On 2006/10/13 02:24, Jeffrey Lim wrote:
> On 10/8/06, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On 2006/10/07 19:29, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> >> I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
> >> of course: Intel and AMD.
> >
> >There are more options than just those. mac
On 10/8/06, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2006/10/07 19:29, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
> of course: Intel and AMD.
There are more options than just those. macppc and sparc64 are amongst
the faster arch's too
is
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Cabillot Julien wrote:
> It's no very expensive, the "electric consumption" (I don't know if this
> expression is ok), the size, ...
>
> On 10/12/06, Mark Bucciarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
SNIP
> > What advantages do you see from building a DNS server using
> > armish?
>
On 2006/10/12 15:42, Cabillot Julien wrote:
> It's no very expensive, the "electric consumption" (I don't know if this
> expression is ok), the size, ...
... socketed RAM, serial console :-)
On Oct 12, 2006, at 9:42 AM, Cabillot Julien wrote:
It's no very expensive, the "electric consumption" (I don't know if
this
expression is ok), the size, ...
On 10/12/06, Mark Bucciarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:31:39AM -0600, Diana Eichert wrote:
On Sun, 8 Oc
Hi Julien,
> It's no very expensive, the "electric consumption" (I don't know if this
> expression is ok), the size, ...
This also holds true for Via Epia Mini-ITX boards, btw. Plus, most fit in
an 1U 19" enclosure or any standard (micro) ATX case.
That said, I know nothing of armish.
Buhbye...
It's no very expensive, the "electric consumption" (I don't know if this
expression is ok), the size, ...
On 10/12/06, Mark Bucciarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:31:39AM -0600, Diana Eichert wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> >
> > > I meant more C
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:31:39AM -0600, Diana Eichert wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Gustavo Rios wrote:
>
> > I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant
> > amount of money! That's it.
>
> Hmmm, before I answer that question I'd like to know what are
> the intended uses? For examp
I would use them for a X server. It will serve about 128 X clients.
On 10/8/06, Diana Eichert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant amount of money!
> That's it.
Hmmm, before I answer that question I'd like
On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant amount of money!
> That's it.
Hmmm, before I answer that question I'd like to know what are the intended
uses? For example, for a DNS server I would seriously consider some of
the platforms recently
On 08/10/06, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2006/10/07 18:08, Brian wrote:
> > There are more options than just those. macppc and sparc64 are amongst
> > the faster arch's too (and if you don't need out-and-out speed there are
> > more to choose from). Motherboard chipsets also ma
On 2006/10/07 18:08, Brian wrote:
> > There are more options than just those. macppc and sparc64 are amongst
> > the faster arch's too (and if you don't need out-and-out speed there are
> > more to choose from). Motherboard chipsets also make a *HUGE* difference,
> > of course.
>
> I am looking at
Gustavo Rios wrote:
I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant amount of money!
That's it.
Then go for AMD, they have more instructions then Intel that now try to
catch up to them!
So, call it more instructions machine per dollar if you like that!
I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant amount of money!
That's it.
On 10/7/06, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2006/10/07 19:29, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
> of course: Intel and AMD.
There are mor
On 2006/10/07 19:29, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
> of course: Intel and AMD.
There are more options than just those. macppc and sparc64 are amongst
the faster arch's too (and if you don't need out-and-out speed there are
more to choo
Gustavo Rios wrote:
I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
of course: Intel and AMD. For the 64 bit version, which delivers the
best relation price/benefits?
Thanks in advance.
Why even asked these days!
Until Intel come clean, use AMD.
I don't understand why
I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
of course: Intel and AMD. For the 64 bit version, which delivers the
best relation price/benefits?
Thanks in advance.
17 matches
Mail list logo
