Important are the bottlenecks regarding to the usage. All general
claims are nothing, but blah-blah.
Could not agree more. Too many people are buying new ram modules when
they should simply buy a faster hard disk, by example.
People often say that dev needs high-performance computers for
comp
Hi,
Dňa Sat, 19 Jan 2013 12:34:54 +0100 berenger.mo...@neutralite.org
napísal:
> Of course, I think it totally useless for habitual uses, like using
> word processors. But for that, modern computer are simply a waste:
> most usages of those applications were made on computers 15 years
> ago... (
-Original Message-
From: Ralf Mardorf
Sent: Sat 1/19/2013 19:21
To: debian-u...@lists.debian.or
Subject: Re: debian 64 or 32 bit
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 18:41:21 +0100, Slavko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Dna Fri, 18 Jan 2013 23:36:50 -0600 "Mark Allums"
> napísal:
>
>>
Hi,
Dňa Fri, 18 Jan 2013 23:36:50 -0600 "Mark Allums"
napísal:
> > There is one disadvantage, i read about it, that by using the 64bit
> > pointers, the binaries size and memory requirements are on amd64
> > higher, than on i386. But bigger HDD and more RAM is no problem
> > in these days.
>
>
Le 19.01.2013 11:49, Andrei POPESCU a écrit :
On Vi, 18 ian 13, 20:33:01, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
So, for processors able to support x84_64 archs, use it. Why would
you use only a fragment of your computer's power?
This is a bit of an overstatement. I've been running amd64, i38
On Vi, 18 ian 13, 20:33:01, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
>
> So, for processors able to support x84_64 archs, use it. Why would
> you use only a fragment of your computer's power?
This is a bit of an overstatement. I've been running amd64, i386 and
amd64 kernel with i386 userland on this
> > So, for processors able to support x84_64 archs, use it. Why would
> > you use only a fragment of your computer's power?
>
> There is one disadvantage, i read about it, that by using the 64bit
> pointers, the binaries size and memory requirements are on amd64
> higher, than on i386. But bigger
Hi,
Dňa Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:33:01 +0100 berenger.mo...@neutralite.org
napísal:
> So, for processors able to support x84_64 archs, use it. Why would
> you use only a fragment of your computer's power?
I agree. Some years ago, when i buy computer with amd64 procesor, i did
the same troubles: to us
Le 18.01.2013 11:51, Ralf Mardorf a écrit :
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 11:26:17 +0100, Andrei Hristow
wrote:
Hi, I have 8 GB RAM Which version will be better for my i381 or
amd64
This doesn't depend to the used RAM. If everything of an install
should be ok, then the whole RAM is available with a
Hi!
Am Freitag, 18. Januar 2013 schrieb Andrei Hristow:
> Hi, I have 8 GB RAM Which version will be better for my i381 or amd64
Anything >= 4 GB: 64 bit.
So that processes can address more than 3G of RAM.
And yeah, I saw this with Planeshift having 3,7 GB of RSS for itself :)
Ciao,
--
Martin
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:26:17PM +0200, Andrei Hristow wrote:
> Hi, I have 8 GB RAM Which version will be better for my i381 or amd64
amd64. Go native and get full access to your ram at full speed.
If you need i386 for anything you can go multiarch (you may aswell install
wheezy at this stage I
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 11:26:17 +0100, Andrei Hristow
wrote:
Hi, I have 8 GB RAM Which version will be better for my i381 or amd64
This doesn't depend to the used RAM. If everything of an install should be
ok, then the whole RAM is available with a PAE kernel on 32-bit and for
64-bit kernels
Hi Andrei,
> Van: Andrei Hristow [mailto:adrifo...@gmail.com]
>
> Hi, I have 8 GB RAM Which version will be better for my i381 or amd64
The i386 kernel can only address the first 4GB and needs "trics" to access the
rest. So, for you and many others, it is the amd64 version.
Bonno Bloksma
--
13 matches
Mail list logo
