Two burning questions! (and a half)

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Tony Sperling, Jun 3, 2006.

  1. Hi, all!

    Charlie mentioned these motherboards with memory constraints a little
    earlier. Can we specifically mention a couple of modern boards that really
    fits-in 4Meg's?

    And the AM2 processor's Virtualisation apparently means you can boot two
    on-disk OS's, will they each boot from their own core, or will they both
    share both cores, or will that be configurable? Will each be able to run
    window'ed and full screen as the need occurs, and how will this development
    affect VMWare and others?

    With the processing power of the AMD dual-cores and the higher latency of
    current DDR2 memory in mind: most people seem to be extra-ordinarily upset
    and disappointed about it, but does it really matter - I mean, of course
    DDR2 800 CL 3.0 will make it faster than DDR2 667 CL 4.0 or 5.0, but isn't
    this in fact one of those instances where you pay dearly for that extra
    millimeter. Can anybody with experience from a dual-core confirm that it
    feels like it would significantly benefit from that faster memory?

    I do not kid myself, like someone we shouldn't mention had us believe we all
    did, that I need the processing power of a dual-core in a AM2 socket with
    virtualisation and I know not what, I need to keep myself abreast with the
    current technology because within the next ten years I will be entirely left
    behind - if I lag behind now by sticking to what I need, it will be so much
    sooner and so much worse, so from this point-of-view: do not the dual-cores
    have enough power as it is that you wouldn't really notice if you fitted
    your machine with DDR2 667 as opposed to the 800 variant?

    I have habitually underclocked many of my machines by a small amount, like
    5% and this is not a difference that I find noticeable, how much difference
    in processing power is there (roughly) between fitting those two qualities
    of memory in a desktop (hobby stuff; occasional compiling and gaming), do
    you believe? (Everything else being equal)

    8% - 12% ???


    A quality weekend to all!


    Tony. . .
    Tony Sperling, Jun 3, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Well, none of us here have the kinds of test setups (or access to unlimited
    hardware budgets) to really test all the possibilities. I used to use
    TomsHardware site, but now focus more on AnandTech for those sorts of
    reviews.

    That being said, very few of us really utilize 2 cores fully for any length
    of time. And those that do are far more likely to be running one of those
    Tyan multisocket mobos that have even more than 2 cores. ;) You know the
    ones I'm lusting after...

    The fact is that from an OS perspective, the hardware got ahead of the
    software, IMHO. Well, Vista looks to be doing its level best to change that.
    :) Hardware bought a year or so ago is going to be up against it in many
    cases running Vista. Oh, if you bought on the leading edge of hardware then
    (and that's a good bet on this newsgroup, given it's all about 64bit) then
    you're likely to be fine. But I'm finding that I need more GPU power than
    I've ever imagined to get the level of performance I want and expect in
    Vista. My dual core 3800+ with 3 GB is fine, but the GPU was an ATI 9600
    with 256 Mb of memory and it's struggling. So I went out and bought an x1600
    a few days ago, and I expect (once they get me a driver that actually works)
    that will be sufficient. It's still in the reasonable price range, a key
    factor. I'm NOT going to spend mega-dollars on a system right now.

    Meanwhile, the Ferrari is OK, but it doesn't "snap" in Vista. Now one of
    those new 5000's that Barb already has lined up? They should be fine.

    So, what to buy now? Personally, if you're running OK as is, I'd hold off a
    bit. There are new cores coming from Intel, and AM2 from AMD will get better
    as they progress, plus there's the new Opteron coming. GPUs will move ahead
    quickly as well.


    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    Tony Sperling wrote:
    > Hi, all!
    >
    > Charlie mentioned these motherboards with memory constraints a little
    > earlier. Can we specifically mention a couple of modern boards that really
    > fits-in 4Meg's?
    >
    > And the AM2 processor's Virtualisation apparently means you can boot two
    > on-disk OS's, will they each boot from their own core, or will they both
    > share both cores, or will that be configurable? Will each be able to run
    > window'ed and full screen as the need occurs, and how will this
    > development affect VMWare and others?
    >
    > With the processing power of the AMD dual-cores and the higher latency of
    > current DDR2 memory in mind: most people seem to be extra-ordinarily upset
    > and disappointed about it, but does it really matter - I mean, of course
    > DDR2 800 CL 3.0 will make it faster than DDR2 667 CL 4.0 or 5.0, but isn't
    > this in fact one of those instances where you pay dearly for that extra
    > millimeter. Can anybody with experience from a dual-core confirm that it
    > feels like it would significantly benefit from that faster memory?
    >
    > I do not kid myself, like someone we shouldn't mention had us believe we
    > all did, that I need the processing power of a dual-core in a AM2 socket
    > with virtualisation and I know not what, I need to keep myself abreast
    > with the current technology because within the next ten years I will be
    > entirely left behind - if I lag behind now by sticking to what I need, it
    > will be so much sooner and so much worse, so from this point-of-view: do
    > not the dual-cores have enough power as it is that you wouldn't really
    > notice if you fitted your machine with DDR2 667 as opposed to the 800
    > variant?
    > I have habitually underclocked many of my machines by a small amount, like
    > 5% and this is not a difference that I find noticeable, how much
    > difference in processing power is there (roughly) between fitting those
    > two qualities of memory in a desktop (hobby stuff; occasional compiling
    > and gaming), do you believe? (Everything else being equal)
    >
    > 8% - 12% ???
    >
    >
    > A quality weekend to all!
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Jun 3, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. One of the oddities of Vista Beta 2 for me is that x86 runs much slower on
    my dual core AMD (4400+) than does the x64 edition. Go figure!

    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:e$9u$...
    > Hi, all!
    >
    > Charlie mentioned these motherboards with memory constraints a little
    > earlier. Can we specifically mention a couple of modern boards that really
    > fits-in 4Meg's?
    >
    > And the AM2 processor's Virtualisation apparently means you can boot two
    > on-disk OS's, will they each boot from their own core, or will they both
    > share both cores, or will that be configurable? Will each be able to run
    > window'ed and full screen as the need occurs, and how will this
    > development affect VMWare and others?
    >
    > With the processing power of the AMD dual-cores and the higher latency of
    > current DDR2 memory in mind: most people seem to be extra-ordinarily upset
    > and disappointed about it, but does it really matter - I mean, of course
    > DDR2 800 CL 3.0 will make it faster than DDR2 667 CL 4.0 or 5.0, but isn't
    > this in fact one of those instances where you pay dearly for that extra
    > millimeter. Can anybody with experience from a dual-core confirm that it
    > feels like it would significantly benefit from that faster memory?
    >
    > I do not kid myself, like someone we shouldn't mention had us believe we
    > all did, that I need the processing power of a dual-core in a AM2 socket
    > with virtualisation and I know not what, I need to keep myself abreast
    > with the current technology because within the next ten years I will be
    > entirely left behind - if I lag behind now by sticking to what I need, it
    > will be so much sooner and so much worse, so from this point-of-view: do
    > not the dual-cores have enough power as it is that you wouldn't really
    > notice if you fitted your machine with DDR2 667 as opposed to the 800
    > variant?
    >
    > I have habitually underclocked many of my machines by a small amount, like
    > 5% and this is not a difference that I find noticeable, how much
    > difference in processing power is there (roughly) between fitting those
    > two qualities of memory in a desktop (hobby stuff; occasional compiling
    > and gaming), do you believe? (Everything else being equal)
    >
    > 8% - 12% ???
    >
    >
    > A quality weekend to all!
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    Colin Barnhorst, Jun 3, 2006
    #3
  4. Well, that may be one instance where I had expected the differences to
    start showing, as the branching of the technologies separates and comes
    together. If it is noticeable, and significant allready- then, yes it would
    be a bit surprising.

    Virtualisation though. Is it true, in your mind, that the processor will be
    likely to do these things I mentioned on it's own, or will it still be
    relying on installed support of some sort from the likes of VMWare?

    I am aware that it is early days yet, and much of the questions and the
    implications they subject to us isn't really known at the moment, but isn't
    it true that if you move from the flatlands to the mountains and take your
    'duce-and-a-quarter' with you, you generally do not have to think about
    changing the gear-ratio?


    Tony. . .

    "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > One of the oddities of Vista Beta 2 for me is that x86 runs much slower on
    > my dual core AMD (4400+) than does the x64 edition. Go figure!
    >
    Tony Sperling, Jun 3, 2006
    #4
  5. There are solutions today that do virtualization below the level of the OS
    (VMWare ESX), but they have their issues still. The Hypervisor technology
    that is the next version of Virtual Server is what I'm waiting for to go
    that way. But that's "Longhorn Server + 180 days", so still a ways away.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Well, that may be one instance where I had expected the differences to
    > start showing, as the branching of the technologies separates and comes
    > together. If it is noticeable, and significant allready- then, yes it
    > would be a bit surprising.
    >
    > Virtualisation though. Is it true, in your mind, that the processor will
    > be likely to do these things I mentioned on it's own, or will it still be
    > relying on installed support of some sort from the likes of VMWare?
    >
    > I am aware that it is early days yet, and much of the questions and the
    > implications they subject to us isn't really known at the moment, but
    > isn't it true that if you move from the flatlands to the mountains and
    > take your 'duce-and-a-quarter' with you, you generally do not have to
    > think about changing the gear-ratio?
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> One of the oddities of Vista Beta 2 for me is that x86 runs much slower
    >> on my dual core AMD (4400+) than does the x64 edition. Go figure!
    >>

    >
    >
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Jun 3, 2006
    #5
  6. You can try Linux + XEN in the mean time although I am hearing reports its
    very rough around edges.
    --
    --
    Andre
    Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > There are solutions today that do virtualization below the level of the OS
    > (VMWare ESX), but they have their issues still. The Hypervisor technology
    > that is the next version of Virtual Server is what I'm waiting for to go
    > that way. But that's "Longhorn Server + 180 days", so still a ways away.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Well, that may be one instance where I had expected the differences to
    >> start showing, as the branching of the technologies separates and comes
    >> together. If it is noticeable, and significant allready- then, yes it
    >> would be a bit surprising.
    >>
    >> Virtualisation though. Is it true, in your mind, that the processor will
    >> be likely to do these things I mentioned on it's own, or will it still be
    >> relying on installed support of some sort from the likes of VMWare?
    >>
    >> I am aware that it is early days yet, and much of the questions and the
    >> implications they subject to us isn't really known at the moment, but
    >> isn't it true that if you move from the flatlands to the mountains and
    >> take your 'duce-and-a-quarter' with you, you generally do not have to
    >> think about changing the gear-ratio?
    >>
    >>
    >> Tony. . .
    >>
    >> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> One of the oddities of Vista Beta 2 for me is that x86 runs much slower
    >>> on my dual core AMD (4400+) than does the x64 edition. Go figure!
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], Jun 3, 2006
    #6
  7. Tony Sperling

    Rick Guest

    You're right about Xen being a bit rough around the edges.&nbsp; I loaded Fedora 5 with Xen integrated into it and I discovered Xen is currently only capable of installing Linux OS - no Windows.&nbsp; They claim on their web site they are working on making it Windows capable, but that's a future capability project.

    Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:

    You can try Linux + XEN in the mean time although I am hearing reports its very rough around edges.








    "Charlie Russel - MVP" &lt;&gt; wrote in message news:...







    &gt; There are solutions today that do virtualization below the level of the OS &gt; (VMWare ESX), but they have their issues still. The Hypervisor technology &gt; that is the next version of Virtual Server is what I'm waiting for to go &gt; that way. But that's "Longhorn Server + 180 days", so still a ways away. &gt; &gt; -- &gt; Charlie. &gt; http://msmvps.com/xperts64 &gt; &gt; &gt; "Tony Sperling" &lt;&gt; wrote in message &gt; news:...



    &gt;&gt; Well, that may be one instance where I had expected the differences to &gt;&gt; start showing, as the branching of the technologies separates and comes &gt;&gt; together. If it is noticeable, and significant allready- then, yes it &gt;&gt; would be a bit surprising. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Virtualisation though. Is it true, in your mind, that the processor will &gt;&gt; be likely to do these things I mentioned on it's own, or will it still be &gt;&gt; relying on installed support of some sort from the likes of VMWare? &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; I am aware that it is early days yet, and much of the questions and the &gt;&gt; implications they subject to us isn't really known at the moment, but &gt;&gt; isn't it true that if you move from the flatlands to the mountains and &gt;&gt; take your 'duce-and-a-quarter' with you, you generally do not have to &gt;&gt; think about changing the gear-ratio? &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Tony. . . &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; "Colin Barnhorst" &lt;colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com&gt; wrote in message &gt;&gt; news:...



    &gt;&gt;&gt; One of the oddities of Vista Beta 2 for me is that x86 runs much slower &gt;&gt;&gt; on my dual core AMD (4400+) than does the x64 edition. Go figure! &gt;&gt;&gt;



    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;



    &gt;
    Rick, Jun 3, 2006
    #7
  8. Oh well, at least they are working on it. Which version of FC5 are you using
    x86 or x64? How is it in comparison to FC4?
    --
    --
    Andre
    Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

    "Rick" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    You're right about Xen being a bit rough around the edges. I loaded Fedora
    5 with Xen integrated into it and I discovered Xen is currently only capable
    of installing Linux OS - no Windows. They claim on their web site they are
    working on making it Windows capable, but that's a future capability
    project.

    Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
    You can try Linux + XEN in the mean time although I am hearing reports its
    very rough around edges.



    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > There are solutions today that do virtualization below the level of the OS
    > (VMWare ESX), but they have their issues still. The Hypervisor technology
    > that is the next version of Virtual Server is what I'm waiting for to go
    > that way. But that's "Longhorn Server + 180 days", so still a ways away.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:...


    >> Well, that may be one instance where I had expected the differences to
    >> start showing, as the branching of the technologies separates and comes
    >> together. If it is noticeable, and significant allready- then, yes it
    >> would be a bit surprising.
    >>
    >> Virtualisation though. Is it true, in your mind, that the processor will
    >> be likely to do these things I mentioned on it's own, or will it still be
    >> relying on installed support of some sort from the likes of VMWare?
    >>
    >> I am aware that it is early days yet, and much of the questions and the
    >> implications they subject to us isn't really known at the moment, but
    >> isn't it true that if you move from the flatlands to the mountains and
    >> take your 'duce-and-a-quarter' with you, you generally do not have to
    >> think about changing the gear-ratio?
    >>
    >>
    >> Tony. . .
    >>
    >> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    >> news:...


    >>> One of the oddities of Vista Beta 2 for me is that x86 runs much slower
    >>> on my dual core AMD (4400+) than does the x64 edition. Go figure!
    >>>


    >>
    >>


    >
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], Jun 3, 2006
    #8
  9. Tony Sperling

    Rick Guest

    I went with the x86 version because of some of the same problems as with
    Win x64 - lack of support. The is no Java 64-bit browser support for one.

    FC5 installed on my Athlon 64 system much easier that my experience with
    FC4. Mostly FC5 is more refinement of the OS. The update feature is
    pretty comprehensive and updates just about everything you have
    installed. Two items I was interested in were the Open Office update
    and the KDE update. Redhat had them available very shortly after they
    were announced.

    Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
    > Oh well, at least they are working on it. Which version of FC5 are you using
    > x86 or x64? How is it in comparison to FC4?

    --
    --
    Andre
    Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

    "Rick" <> wrote:
    You're right about Xen being a bit rough around the edges. I loaded
    Fedora 5 with Xen integrated into it and I discovered Xen is currently
    only capable of installing Linux OS - no Windows. They claim on their
    web site they are working on making it Windows capable, but that's a
    future capability project. Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote: You can
    try Linux + XEN in the mean time although I am hearing reports its very
    rough around edges.
    Rick, Jun 3, 2006
    #9
  10. Of the whole host of distros that I've looked at in the past year, only
    Gentoo and Suse stand out in my opinion. I am running out of machines, so
    haven't tried Debian for some time. The new Suse 10.1 x64 is quite amazing,
    it sits in the notebook, the installation is extremely slow but I love it
    now it's inside.

    And you have to give them credit for going throught the trouble of
    publishing the complete documentation in a very nice PDF document.

    (The Ubuntu family looks promising too.)


    Tony. . .



    "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Oh well, at least they are working on it. Which version of FC5 are you
    > using x86 or x64? How is it in comparison to FC4?
    > --
    > --
    > Andre
    > Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    > Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    > Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    > http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    >
    > "Rick" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    > You're right about Xen being a bit rough around the edges. I loaded
    > Fedora 5 with Xen integrated into it and I discovered Xen is currently
    > only capable of installing Linux OS - no Windows. They claim on their web
    > site they are working on making it Windows capable, but that's a future
    > capability project.
    >
    > Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
    > You can try Linux + XEN in the mean time although I am hearing reports its
    > very rough around edges.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >> There are solutions today that do virtualization below the level of the
    >> OS
    >> (VMWare ESX), but they have their issues still. The Hypervisor technology
    >> that is the next version of Virtual Server is what I'm waiting for to go
    >> that way. But that's "Longhorn Server + 180 days", so still a ways away.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >>
    >>
    >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...

    >
    >>> Well, that may be one instance where I had expected the differences to
    >>> start showing, as the branching of the technologies separates and comes
    >>> together. If it is noticeable, and significant allready- then, yes it
    >>> would be a bit surprising.
    >>>
    >>> Virtualisation though. Is it true, in your mind, that the processor will
    >>> be likely to do these things I mentioned on it's own, or will it still
    >>> be
    >>> relying on installed support of some sort from the likes of VMWare?
    >>>
    >>> I am aware that it is early days yet, and much of the questions and the
    >>> implications they subject to us isn't really known at the moment, but
    >>> isn't it true that if you move from the flatlands to the mountains and
    >>> take your 'duce-and-a-quarter' with you, you generally do not have to
    >>> think about changing the gear-ratio?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Tony. . .
    >>>
    >>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    >>> news:...

    >
    >>>> One of the oddities of Vista Beta 2 for me is that x86 runs much slower
    >>>> on my dual core AMD (4400+) than does the x64 edition. Go figure!
    >>>>

    >
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >>

    >
    >
    >
    Tony Sperling, Jun 3, 2006
    #10
  11. Ah, well - I think I'll leave the black art to the magicians, for now. But
    if I find I'm in need of a head-ache one day, who knows?


    Tony. . .


    "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <> wrote in message
    news:%23%...
    > You can try Linux + XEN in the mean time although I am hearing reports its
    > very rough around edges.
    > --
    > --
    > Andre
    > Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    > Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    > Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    > http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> There are solutions today that do virtualization below the level of the
    >> OS (VMWare ESX), but they have their issues still. The Hypervisor
    >> technology that is the next version of Virtual Server is what I'm waiting
    >> for to go that way. But that's "Longhorn Server + 180 days", so still a
    >> ways away.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >>
    >>
    >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Well, that may be one instance where I had expected the differences to
    >>> start showing, as the branching of the technologies separates and comes
    >>> together. If it is noticeable, and significant allready- then, yes it
    >>> would be a bit surprising.
    >>>
    >>> Virtualisation though. Is it true, in your mind, that the processor will
    >>> be likely to do these things I mentioned on it's own, or will it still
    >>> be relying on installed support of some sort from the likes of VMWare?
    >>>
    >>> I am aware that it is early days yet, and much of the questions and the
    >>> implications they subject to us isn't really known at the moment, but
    >>> isn't it true that if you move from the flatlands to the mountains and
    >>> take your 'duce-and-a-quarter' with you, you generally do not have to
    >>> think about changing the gear-ratio?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Tony. . .
    >>>
    >>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> One of the oddities of Vista Beta 2 for me is that x86 runs much slower
    >>>> on my dual core AMD (4400+) than does the x64 edition. Go figure!
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>

    >
    >
    Tony Sperling, Jun 3, 2006
    #11
  12. I have been interested in trying out a distro myself, but I have been so
    overwhelmed with hundreds that exist, I just don't know which to choose
    from. I have been hearing really good things about Ubuntu here too, I think
    I might try it, although I love the look of Suse Linux 10.1 although I heard
    reports it is slow and a lot devices are not working properly with it. I
    might wait until 10.2 is released, because I just love what Novell and Suse
    have done with the UI especially for Gnome.
    --
    Andre
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > Of the whole host of distros that I've looked at in the past year, only
    > Gentoo and Suse stand out in my opinion. I am running out of machines, so
    > haven't tried Debian for some time. The new Suse 10.1 x64 is quite
    > amazing, it sits in the notebook, the installation is extremely slow but I
    > love it now it's inside.
    >
    > And you have to give them credit for going throught the trouble of
    > publishing the complete documentation in a very nice PDF document.
    >
    > (The Ubuntu family looks promising too.)
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    >
    > "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Oh well, at least they are working on it. Which version of FC5 are you
    >> using x86 or x64? How is it in comparison to FC4?
    >> --
    >> --
    >> Andre
    >> Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    >> Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    >> Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    >> http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    >>
    >> "Rick" <> wrote in message
    >> news:%...
    >> You're right about Xen being a bit rough around the edges. I loaded
    >> Fedora 5 with Xen integrated into it and I discovered Xen is currently
    >> only capable of installing Linux OS - no Windows. They claim on their
    >> web site they are working on making it Windows capable, but that's a
    >> future capability project.
    >>
    >> Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
    >> You can try Linux + XEN in the mean time although I am hearing reports
    >> its
    >> very rough around edges.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>
    >>> There are solutions today that do virtualization below the level of the
    >>> OS
    >>> (VMWare ESX), but they have their issues still. The Hypervisor
    >>> technology
    >>> that is the next version of Virtual Server is what I'm waiting for to go
    >>> that way. But that's "Longhorn Server + 180 days", so still a ways away.
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> Charlie.
    >>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...

    >>
    >>>> Well, that may be one instance where I had expected the differences to
    >>>> start showing, as the branching of the technologies separates and
    >>>> comes
    >>>> together. If it is noticeable, and significant allready- then, yes it
    >>>> would be a bit surprising.
    >>>>
    >>>> Virtualisation though. Is it true, in your mind, that the processor
    >>>> will
    >>>> be likely to do these things I mentioned on it's own, or will it still
    >>>> be
    >>>> relying on installed support of some sort from the likes of VMWare?
    >>>>
    >>>> I am aware that it is early days yet, and much of the questions and the
    >>>> implications they subject to us isn't really known at the moment, but
    >>>> isn't it true that if you move from the flatlands to the mountains and
    >>>> take your 'duce-and-a-quarter' with you, you generally do not have to
    >>>> think about changing the gear-ratio?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Tony. . .
    >>>>
    >>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...

    >>
    >>>>> One of the oddities of Vista Beta 2 for me is that x86 runs much
    >>>>> slower
    >>>>> on my dual core AMD (4400+) than does the x64 edition. Go figure!
    >>>>>

    >>
    >>>>
    >>>>

    >>
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], Jun 4, 2006
    #12
  13. Yes, I do agree - the only thing I couldn't get support to out of the box
    was the wireless card (I am fiddling with ndiswrapper) the x86 version I was
    trying out on another machine completely refused to configure my monitor to
    anything sensible so, I might dump that one for a Debian?

    I wouldn't say that Suse is slow, though. The installer is maddeningly slow,
    but the system is extremely fast with everything natively compiled for the
    platform, except a few fonts and helpfiles that I could see.

    It runs the 'xscreensaver' GL modules unaccelerated almost effortlessly, I
    used it for two days before realising the nVidia driver was not installed,
    but that is so easily corrected.

    And you are right about how Novells fingerprint is all over the place, the
    fonts alone you can sit and drool over how nice and inviting it all looks.
    If they are serious and hang on in there they will rival most anything
    Windows is, within 18 months or so.


    Tony. . .


    "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    >I have been interested in trying out a distro myself, but I have been so
    >overwhelmed with hundreds that exist, I just don't know which to choose
    >from. I have been hearing really good things about Ubuntu here too, I think
    >I might try it, although I love the look of Suse Linux 10.1 although I
    >heard reports it is slow and a lot devices are not working properly with
    >it. I might wait until 10.2 is released, because I just love what Novell
    >and Suse have done with the UI especially for Gnome.
    > --
    > Andre
    > Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    > Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    > http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >> Of the whole host of distros that I've looked at in the past year, only
    >> Gentoo and Suse stand out in my opinion. I am running out of machines, so
    >> haven't tried Debian for some time. The new Suse 10.1 x64 is quite
    >> amazing, it sits in the notebook, the installation is extremely slow but
    >> I love it now it's inside.
    >>
    >> And you have to give them credit for going throught the trouble of
    >> publishing the complete documentation in a very nice PDF document.
    >>
    >> (The Ubuntu family looks promising too.)
    >>
    >>
    >> Tony. . .
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Oh well, at least they are working on it. Which version of FC5 are you
    >>> using x86 or x64? How is it in comparison to FC4?
    >>> --
    >>> --
    >>> Andre
    >>> Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    >>> Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    >>> Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    >>> http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    >>>
    >>> "Rick" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:%...
    >>> You're right about Xen being a bit rough around the edges. I loaded
    >>> Fedora 5 with Xen integrated into it and I discovered Xen is currently
    >>> only capable of installing Linux OS - no Windows. They claim on their
    >>> web site they are working on making it Windows capable, but that's a
    >>> future capability project.
    >>>
    >>> Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
    >>> You can try Linux + XEN in the mean time although I am hearing reports
    >>> its
    >>> very rough around edges.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>> message
    >>> news:...
    >>>
    >>>> There are solutions today that do virtualization below the level of the
    >>>> OS
    >>>> (VMWare ESX), but they have their issues still. The Hypervisor
    >>>> technology
    >>>> that is the next version of Virtual Server is what I'm waiting for to
    >>>> go
    >>>> that way. But that's "Longhorn Server + 180 days", so still a ways
    >>>> away.
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Charlie.
    >>>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>
    >>>>> Well, that may be one instance where I had expected the differences
    >>>>> to
    >>>>> start showing, as the branching of the technologies separates and
    >>>>> comes
    >>>>> together. If it is noticeable, and significant allready- then, yes it
    >>>>> would be a bit surprising.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Virtualisation though. Is it true, in your mind, that the processor
    >>>>> will
    >>>>> be likely to do these things I mentioned on it's own, or will it still
    >>>>> be
    >>>>> relying on installed support of some sort from the likes of VMWare?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I am aware that it is early days yet, and much of the questions and
    >>>>> the
    >>>>> implications they subject to us isn't really known at the moment, but
    >>>>> isn't it true that if you move from the flatlands to the mountains and
    >>>>> take your 'duce-and-a-quarter' with you, you generally do not have to
    >>>>> think about changing the gear-ratio?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Tony. . .
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>
    >>>>>> One of the oddities of Vista Beta 2 for me is that x86 runs much
    >>>>>> slower
    >>>>>> on my dual core AMD (4400+) than does the x64 edition. Go figure!
    >>>>>>
    >>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    Tony Sperling, Jun 4, 2006
    #13
  14. I have given this some thought, do you believe, though, that this design
    flaw, from a technical aspect, could be ironed out with a BIOS update,
    supposing, of course, that there is a will to update it?

    Is it very few boards that are affected? Or, are boards from all producers
    in the danger-zone?

    It is not really that I want all that memory myself, but I have lost any
    illusions of building that monster machine with all the Hardware I want, and
    that I can afford, and that will last me the full length of four years. It
    is not gonna happen, not by design anyway, so in order to be able to
    continue being on the sharp and bleeding edge, I will have to build
    something that I can sell off after a while - and I cannot possibly foresee
    what that next owner would want for that machine and I would be stupid not
    to try and avoid anything with foreseable design flaws.

    Yes, I agree. Tom's Hardware conglomerate of sites and newsletters is an
    excellent resource, and Anand too, someone posted a link over on our Vista
    neighbor, 40 pages of hands-on reporting about the latest Vista build - good
    material.

    No, I didn't really expect a run down of everything that would be having
    some kind of problem, I can remember this memory issue having popped up on
    two occasions, I was simply wondering if you since had decided that this
    was a fairly isolated issue, or possibly some kind of hidden problem that
    could affect many more boards out there that wasn't detected for the simple
    reason that not many had tried installing more than two GB.

    I plan to put together a system with the nForce 590 chipset, I understand
    that it is largly compatible with nForce 4, so should be stable. I don't
    care if it is Asus, or MSI but I might prefer an Asrock since I have
    excellent experience with one of those, but most of all I want a board with
    a full feature BIOS. This is the only point of critic against the Asrock,
    the BIOS is intolerably rudimentary.

    I would love a SCSI RAID but may have to forgo that at least in the
    beginning, and unless I wait till after summer, I wouldn't mind going for
    2GB of CL 4 667 RAM. That should be available right now at this moment. And
    I would want to go for a 4400+, as this is the only choice of 2MB cache in
    the economy class.
    Put that in your Antec box with a top notch PSU and cooler, two 256MB
    Graphic cards, and I figure I should be rolling, and if I wasn't completely
    satisfied, I should be able to sell off an excellent machine and build a new
    one from second generation components and a lot more experience. And who
    knows the Intels that'll hit us in the fall may turn out to be an excellent
    choice, then?

    Sounds crazy?


    Tony. . .



    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Well, none of us here have the kinds of test setups (or access to
    > unlimited hardware budgets) to really test all the possibilities. I used
    > to use TomsHardware site, but now focus more on AnandTech for those sorts
    > of reviews.
    >
    > That being said, very few of us really utilize 2 cores fully for any
    > length of time. And those that do are far more likely to be running one of
    > those Tyan multisocket mobos that have even more than 2 cores. ;) You know
    > the ones I'm lusting after...
    >
    > The fact is that from an OS perspective, the hardware got ahead of the
    > software, IMHO. Well, Vista looks to be doing its level best to change
    > that. :) Hardware bought a year or so ago is going to be up against it in
    > many cases running Vista. Oh, if you bought on the leading edge of
    > hardware then (and that's a good bet on this newsgroup, given it's all
    > about 64bit) then you're likely to be fine. But I'm finding that I need
    > more GPU power than I've ever imagined to get the level of performance I
    > want and expect in Vista. My dual core 3800+ with 3 GB is fine, but the
    > GPU was an ATI 9600 with 256 Mb of memory and it's struggling. So I went
    > out and bought an x1600 a few days ago, and I expect (once they get me a
    > driver that actually works) that will be sufficient. It's still in the
    > reasonable price range, a key factor. I'm NOT going to spend mega-dollars
    > on a system right now.
    >
    > Meanwhile, the Ferrari is OK, but it doesn't "snap" in Vista. Now one of
    > those new 5000's that Barb already has lined up? They should be fine.
    >
    > So, what to buy now? Personally, if you're running OK as is, I'd hold off
    > a bit. There are new cores coming from Intel, and AM2 from AMD will get
    > better as they progress, plus there's the new Opteron coming. GPUs will
    > move ahead quickly as well.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >
    >
    Tony Sperling, Jun 4, 2006
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Word Worrier
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,871
    Word Worrier
    Aug 9, 2004
  2. Dragon

    Two And a Half Men DVD Releases

    Dragon, May 2, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,182
    Dragon
    May 2, 2005
  3. Frosty

    Two and a half questions, unrelated

    Frosty, Jul 27, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    524
    Frosty
    Jul 28, 2006
  4. Frosty

    Two and a half questions, unrelated

    Frosty, Jul 27, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    364
    Frosty
    Jul 27, 2006
  5. Ian

    Half-Life 2: Episode Two

    Ian, Oct 12, 2007, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    696
Loading...

Share This Page