Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 31 May 2005 07:42:40 -0700
From:      "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org>
To:        Andre Guibert de Bruet <andy@siliconlandmark.com>
Cc:        "Jack L." <xxjack12xx@doramail.com>, freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Intel EM64T Processor Platform
Message-ID:  <20050531144240.GE9158@dragon.NUXI.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050530235253.W69811@lexi.siliconlandmark.com>
References:  <20050529080029.687192B2B86@ws5-7.us4.outblaze.com> <20050529081442.GA99205@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <20050530235253.W69811@lexi.siliconlandmark.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 12:00:44AM -0400, Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote:
> On Sun, 29 May 2005, Roland Smith wrote:
> >On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 12:00:29AM -0800, Jack L. wrote:
> >>
> >>What cpu type should I use for make.conf and the kernel if I want to
> >>use the AMD64 platform?
> >
> >You do not need to have anything special in make.conf, and the GENERIC
> >kernel for amd64 contains the necessary 'machine' and 'cpu' paramaters.
> 
> This is not entirely correct. Sure, your system will run without anything 
> special in make.conf; But if you want decent performance, you probably 
> want to set CPUTYPE to "nocona" in order to get a build that is tailored 
> to your cpu (SSE3, etc). More information on what that CPUTYPE enables is 
> available in /usr/share/mk/bsd.cpu.mk.

You're saying that one doesn't get decent performance on a Nocona with
stock GCC code generation?  While one may get noticeably better
performance with CPUTYPE=nocona, I doubt it is a huge difference.  What
I'm saying is, I sure one will have decent performance with a stock
FreeBSD/amd64 install.

-- 
-- David  (obrien@FreeBSD.org)



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050531144240.GE9158>