Can someone enlighten me regarding my confusion with the term AMD.
1, I know that the term AMD (American Micro Devices) is supposed to be a
'second source' for Intel 32bit and 64bit microprocessors. But it seems
based on what I have read on this relationship between AMD and Intel
that there is controversy, legal actions, competition, and architectural
differences regarding the manufacture and selling of these
microprocessors. So this suggests to me that AMD is not really a
'second source' (a licensed second manufacturing and selling source
supplier of identical products as designed and manufactured by another
company).
2. Is there any significant architectural differences between the
products manufactured by these two companies???
3. I ask the above question because it seems that the chips produced by
one seem not be be plug in capable with the chips produced by the other
-- it seems that the boards produced for one are different that the CPU
boards produced for the other???
4. I also ask the above question because over the last 2 years software
problems "seem" to occur around one but not the other???
5. Also, there is a non-i386 computer containing the AMD acronymn listed
with ARM and a dozen other non i386 computers listed by Debian. I
understand this second listing of non i386 machines (one example being
the Motorola 68xxx) but am confused about the AMD non i386 machines
place in this listing.
6. How is it that (for example) the Debian i386 AMD chip (some but not
all) are more condusive to the Debian kernel for certain kinds of
operations but not so with the Intel chip??? I base this on Debian
documentation where the Intel chip is not even mentioned.
Bottom line, over the past 2 years I have been struggling with the idea
of using the correct (if there is such a thing) microprocessor
board/chip combination appropriate for certain operations but not at the
exclusion of all other possible operations. Maybe I have just confused
myself and every Intel board/chip combination is replaceable with every
AMD board/chip combination. But this is not what vendors have been
telling me. They are telling me that on MS Windows OS (eg: XP) I can
use either the AMD board/chip combination or the Intel board/chip
combination but the boards and chips are not mutually compatible - AMD
chips must go into AMD boards and Intel chips must go into Intel boards.
Also, I am being told that some Debian software will operate on some AMD
board/chip combinations but not others and that this has something to do
with the specific kernel where one Debian kernel version will not run
the same (for certain operations) as another version.
So, I am confused and frustrated. I used to think that Debian kernels
would all run without exception on either AMD or Intel board/chip
combinations and the odd quirk in a kernel version would be resolved
with a newer version. I was also told that the chip sets (including the
MP chip(s) had different parameters and an Intel chip set combination
was not compatible with an AMD chip set combination thus making the
boards non compatible with one another. In fact, I am told, it is these
other chips (including and working with the MP chip) that account for
many differences some of which play havoc with certain Linux kernels. I
am also told that indiscriminate use of a Debian kernel may bring
problems that occur on an Intel system or vice-versa for a AMD system.
Is there a CHART that matches Debian kernels to tested and acceptable
AMD and Intel board/chip set matches while indicating limitations,
constraints, and possible special operations for both???
I have seen this same question (in a variety of forms) asked on this
forum as well as others but I haven't seen a complete answer.
Thanks in advance, for any comments, technical references, etc. == Ted Hilts
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
