![]() |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
I have to take issue with some of your article (good though it was):
Linux was 64-bit enabled before the Hammer processors (Athlon 64 and Opteron) were ever released. Itanium died a death because of Intel messing up the design, not because of Microsoft. Having an expensive 64-bit processor producing results slower than a less expensive 32-bit processor is bad. Pity Intel didn't think that. Other than that, I thought the article was good. I would have included load times and system responsiveness times (if available) rather than the standard benchies. Andy
__________________
1.1GHz T-Bird, ASUS A7N8X, 1GB Crucial PC3200, 30GB and 60GB HDD, ASUS V9560TD GFX 5600 graphics. Win XP SP1. Not yet oveclocked, needs to run stably first... |
|
|||
|
I enjoyed the article immensly. And it did give me a lot to think about before upgrading (if i ever do) to vista. Since i am already Duo cpu running it helped determine if i will be running 32bit or the 64 bit version with the addition of at least 2 more gigs of ram (running 2 gigs now).
__________________
lost most control of my fingers so pleaqe bear with me. - Ron Shaw I Am a Criminal created by the US Government A Medical Cannabis Advocate, User & Engineer. I Designed your Space Shuttles, Cars & Software. |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|