Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 12:35:31 -0500 From: "Isaac Mushinsky" <itz@mushinsky.net> To: "Isaac Mushinsky" <itz@mushinsky.net>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use? Message-ID: <bbe9e35d0803050935w3476aeabl4bef4b8912f0f814@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20080305171303.GA35180@slackbox.xs4all.nl> References: <200803050036.33579.itz@mushinsky.net> <20080305171303.GA35180@slackbox.xs4all.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3/5/08, Roland Smith <rsmith@xs4all.nl> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:36:33AM -0500, Isaac Mushinsky wrote: > > I have new hardware (Abit ip35-pro, Intel Q6600), and was contemplating > > installing FreeBSD/arch, but now realise that I am going to have some > > problems. > > > > My nvidia card will not be of much use (GeForce 8500GT), since > nvidia-drivers > > are not there for amd64, and the open source nv driver does not even > support > > XVideo extension for these cards. I can downgrade to a nv 7xxx series > card, > > which works better with the open driver. I do not mind loss of 3D > support, > > but would need basic things like mplayer. > > > Any ATI card up to and including the 9250 (rv280) is fully supported on > amd64, 3D and all. (I know because I've got one :-) > > > > 2. Any problems with flash plugin (flash7 for now, I do not mean the > > confounded flash9 headache)? > > > I've never been able to get a native flash player to work, but I don't > mind doing without. The downloadhelper plugin for firefox can help you > download a lot of movies (e.g. youtube) which you then can play with > mplayer. All the flash ads I'll gladly do without. > > > > 3. Other casual desktop user problems I should be aware of? > > > Wine is i386 only. > > > > 4. Is it worth it? Perhaps I should stay with i386, but it is a pity > > not to be able to use the new machine to its full potential. > > > Practically you don't _need_ amd64 unless you're running out of address > space on i386. Me, I'm running amd64 because I can. :-) My desktop has a > gig > of RAM, and I seldom use more than half of that. Mind you, I'm using a > simple window manager not a desktop environment with lots of bells & > whistles. > > I suspect binaries on i386 will be somewhat smaller. But amd64 has more > registers which might give some speed advantages. I haven't tested it, but > it > might be nice to do a speed comparison between i386 and amd64 on > identical hardware. I don't think the difference will matter for > a common desktop though; the CPU of a desktop is mostly idling anyway. > > Roland > > -- > R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/<http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ersmith/> > [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] > pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) Thanks a lot. Trouble is, new hardware does not even have an AGP slot for those cards. I don't mind to go without 3D, though, and it appears some newer cards (R5xx/R6xx) have decent drivers otherwise. Yes, I also want to go amd64 because I can. Besides, it will be a fresh install, and if ever, this is the right time to switch.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bbe9e35d0803050935w3476aeabl4bef4b8912f0f814>