PDA

View Full Version : Linux for AMD64


Don McCarter
May 5th 04, 05:06 PM
Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
that works with the AMD64 CPU?

Thanks, Don

General Schvantzkoph
May 5th 04, 06:14 PM
On Wed, 05 May 2004 11:06:02 -0500, Don McCarter wrote:

> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?
>
> Thanks, Don

Both SUSE and Mandrake have 64 bit versions. The 64 bit version of
Mandrake 10 is in beta, 9.2 is out.

Povl H. Pedersen
May 5th 04, 06:19 PM
In article >, Don McCarter wrote:
> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?


SUSE has and AMD64, and Mandrake 10 is in public beta / release candidate
state.

--
Povl H. Pedersen - (yes - it works)
Get 5% discount on VMWare use discount/referral code: MRC-POVPED260

Barry Walsh
May 5th 04, 06:41 PM
Don McCarter wrote:
> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?
>
> Thanks, Don
>
>
There's also Fedora and Gentoo. Mandrake 64bit Official is out of beta,
but only available to buy at the moment, no downloads yet.

goblin
May 5th 04, 06:50 PM
"Don McCarter" > wrote in
:

> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?
>
> Thanks, Don
>
>

Mandrake 10 x86_64 RC1 works great for me on an A64 3200+ GA-K8TV800. I
haven't tried other distros but I did have plenty of problems with the
Beta-1 of Mandrake 10 x86_64. RC1 is much better, almost no problems.

The only major problem I have with it is it can't read the NTFS
formatted Raid-0 SATA drives. It's not the raid-0 nor the SATA that it
chokes on, but the combination of it being ntfs and bios raid (as
opposed to simple OS striping). I have installed mdk64 (bootable) on the
SATA raid-0 themselves in the past so I'm certain the problem involves
NTFS here. Linux sees it as 2 empty drives instead of one NTFS formatted
drive. My config is:

ide0 = XP Pro 64 [80GB] NTFS
ide1 = XP Pro 32 [80GB] NTFS
ide2 = Mandrake 64 [120GB] ext3
sata0+1 = 240GB [2-120GB with raid-0) NTFS



Linux can be tricky to setup if you have both IDE and SATA hard drives,
and several operating systems. I don't suggest booting any OS from SATA
when you're running both IDE and SATA. It can be done but I've found
errors on the sata drives under that configuration so I'd stay away
booting SATA if you also have IDE running.


One thing I've noticed about mdk64: If you change the amount of ram in
your box after mdk is installed, it won't run correctly anymore. That
problem doesn't occur with XP64.

K
May 5th 04, 11:01 PM
On Wed, 05 May 2004 11:06:02 -0500, Don McCarter wrote:

> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?
>

Lots of happy customers in the Gentoo forums. The downside of Gentoo is
the compile times but with any AMD64 CPU it will fly.

K

_
May 6th 04, 01:03 AM
On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:50:05 -0500, goblin > wrote:


>...
>Linux can be tricky to setup if you have both IDE and SATA hard drives,
>and several operating systems. I don't suggest booting any OS from SATA
>when you're running both IDE and SATA. It can be done but I've found
>errors on the sata drives under that configuration so I'd stay away
>booting SATA if you also have IDE running.
>...


From what I've heard, you'd be better off staying away from SATA
entirely. Another Intel technological disaster.

Andy Yee
May 6th 04, 05:48 PM
Hmmm...can you cite sources please?

Personally though, I'd wait and ensure that SATA is implemented directly
on a chipset, and NOT going through the PCI bus.

_ wrote in :
>
> From what I've heard, you'd be better off staying away from SATA
> entirely. Another Intel technological disaster.
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Yee E-Mail: ayee AT mn dot rr dot com
President Home Page: http://home.mn.rr.com/andyyee
New Directions Engineering, Inc.

Godwin's Law: As a USENET thread grows, the probability of a reference
to Hitler or Nazis approaches 1.00.
Corollary: When such a reference is made, it is generally
recognized that the poster has LOST the argument.

K
May 6th 04, 09:51 PM
On Thu, 06 May 2004 16:48:58 +0000, Andy Yee wrote:

> Hmmm...can you cite sources please?
>
> Personally though, I'd wait and ensure that SATA is implemented directly
> on a chipset, and NOT going through the PCI bus.
>

It's just arrived, the Nforce 3 250 has integrated SATA.

I don't find PCI SATA that much of a problem anyway, my NF2 box has no PCI
cards installed and you'd find it hard to transfer 133MB/s.

K

_
May 6th 04, 10:55 PM
Various current threads over in blahblahblah.storage newsgroup. Yes
many issues hotly debated, but one thing remains the same: never be a
first adapter.


On Thu, 06 May 2004 16:48:58 GMT, Andy Yee > wrote:

>Hmmm...can you cite sources please?
>
>Personally though, I'd wait and ensure that SATA is implemented directly
>on a chipset, and NOT going through the PCI bus.
>
>_ wrote in :
>>
>> From what I've heard, you'd be better off staying away from SATA
>> entirely. Another Intel technological disaster.
>>

Povl H. Pedersen
May 6th 04, 11:34 PM
In article >, K wrote:
> On Thu, 06 May 2004 16:48:58 +0000, Andy Yee wrote:
>
>> Hmmm...can you cite sources please?
>>
>> Personally though, I'd wait and ensure that SATA is implemented directly
>> on a chipset, and NOT going through the PCI bus.
>>
>
> It's just arrived, the Nforce 3 250 has integrated SATA.
>
> I don't find PCI SATA that much of a problem anyway, my NF2 box has no PCI
> cards installed and you'd find it hard to transfer 133MB/s.

What ? I am running a 2 disk SATA stripe set, and I am doing
110-115 Mbyte/s sustained transfer. What you are saying is, that
if I add a plain UDMA 133 disk, then my speed will max out
at 133MByte/s ?

Oh well - ATA has always sucked big time.

--
Povl H. Pedersen - (yes - it works)
Get 5% discount on VMWare use discount/referral code: MRC-POVPED260

Don McCarter
May 7th 04, 12:06 AM
Thanks for the info.
I installed Mandrake 10 AMD64 RC1 today.
For some reason the 2.6 kernel lunix doesn't like
my machine. The advanced options in Mandrake 10
allowed me to use kernel 2.4..

"goblin" > wrote in message
30...
> "Don McCarter" > wrote in
> :
>
> > Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> > that works with the AMD64 CPU?
> >
> > Thanks, Don
> >
> >
>
> Mandrake 10 x86_64 RC1 works great for me on an A64 3200+ GA-K8TV800. I
> haven't tried other distros but I did have plenty of problems with the
> Beta-1 of Mandrake 10 x86_64. RC1 is much better, almost no problems.
>
> The only major problem I have with it is it can't read the NTFS
> formatted Raid-0 SATA drives. It's not the raid-0 nor the SATA that it
> chokes on, but the combination of it being ntfs and bios raid (as
> opposed to simple OS striping). I have installed mdk64 (bootable) on the
> SATA raid-0 themselves in the past so I'm certain the problem involves
> NTFS here. Linux sees it as 2 empty drives instead of one NTFS formatted
> drive. My config is:
>
> ide0 = XP Pro 64 [80GB] NTFS
> ide1 = XP Pro 32 [80GB] NTFS
> ide2 = Mandrake 64 [120GB] ext3
> sata0+1 = 240GB [2-120GB with raid-0) NTFS
>
>
>
> Linux can be tricky to setup if you have both IDE and SATA hard drives,
> and several operating systems. I don't suggest booting any OS from SATA
> when you're running both IDE and SATA. It can be done but I've found
> errors on the sata drives under that configuration so I'd stay away
> booting SATA if you also have IDE running.
>
>
> One thing I've noticed about mdk64: If you change the amount of ram in
> your box after mdk is installed, it won't run correctly anymore. That
> problem doesn't occur with XP64.
>

Olivier Brisson
May 7th 04, 12:18 AM
Don McCarter > schrieb:
> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?
>
> Thanks, Don
>
>

Hello Don,

There is not only Linux, but a lot of other free Unix out there:
FreeBSD: http://www.freebsd.org
NetBSD : http://www.netbsd.org
OpenBSD: http://www.openbsd.org

Cheers,

Olivier
--

Don McCarter
May 7th 04, 12:36 AM
Thanks for the reply,
I have tried several Linux distro's, many of them
don't work well with my ATI 9600 Pro video card.
So I was trying to find a 64bit version for the AMD64
CPU that likes my MB & Video card, grin.
So far the Mandrake 10 AMD64 RC1 works best.
There appear to be several distro's available for the AMD64
if one buys them. I like the try before you buy approach.
I now have the option of booting to WinXP pro, WinXP64
or Mandrake 10.
Some of the Linux versions are complicated and
I don't have the knowledge to install them.




"Olivier Brisson" > wrote in message
...
> Don McCarter > schrieb:
> > Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> > that works with the AMD64 CPU?
> >
> > Thanks, Don
> >
> >
>
> Hello Don,
>
> There is not only Linux, but a lot of other free Unix out there:
> FreeBSD: http://www.freebsd.org
> NetBSD : http://www.netbsd.org
> OpenBSD: http://www.openbsd.org
>
> Cheers,
>
> Olivier
> --

K
May 7th 04, 02:08 AM
On Thu, 06 May 2004 22:34:06 +0000, Povl H. Pedersen wrote:
>
> What ? I am running a 2 disk SATA stripe set, and I am doing
> 110-115 Mbyte/s sustained transfer. What you are saying is, that
> if I add a plain UDMA 133 disk, then my speed will max out
> at 133MByte/s ?
>
> Oh well - ATA has always sucked big time.

I don't quite understand you. Most PATA controllers are integrated into
the southbridge on your motherboard and have nothing to do with PCI. It
would make no difference to your SATA throughput if you added another
regular PATA drive.

your SATA setup already takes up 115MB/s from the maximum of 133MB/s the
PCI bus can carry. Add some extra cards such as Gb ethernet, PCI video etc
and you could well end up saturating the PCI bus.


K

Ian Hastie
May 7th 04, 09:53 PM
On Fri, 07 May 2004 01:08:19 +0000, K wrote:

> I don't quite understand you. Most PATA controllers are integrated into
> the southbridge on your motherboard and have nothing to do with PCI.

I can't be entirely sure, but I think you'll find the integrated
controller is on the PCI bus. It may not be a physically seperate piece
of hardware, but that doesn't mean much. It would be fairly easy to put
it on the PCI bus internally to the chip. It may not be proof, but why
do you think they show up on lcpsi? For example...

0000:00:0f.0 RAID bus controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VIA VT6420 SATA
RAID Controller (rev 80)
0000:00:0f.1 IDE interface: VIA Technologies, Inc.
VT82C586A/B/VT82C686/A/B/VT823x/A/C PIPC Bus Master IDE
(rev 06)

Note also the south bridge integrated SATA controller.

> It
> would make no difference to your SATA throughput if you added another
> regular PATA drive.
>
> your SATA setup already takes up 115MB/s from the maximum of 133MB/s the
> PCI bus can carry. Add some extra cards such as Gb ethernet, PCI video etc
> and you could well end up saturating the PCI bus.

Wouldn't it be nice to have all those extra components on a native hyper
transport bus?! Especially with VIA K8T800 Pro taking that to 1GHz.

--
Ian.

EOM

Wes Newell
May 7th 04, 10:56 PM
On Fri, 07 May 2004 21:53:26 +0100, Ian Hastie wrote:

> On Fri, 07 May 2004 01:08:19 +0000, K wrote:
>
>> I don't quite understand you. Most PATA controllers are integrated into
>> the southbridge on your motherboard and have nothing to do with PCI.
>
> I can't be entirely sure, but I think you'll find the integrated
> controller is on the PCI bus.

You are correct.

[[email protected] wes]$ lspci
00:00.0 Host bridge: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] SiS 755 Host Bridge (rev 01)
00:01.0 PCI bridge: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] SG86C202
00:02.0 ISA bridge: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] 85C503/5513 (rev 25)
00:02.5 IDE interface: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] 5513 [IDE]
00:02.7 Multimedia audio controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] Sound Controller (rev a0)
00:03.0 USB Controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] USB 1.0 Controller (rev 0f)
00:03.1 USB Controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] USB 1.0 Controller (rev 0f)
00:03.3 USB Controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] USB 2.0 Controller
00:04.0 Ethernet controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] SiS900 10/100 Ethernet (rev 90)
00:18.0 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 NorthBridge
00:18.1 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 NorthBridge
00:18.2 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 NorthBridge
00:18.3 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 NorthBridge
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation NV20 [GeForce3] (rev a3)
[[email protected] wes]$
--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

K
May 8th 04, 01:51 AM
On Fri, 07 May 2004 21:56:13 +0000, Wes Newell wrote:

[i]
>> I can't be entirely sure, but I think you'll find the integrated
>> controller is on the PCI bus.
>
> You are correct.
>
> [[email protected] wes]$ lspci
> 00:00.0 Host bridge: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] SiS 755 Host
> Bridge (rev 01) 00:01.0 PCI bridge: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS]
> SG86C202 00:02.0 ISA bridge: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS]
> 85C503/5513 (rev 25) 00:02.5 IDE interface: Silicon Integrated Systems
> [SiS] 5513 00:02.7 Multimedia audio controller: Silicon Integrated
> Systems [SiS] Sound Controller (rev a0) 00:03.0 USB Controller: Silicon
> Integrated Systems [SiS] USB 1.0 Controller (rev 0f) 00:03.1 USB
> Controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] USB 1.0 Controller (rev 0f)
> 00:03.3 USB Controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] USB 2.0
> Controller 00:04.0 Ethernet controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS]
> SiS900 10/100 Ethernet (rev 90) 00:18.0 Host bridge: Advanced Micro
> Devices [AMD] K8 NorthBridge 00:18.1 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices
> [AMD] K8 NorthBridge 00:18.2 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD]
> K8 NorthBridge 00:18.3 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8
> NorthBridge 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation NV20
> [GeForce3] (rev a3)

None of those devices use the PCI bus, despite them being PCI devices
themselves. In a well designed system the only devices that make use of
the bus should be the ones that physically use the PCI slots.

K

Hellraiser
May 8th 04, 03:23 PM
> > [[email protected] wes]$ lspci
> > 00:00.0 Host bridge: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] SiS 755 Host
> > Bridge (rev 01) 00:01.0 PCI bridge: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS]
> > SG86C202 00:02.0 ISA bridge: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS]
> > 85C503/5513 (rev 25) 00:02.5 IDE interface: Silicon Integrated Systems
> > [SiS] 5513 [IDE] 00:02.7 Multimedia audio controller: Silicon Integrated
> > Systems [SiS] Sound Controller (rev a0) 00:03.0 USB Controller: Silicon
> > Integrated Systems [SiS] USB 1.0 Controller (rev 0f) 00:03.1 USB
> > Controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] USB 1.0 Controller (rev 0f)
> > 00:03.3 USB Controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] USB 2.0
> > Controller 00:04.0 Ethernet controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS]
> > SiS900 10/100 Ethernet (rev 90) 00:18.0 Host bridge: Advanced Micro
> > Devices [AMD] K8 NorthBridge 00:18.1 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices
> > [AMD] K8 NorthBridge 00:18.2 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD]
> > K8 NorthBridge 00:18.3 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8
> > NorthBridge 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation NV20
> > [GeForce3] (rev a3)
>
> None of those devices use the PCI bus, despite them being PCI devices
> themselves. In a well designed system the only devices that make use of
> the bus should be the ones that physically use the PCI slots.

So, do tell, what bus do they use? ISA perhaps? Of course they use the PCI
bus, how do you suppose all those integrated LANs, sound, video, etc
communicate with everything else?

Sheesh.

Hellraiser..........>

Hellraiser
May 8th 04, 04:06 PM
"K" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 08 May 2004 15:23:18 +0100, Hellraiser wrote:
>
> >
> > So, do tell, what bus do they use? ISA perhaps? Of course they use the
PCI
> > bus, how do you suppose all those integrated LANs, sound, video, etc
> > communicate with everything else?
> >
>
> Define 'integrated'. Integrated can mean that that devices are on separate
> chips on the motherboard, or can mean they have all been placed on one
> chip, usually the southbridge.
>
> They don't need to use any bus if they're all integrated on to the
> southbridge. The southbridge then communicates with the northbridge with a
> proprietry interconnect (MuTIOL for SiS chipsets, Hypertransport for VIA,
> V-Link for VIA). However if any of these devices are on their own chip
> such as a SATA chip, then they have to make use of the PCI bus

OK, explain to me how without a PCI lock, I experience hard disk corruption
on an older VIA board which allegedly has its IDE controller as part of the
Southbridge, when I increase the FSB? As this apparently doesn't use the PCI
bus, there is surely no reason for it to do this is there?

Hellraiser..........>

K
May 8th 04, 05:07 PM
On Sat, 08 May 2004 15:23:18 +0100, Hellraiser wrote:

>
> So, do tell, what bus do they use? ISA perhaps? Of course they use the PCI
> bus, how do you suppose all those integrated LANs, sound, video, etc
> communicate with everything else?
>

Define 'integrated'. Integrated can mean that that devices are on separate
chips on the motherboard, or can mean they have all been placed on one
chip, usually the southbridge.

They don't need to use any bus if they're all integrated on to the
southbridge. The southbridge then communicates with the northbridge with a
proprietry interconnect (MuTIOL for SiS chipsets, Hypertransport for VIA,
V-Link for VIA). However if any of these devices are on their own chip
such as a SATA chip, then they have to make use of the PCI bus.

All AGP graphics cards are in fact PCI devices and are treated as such by
the BIOS. But they have their own bus, AGP. However AGP is not a 'bus' by
the true definition, it is a point to point interconnect that can't be
shared with other devices. Same for front side bus, this term is very much
outdated and today really only applies to Intel MP chipsets where two or
more CPUs share the same bandwidth.


> Sheesh.

Indeed

>
> Hellraiser..........>


K

Andy Yee
May 10th 04, 10:51 AM
adapter or adopter? :)

_ wrote in :

>
> Various current threads over in blahblahblah.storage newsgroup. Yes
> many issues hotly debated, but one thing remains the same: never be a
> first adapter.
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Yee E-Mail: ayee AT mn dot rr dot com
President Home Page: http://home.mn.rr.com/andyyee
New Directions Engineering, Inc.

Godwin's Law: As a USENET thread grows, the probability of a reference
to Hitler or Nazis approaches 1.00.
Corollary: When such a reference is made, it is generally
recognized that the poster has LOST the argument.

goblin
May 18th 04, 01:15 PM
_ wrote in :

> On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:50:05 -0500, goblin > wrote:
>
>
>>...
>>Linux can be tricky to setup if you have both IDE and SATA hard drives,
>>and several operating systems. I don't suggest booting any OS from SATA
>>when you're running both IDE and SATA. It can be done but I've found
>>errors on the sata drives under that configuration so I'd stay away
>>booting SATA if you also have IDE running.
>>...
>
>
> From what I've heard, you'd be better off staying away from SATA
> entirely. Another Intel technological disaster.
>
>

It's fast as hell though

Conrad J. Sabatier
June 11th 04, 10:29 PM
In article >,
Don McCarter > wrote:
>Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
>that works with the AMD64 CPU?

Ah, forget Linux; go with FreeBSD. They've been working on amd64 support
for quite a while now, and it's very good at this point. Just make sure
you start with either 5.2.1-RELEASE or 5.2-CURRENT (both of which are
quite stable and useable, and the performance is just spectacular), if you
want the latest, greatest amd64 support.
--
Conrad J. Sabatier > -- "In Unix veritas"

merivale
June 14th 04, 06:44 PM
Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:

> In article >,
> Don McCarter > wrote:
>>Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
>>that works with the AMD64 CPU?
>
> Ah, forget Linux; go with FreeBSD. They've been working on amd64 support
> for quite a while now, and it's very good at this point. Just make sure
> you start with either 5.2.1-RELEASE or 5.2-CURRENT (both of which are
> quite stable and useable, and the performance is just spectacular), if you
> want the latest, greatest amd64 support.

I'm running a Dual 240 AMD64's on a Tyan Tiger with Gentoo Linux. Go no
problems with it.

I'd say give each a try. No harm if you have the time available. If
stability and port are an issue I'd try the SuSE Pro 9.2. It has full 64
support right out of the box.

It really is up to your needs. Do some googling etc... to see what issue
each of the choices has then pick to and give them a whorl.

--
DWW