Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 21:30:05 -0400 From: jason <jason@ec.rr.com> To: stewart@nameless-uk.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: EM64T support Message-ID: <411C199D.4090304@ec.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <411B8E17.5020409@nameless-uk.com> References: <411B8E17.5020409@nameless-uk.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Stewart Morgan wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm putting together a (dual-CPU) web/mail server and I have a > quandary regarding CPUs: I'd like to use the features on the EM64T > Intel Xeons. However, from reading around, there is only support in > the AMD64 arm of FreeBSD-5. > > > Since these are extensions, would I be able to use a pair of Xeons > with EM64T and run FreeBSD-4.10 until such time as FreeBSD-5 becomes > production ready (5.3?), or should I stick with straight Xeon/XeonMP? > > > Thanks, > > > Stewart. > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > It is my understanding nocona p4/xeons copy amd64 leaving out only 3dnow and the nx bit and add 2 obscure instructions to make a emt64 binary incompatible with amd64. If these 2 instructions are not used there are no problems between the 2. Same can be said for 3dnow and the nx bit. Do you know intel is in a rush to get out a new version that supports the nx bit? That would be a big boost for security on any platform. Also I heard about intel using the 36bit pae tech in place of the 40 bit physical addressing amd uses, causing more incompatabliites between the 2. In effect when you compile binaries for amd64 you software may not work on intels stuff. http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=894 http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17181 http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1274604,00.asp http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2004Jun/bch20040714025978.htm Really I would recommend going with the original, not a clone from intel if you want 64bits and lots of other cool and fast features now(I love saying this!). Or wait until intel gets it right. I don't work at amd and am not a spokesperson, but I am a fan boy. Feel free to take what I say with a grain, or a whole shaker of salt, just don't ignore it please. The amd stuff also scales much better than xeon mp too. Have you seen one of the many benchmarks that show amd64 chips whipping up on intel stuff? http://www.anandtech.com/linux/showdoc.aspx?i=2163 http://www.forbes.com/prnewswire/feeds/prnewswire/2004/07/26/prnewswire200407260800PR_NEWS_B_NWT_SF_SFM028.html http://www.tweakers.net/nieuws/26660 notice how a 4x xeon at 1.6 is only ahead of a 2x amd64 at 1.8 by what I would call within margin of error! http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8796_8800,00.html http://mpc.nacs.uci.edu/opteron.html http://www.aceshardware.com/forum?read=95035921 http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2003/07/msg00025.html http://www.overclockers.at/showthread.php?threadid=120480 http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/insidespeccpu/insidespeccpu2000-opteron2.html I hope I was able to help you, but I think I may have left you more confused. :-( I hope I was able to help you to at least give amd a chance. :-) Jason
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?411C199D.4090304>