s+: a? C++ UL+>++++ P+ L++ E--- W+(+++) N++ o? K? w--- O? M+ V? PS- PE+ Y-(--) PGP- t+++ 5? X R tv-- b+ DI+++ D+ G e* h- !r !y ========= END GCv3.12 ======== -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list