Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:45:37 -0500 From: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@math.missouri.edu> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: CPUTYPE in general - was Re: Which CPUTYPE for a dualcore Xeon on AMD64 Message-ID: <467FFF41.10204@math.missouri.edu> In-Reply-To: <ab581e310706250250m4ec2432fide67251d7bcad132@mail.gmail.com> References: <467EF0C1.1010609@optiksecurite.com> <ab581e310706250250m4ec2432fide67251d7bcad132@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jack L. wrote: > On 6/24/07, Martin Turgeon <martin@optiksecurite.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I recently installed AMD64 6.2 Release on 2 PowerEdge servers, both with >> dual core Xeon (3070 and 5110). I noticed when I was updating the >> sources that it was compiling as an Athlonxp by default. I was wondering >> if I should change the CPUTYPE in make.conf to something else. I read at >> some places that it is not recommended because it could cause problems >> but I thought it would be interesting to start the debate here. Please >> note that I would prefer not to go with the -STABLE or -CURRENT branch >> because these a going to be essential productions servers. >> >> Thank you for your opinions, >> >> Martin > I use nocona. That should be the correct one. I know I am hijacking the thread a bit - but: In general, how does one decide which CPUTYPE to use? The connection between the options for CPUTYPE and the output of dmesg is not so obvious to me. I looked at the features advertised by dmesg (which in my case included SSE3) and then reverse engineered bsd.cpu.mk to figure out I should be using "prescott," but I am hoping I figured it out the hard way. Also, does setting CPUTYPE make a lot of difference to performance? Right now I have no CPUTYPE set at all. Thanks, Stephen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?467FFF41.10204>