From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 20:49:38 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CABAC106564A for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:49:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from christopher.maness@gmail.com) Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.230]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 989FA8FC17 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:49:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from christopher.maness@gmail.com) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so2171961rvf.43 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:49:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:sender; bh=+J6jg1zxMCo6h8zblnhKGvopYo1C00UOTgVDB6oBxVc=; b=c0MYqhi99aJQY7K09I56sKES5O/KlNSdYDUBBnoQSwaRaIvsSbI74zkJ5iagFxxuJn ISYnpRFbr9gmFAD0Z15RKQ4S5V80Xh0WT1m8kpC7ReGK4W23NH83/2p5LuS4f/f317/K eIQYxZN6bg/QLVjVjpo89oNpruEIOTOlVE974= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :sender; b=KqqrhT/t4aY1yzpJ5eVphDWoWaJCIdG5uA0lr4m8hqgKfoqIzgnBWSDLQWsL7rJKSK nfBGbMYLHygGxzi3WumoXgIONWm3gR5dUFdrqlWTb+wOP+4tTwsQJHGH1y23dCzUTD3f KHP53hBqsDSCiJcx09KOkhYFLoT0dYOwUC63Y= Received: by 10.114.131.1 with SMTP id e1mr843655wad.222.1227559778335; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:49:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.65? (adsl-76-238-148-150.dsl.irvnca.sbcglobal.net [76.238.148.150]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y11sm120726pod.5.2008.11.24.12.49.37 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:49:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <492B1361.4050604@chrismaness.com> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:49:37 -0800 From: Chris Maness User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080925) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Roland Smith References: <20081112100640.GA21560@icarus.home.lan> <492AF564.5050605@chrismaness.com> <20081124200044.A1528@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <492B0275.6000300@chrismaness.com> <20081124200755.GA3659@slackbox.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <20081124200755.GA3659@slackbox.xs4all.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: Chris Maness Cc: Wojciech Puchar , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Xeon Quad Core (Was: Server Freezing Solid) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:49:38 -0000 Roland Smith wrote: > On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:37:25AM -0800, Chris Maness wrote: > >> Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> >>>> Since a Xeon Quad Core is a 64bit processor, would it work ok with >>>> FreeBSD? Or would the adm64 release be better for that chip? >>>> >>> don't be suggested by "amd" in port name. it's for AMD64-compatible >>> processor, for example your xeon >>> >> Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I am currently running FreeBSD 7.0 the >> regular i386 release. I would prefer to keep it that way if migration >> to the 64bit release would mean rebuilding from scratch >> > > You'll have to remove and re-install all ports to make them 64-bits as well. > > >> (there is >> probably an easier way to convert an i386 release to a amd64 release). >> > > Not really. You could do a cross-build to another partition, but you'd > have to have one available. > > >> Another poster seemed to indicate that the i386 release would run just >> fine on a quad core chip. >> > > It should. > > >> Would there be a major performance gain with amd64 over that of the i386 >> build on a Xeon Quad Core? >> > > It will depend on your workload. If your machines were strapped fo > address space on i386, switching to amd64 (with enough RAM) will help. > > In "long" (64-bit) mode, amd64 compatible CPUs have more registers > available, so that will speed up things. On the other hand, pointers and > longs are 64-bit numbers instead of 32-bit, which will make the code > somewhat larger. Run some benchmarks that are relevant for you on i386 > and re-run them after you've switched to amd64 to know for sure. > > I've been running amd64 since 5.4 on both Athlon64 and recently Core 2 > Quad without problems. > > Roland > Another thought. Would a Quad Core chip help with compiling applications -- or would it be the same as a dual core or single core chip running at the same clock speed because the compiler is running single thread? Would php processing be benefited by quad a quad core over a dual core. If not, then I guess I should just purchase a dual core chip and save the cabbage up front and wattage to boot. Thanks, Chris Maness