On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:45 PM, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But that's approximately 2**34 gigabytes, and the lowest
> price-per-gigabyte that I can find for RAM chips is about $20. So to
> max out a 64-bit memory space, you would need to spend around
>
> $343,597,383,680
A
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 07:14:43PM -0700, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> The good news is that if you have a 64-bit processor, the
> amount of memory you can install is limited only by the amount your
> motherboard can recognize. Also, memory is super-cheap nowadays. So
Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 02:03:57PM -0600, Ted Hilts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
[snipped -- please don't repeat long emails if you're just responding
to one part]
Also, recently, I discovered that a dual or quad CPU board only
provides load balancin
> (Java, Flash, etc. are not yet released in 64-bit compatible
> versions). This requires some workaround but is generally manageable;
> software that is not available in 64-bit versions will usually just be
> run in 32-bit compatibility mode.
This is true. Flash is not yet released in 64-bit co
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 02:03:57PM -0600, Ted Hilts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
[snipped -- please don't repeat long emails if you're just responding
to one part]
> Also, recently, I discovered that a dual or quad CPU board only
> provides load balancing and not greater speed
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:13:29PM +0100, Nuno Magalhães wrote:
> «(Java, Flash, etc. are not yet released in 64-bit compatible
> versions)»
browser plugins
>
> Huh? I'm using Java (Eclipse) and flash (mozilla) on 2.6.18-6-amd64...
>
> --
> Nuno Magalhães
--
"A dictatorship would be a heck of
So am I -- thought that was via a compatibility layer, though?
I know I'm running Adobe's flash player, which has not been released
in a 64-bit version, on my 64-bit box here...
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Nuno Magalhães <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> «(Java, Flash, etc. are not yet released i
«(Java, Flash, etc. are not yet released in 64-bit compatible
versions)»
Huh? I'm using Java (Eclipse) and flash (mozilla) on 2.6.18-6-amd64...
--
Nuno Magalhães
On Monday 18 August 2008 23:03, Ted Hilts wrote:
> Jeff Soules wrote:
> > AMD is a chip manufacturer. They started out (~20 years ago) as a
> > "second source" for 286 processors, but since then they have been
> > producing independently-designed chips within the x86 architecture
> > (i.e. they us
Hi Ted,
Thanks for clarifying -- hopefully that'll give the wiser heads around
here a bit more of a lead on how to help you.
I've done a little bit of research into virtualization, but only just
scratching the surface, and nothing on the level that you're
describing--it sounds like you'll have a
Jeff Soules wrote:
AMD is a chip manufacturer. They started out (~20 years ago) as a
"second source" for 286 processors, but since then they have been
producing independently-designed chips within the x86 architecture
(i.e. they use the same instruction set).
(See:
AMD: http://en.wikipedia.org/
Kent West wrote:
Ted Hilts wrote:
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.
You're incorrect. They're two totally different chip
AMD is a chip manufacturer. They started out (~20 years ago) as a
"second source" for 286 processors, but since then they have been
producing independently-designed chips within the x86 architecture
(i.e. they use the same instruction set).
(See:
AMD: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD
x86 architec
Ted Hilts wrote:
> 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.
You're incorrect. They're two totally different chips, which are mostly
co
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 i
First off, please don't cross-post.
An amd64 host can be used to build i386 packages with ease (using
e.g. schroot), whereas amd64 packages cannot easily be built on an
i386 host. Thus, I suggest an amd64 machine with an i386 chroot.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the li
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 12:44:48PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> Thus I am logically considering chipset and processor. I can hardly
> imagine that this is a problem with AMD, but I would like to know
> from you success and failure stories of AMD processors and Linux.
4 AMD all runing Debian, 2
On Sun, Apr 11, 2004 at 10:30:39PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.09.1949 +0200]:
> > It won't hurt. But nmi_watchdog is only for usermode and
> > kernemode hangs. The NMI watchdog is useless against nasty bugs
> > (hw or sw) th
also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.09.1949 +0200]:
> It won't hurt. But nmi_watchdog is only for usermode and
> kernemode hangs. The NMI watchdog is useless against nasty bugs
> (hw or sw) that make the hardware unstable.
Yes, I have just discovered that.
(Note
also sprach Chris Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.11.1718 +0200]:
> The first problem is that OpenGL-intensive applications eventually
> lock up the machine. No killing X, no switching virtual consoles
> to another console to kill things off, etc. The only thing for it
> is to hit reset.
I
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 12:44:48 +0200
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thus I am logically considering chipset and processor. I can hardly
> imagine that this is a problem with AMD, but I would like to know
> from you success and failure stories of AMD processors and Linux.
I have an ASu
On Fri, 09 Apr 2004, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.09.0034 +0200]:
> > > No. nmi_watchdog=1 means IOAPIC, nmi_watchdog=2 means LAPIC. You
> > > need to have the NMI Watchdog compiled into the kernel.
> >
> > This is my problem. I have looked arou
also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.09.0034 +0200]:
> > No. nmi_watchdog=1 means IOAPIC, nmi_watchdog=2 means LAPIC. You
> > need to have the NMI Watchdog compiled into the kernel.
>
> This is my problem. I have looked around the LAPIC stuff and in the
> Watchdog section, but
also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.08.1434 +0200]:
> You'll have to move cards around or remove them.
So I do that until the info screen just after the BIOS shows them
all to have different IRQs?
> No. nmi_watchdog=1 means IOAPIC, nmi_watchdog=2 means LAPIC. You
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 12:08:43PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.08.0108 +0200]:
> > No. It is a machine totally dead, CPU won't even NMI, soundboard
> > will keep looping whatever is in its buffer kind of bug. Probably
> > a
Roberto Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I know that when I had battery problems (quick discharge), Toshiba tech
> support told me that the way to ensure that the LiION battery didn't
> get a "memory" was to periodically run it through a couple of complete
> discharge cycles by booting a DOS
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 12:44:48PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
> cheaper.
>
> Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
> that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
> usually when there
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>>also sprach Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.08.0244 +0200]:
That's why you should run from the battery until it runs down at least
once a week or so
I believe this is wrong. Lithium-Ion Batteries actually suffer from
complete discharge cycles.
Any
martin f krafft wrote:
I wasn't the one initiating the cross-post. Don't shoot me.
also sprach Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.08.0155 +0200]:
Just to throw some weight behind this, this solution has worked
for me on several Athlon / nForce servers I've built. I just
removed APIC fro
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004, martin f krafft wrote:
> I wasn't the one initiating the cross-post. Don't shoot me.
I am killing it.
> also sprach Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.08.0244 +0200]:
> > That's why you should run from the battery until it runs down at least
> > once a week or so
>
>
On Thursday April 8 at 08:40am
Johann Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also, to reinforce what others have said about hard drives:
Errr, I meant power supplies. Sorry.
--
-johann koenig
Now Playing: Dropkick Murphys - The Dirty Glass : Face To Face Vs.
Dropkick Murp
Today is Pungenday, the 2
On Wednesday April 7 at 08:08pm
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can trigger it by increasing the PCI activity. Playing sound while
> doing heavy network (PCI NIC) and disk IO would crash it sooner or
> later. Removing everything offboard (but the videocard) won't fix t
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.08.0108 +0200]:
> > No. It is a machine totally dead, CPU won't even NMI, soundboard
> > will keep looping whatever is in its buffer kind of bug. Probably
> > a northbridge issue.
>
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Katipo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.08.0332 +0200]:
and that only briefly for things such as a monitor install.
Why do you need to take a machine down for a monitor install? Do you
take it down when you change the network cable too?
Yes.
Just on the of
On Thursday 08 April 2004 03:52, Christian Schnobrich wrote:
> > /rant on
> >
> > I should have said this in my first reply. It's common knowedge that AMD
> > based systems has, compared to Intel based systems, a reputation of
> > sometimes being unstable. No one ever bothers to explain why.
>
>
also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.08.0108 +0200]:
> No. It is a machine totally dead, CPU won't even NMI, soundboard
> will keep looping whatever is in its buffer kind of bug. Probably
> a northbridge issue.
What's NMI?
> Try to make sure you don't have extern
I wasn't the one initiating the cross-post. Don't shoot me.
also sprach Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.08.0155 +0200]:
> Just to throw some weight behind this, this solution has worked
> for me on several Athlon / nForce servers I've built. I just
> removed APIC from the kernel compl
On Thursday 08 April 2004 04:55, Raiz-mpx wrote:
> >Although, AMD give more heat, as I am sure you are aware.
At the moment the top-end P4's have a much higher thermal loss than the
top-end AMDs. Read more on www.tomshardware.com The K6 was hotter than the
P-II, then came the P-III that was hot
On Wed, 07 Apr 2004, Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
> Now, putting together what you and Roberto said, what about if the
> machine is in your home, then what, leave it on for days and months
> and months is better than shutting it down once in a while? Who takes
> it better, AMD or INTEL, or even Cru
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>For the past 7 years I have had nothing but AMD, besides a single
>Compaq
>laptop. I have, found problems mainly to be BIOS related and not
>CPU.
>
>Although, AMD give more heat, as I am sure you are aware. Heat is
>bad
>for processors, heat=resistance. It is also pla
On Mit, 2004-04-07 at 15:18, Hans du Plooy wrote:
> >
> > I have no first-hand experience, but from stories I heard it seems that
> > Intel has some benefits over AMD.
[...]
> /rant on
>
> I should have said this in my first reply. It's common knowedge that AMD
> based systems has, compared
Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
Now, putting together what you and Roberto said, what about if the
machine is in your home, then what, leave it on for days and months
and months is better than shutting it down once in a while? Who takes
it better, AMD or INTEL, or even Crusoe?
I can only speak of AMD
Antony Gelberg wrote:
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 05:17:08PM -0400, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
There are current known issues with nForce2/AMD combo. It
has to do with a race condition during the C1 disconnect.
The solution is to disable APIC, either in the kernel config
or by passing apic=off (or noa
Katipo wrote:
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
Incidentally, since you mention looking for a new board,
if you plan to get an ATI video card, get a non-nVidia
mobo. I really did the hat trick (nVidia mobo, AMD CPU,
and ATI video card). The machine is rock solid now, but
it took me several months of tweakin
Roberto Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Naturally, leaving my laptop plugged in and turned on all the time
> killed the battery after a few months. But, it was already a couple
> of years old at the time.
That's why you should run from the battery until it runs down at least
once a week or
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
Katipo wrote:
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
There are current known issues with nForce2/AMD combo. It
has to do with a race condition during the C1 disconnect.
The solution is to disable APIC, either in the kernel config
or by passing apic=off (or noapic, I can't remember) on th
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 08:11:55PM -0400, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> Antony Gelberg wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 05:17:08PM -0400, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> >
> >>There are current known issues with nForce2/AMD combo. It
> >>has to do with a race condition during the C1 disconnect.
> >>The solut
Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 08:06:51AM +0800, Katipo wrote:
Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
What about the shutting down, booting process? I've heard several
opinions about it, probably from incompetent people mostly. Some say
that it is better to leave the machine on without booti
Antony Gelberg wrote:
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 05:17:08PM -0400, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
There are current known issues with nForce2/AMD combo. It
has to do with a race condition during the C1 disconnect.
The solution is to disable APIC, either in the kernel config
or by passing apic=off (or noapic
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 08:06:51AM +0800, Katipo wrote:
> Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
>
> >
> >What about the shutting down, booting process? I've heard several
> >opinions about it, probably from incompetent people mostly. Some say
> >that it is better to leave the machine on without booting on and
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 05:17:08PM -0400, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> There are current known issues with nForce2/AMD combo. It
> has to do with a race condition during the C1 disconnect.
> The solution is to disable APIC, either in the kernel config
> or by passing apic=off (or noapic, I can't remem
We've been 100% AMD for 5 years now, and we have seen no such problems.
And all we do is file and application servers, where IO is king ;-)
For reference, we use Asus motherboards.
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 12:44:48PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their pr
Katipo wrote:
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
There are current known issues with nForce2/AMD combo. It
has to do with a race condition during the C1 disconnect.
The solution is to disable APIC, either in the kernel config
or by passing apic=off (or noapic, I can't remember) on the
kernel command line. Ev
Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
What about the shutting down, booting process? I've heard several
opinions about it, probably from incompetent people mostly. Some say
that it is better to leave the machine on without booting on and off,
others say that it is better to turn it off. Supossedly in the booti
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
Katipo wrote:
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
martin f krafft wrote:
I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
cheaper.
Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
usually w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 07 April 2004 02:14 pm, Paul Johnson wrote:
> I understand Crusoe is amazing in Linux. I'm a fan of Intel hardware
> in general. But I'm biased: I buy Oregonian products first, and the
> vast majority of Intel's hardware is made in Hill
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.07.1633 +0200]:
> > Let me guess: VIA chipset? I have a A7V motherboard that does the
> > same, unpredictably. The PCI bus just hangs the entire machine.
> > After that one, I tried
Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
> What about the shutting down, booting process? I've heard several
opinions about it, probably from incompetent people mostly. Some say
that it is better to leave the machine on without booting on and off,
others say that it is better to turn it off. Supossedly in the boo
First off, thanks for the replies so far. Let me address some points
in turn:
also sprach Hans du Plooy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.07.1436 +0200]:
> This has nothing to do with CPU. Things to check: 1. Hard
> drive/CD-ROM data cable. Especially if it is the thin (ATA-66 and
> up) - they damage
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
> that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
> usually when there is a lot of disk activity. The disks themselves
> are fine, though, and also the controller appea
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 10:25:16PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 12:44:48 +0200
> martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Thus I am logically considering chipset and processor. I can hardly
> > imagine that this is a problem with AMD, but I would like to know
> > fr
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 12:44:48 +0200
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thus I am logically considering chipset and processor. I can hardly
> imagine that this is a problem with AMD, but I would like to know
> from you success and failure stories of AMD processors and Linux.
For the past 7
Katipo wrote:
martin f krafft wrote:
I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
cheaper.
Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
usually when there is a lot of disk activity. The disks th
Katipo wrote:
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
martin f krafft wrote:
I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
cheaper.
Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
usually when there is a lot of dis
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 12:44:48PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
> cheaper.
>
> Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
> that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
> usually when there
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
martin f krafft wrote:
I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
cheaper.
Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
usually when there is a lot of disk activity. Th
martin f krafft wrote:
I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
cheaper.
Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
usually when there is a lot of disk activity. The disks themselves
are f
Most of this is stuff I gathered from various fonts, and some of my nearly
forgotten experience with designs for highly-stable and durable generator
static field controllers.
On Wed, 07 Apr 2004, Christian Schnobrich wrote:
> On Mit, 2004-04-07 at 12:44, martin f krafft wrote:
> > I am a huge fan
martin f krafft wrote:
I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
cheaper.
Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
usually when there is a lot of disk activity. The disks themselves
are fi
also sprach Olle Eriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.07.1322 +0200]:
> Have you checked your RAM?
Yes. Thanks for the suggestion, though.
In the future, please don't CC me on replies to mailing lists.
I request it in the signature and in the Mail-Followup-To header.
--
Please do not CC me wh
On Wednesday 07 April 2004 14:37, Christian Schnobrich wrote:
> > Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
> > that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
>
> I have no first-hand experience, but from stories I heard it seems that
> Intel has some bene
On Wednesday 07 April 2004 12:44, martin f krafft wrote:
> Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
> that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
> usually when there is a lot of disk activity.
This has nothing to do with CPU. Things to check:
1. Hard
On Mit, 2004-04-07 at 12:44, martin f krafft wrote:
> I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
> cheaper.
>
> Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
> that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
I have no first-hand experience,
On Wednesday 07 April 2004 12.44, martin f krafft wrote:
> I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
> cheaper.
>
> Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
> that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
> usually when there is a lot
I am a huge fan of AMD, not only because their processors are
cheaper.
Recently, however, I have experienced random crashes on two machines
that run AMDs. The crashes seem to be related to IO and happen
usually when there is a lot of disk activity. The disks themselves
are fine, though, and also t
75 matches
Mail list logo
