Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:36:48
Message-Id: 5bdc1c8b0803141636q3142e580oe9daba625bbfac7c@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo by Filipe Sousa
1 On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 3:45 PM, Filipe Sousa <natros@×××××.com> wrote:
2 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
3 > Hash: SHA1
4 >
5 > Mark Knecht wrote:
6 >
7 > | On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Dan Farrell <dan@×××××××××.cx> wrote:
8 > |
9 > | It's an interesting question and one I've not tried to test. Does an
10 > | AMD64 machine running a 32-bit or 64-bit install run faster or slower
11 >
12 > | with one or the other. For all of my everyday work - Gnome, Firefox,
13 > | web browsing, email, MythTV, etc., it's been my assumption that there
14 > | wouldn't be any noticeble difference. I run 64-bit but assume I'd run
15 >
16 > | at more or less the same speed if I ran 32-bit. I may be wrong. Anyone
17 > | have any measured data? Same machine, two installs?
18 >
19 > I have a few numbers from genlop -t
20 >
21 <SNIP>
22 >
23 > These times are from the same machine:
24 > abit ip35 pro, c2quad q6600 (2.4ghz), 4gb ram, (320+320) sataII raid0 (155-MB/s)
25 >
26 > - --
27 > Filipe Sousa
28
29 Nice numbers and nice machine. Must have set you back a bit. ;-)
30
31 It seems when I match up exact revisions you're getting something
32 between a 10-15% speed increase. Quite nice.
33
34 Do we know that the amount code compiled is identical? I imagine
35 everything you show is correct since the speed increase is pretty
36 consistent from app to app.
37
38 Great stuff. Thanks.
39
40 Cheers,
41 Mark
42 --
43 gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo Filipe Sousa <natros@×××××.com>