Alex White wrote: > Johnny Hughes wrote: > >> On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 19:40 -0500, Ryan Lum wrote: > > > <snipped> > >> My question is: is the hardware support for >> >>> x86_64 as good as i386. I just installed i386 4.1 without a hang or >>> any >>> problems. >> >> >> >> Personally, if I was going to run a server, I would use the x86_64 >> distro ... but if I was going to run a workstation, I would use the i386 >> distro. >> To be perfectly honest, if i386 is stable for you and x86_64 is not, I >> would recommend you use the i386 distro ... in my experience, the >> difference between the two is not really that noticeable when using the >> system. > > > <snipped> > > So then, can anyone point me to documentation or experience that would > lead one to choose x86_64 over i386 on a workstation or desktop? > Perceived or otherwise performance gains would be nice, I'm just > looking for some "why" type stuff if anyone would like to share their > experience and or decision making scenarios with me. This can be done > off list or on maybe it would benefit some others? > > Sincerely, > > Alex White One reason for going 64-bit is larger address space for applications. If you are not doing high-resolution Finite-Element analysis or C.F.D. or astro-physics, the i386 would probably be OK. Of course, there is then the question of 'Why did you buy an Opteron/Athlon64, only to run a 32-bit OS ?' :-) I am also on the SuSE AMD64 list & they are having their share of problems with their current release (9.3). I have been wanting to build a simple Opteron compute server for about a year now, but have been scared off by the apparent lingering stability issues in SuSE 9.2 & 9.3. That's one of the reasons I am here now, trying to see if things are better w/ CentOS :-). -- William A. Mahaffey III --------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember, ignorance is bliss, but willful ignorance is LIBERALISM !!!!