Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...

2009-05-24 Thread Jan Claeys
Op maandag 18-05-2009 om 20:22 uur [tijdzone -0400], schreef John Moser: > The bigger concern here is why are we bothering with systems like i586 > that will probably have around 64MB of RAM, when you need 192MB just > to install? AMD Geode is i586 AFAIK? Also, in the past I've installed a full G

Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...

2009-05-20 Thread Daniel J Blueman
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 12:00 PM, John McCabe-Dansted wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Daniel J Blueman > wrote: >> I was trying to raise a more general point about the minimum spec >> across the board, including the embedded and old-server hardware. >> >> I challenge anyone to find some

Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...

2009-05-20 Thread John McCabe-Dansted
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Daniel J Blueman wrote: > I was trying to raise a more general point about the minimum spec > across the board, including the embedded and old-server hardware. > > I challenge anyone to find someone using Ubuntu 8.10/9.04 on a > processor which doesn't support the

Re: [Fwd: Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...]

2009-05-19 Thread Christopher Chan
Mackenzie Morgan wrote: > On Tuesday 19 May 2009 9:35:28 pm Christopher Chan wrote: > >> Pentium the Original. Pentium II, III are all based on the Pentium Pro >> (i686) and they have a different architecture than Pentium the Original. >> Pentium II is basically the Pentium Pro + MMX. Pentium

Re: [Fwd: Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...]

2009-05-19 Thread Mackenzie Morgan
On Tuesday 19 May 2009 9:35:28 pm Christopher Chan wrote: > Pentium the Original. Pentium II, III are all based on the Pentium Pro > (i686) and they have a different architecture than Pentium the Original. > Pentium II is basically the Pentium Pro + MMX. Pentium 4 and M use the > Netburst archit

Re: [Fwd: Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...]

2009-05-19 Thread Christopher Chan
Mackenzie Morgan wrote: > I have no idea how Christopher sent his message, but KMail claims > there's nothing to quote O_o > :-D I did not hit reply all and then sent it to sounder by mistake. Then I forwarded that back here. My apologies. > Anyway... > He said, "i586 binaries should be only

Re: [Fwd: Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...]

2009-05-19 Thread Mackenzie Morgan
I have no idea how Christopher sent his message, but KMail claims there's nothing to quote O_o Anyway... He said, "i586 binaries should be only installed on actual Pentium computers." Does that mean Pentium The Original, or does it include Pentium 2, 3, 4 and M? -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ub

[Fwd: Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...]

2009-05-19 Thread Christopher Chan
--- Begin Message --- > I challenge anyone to find someone using Ubuntu 8.10/9.04 on a > processor which doesn't support the full i586 instruction set (eg > i386/i486 or something with incomplete i586 support). > i586 binaries should be only installed on actual Pentium computers. Every other

Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...

2009-05-19 Thread John Moser
Daniel J Blueman wrote: > All older VIA processors, AMD Geode procs and so on support the full > i586 instruction set, which including MMX instructions and registers, > which itself can provide a good win. > Geodes have partial implementation, particularly they only handle a few PREFETCH instr

Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...

2009-05-19 Thread Daniel J Blueman
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 1:21 AM, John Moser wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 7:24 PM, Daniel J Blueman > wrote: [snip] > > Even if we split up Ubuntu in i486 and i686, i686 gets its most major > gains from the CMOV instruction family-- a conditional MOV instruction > that acts as a branch-and-mov

Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...

2009-05-19 Thread Dmitrijs Ledkovs
2009/5/19 Alexandre Strube : >> Even though I'm performance freak I will be staying on my 32bit >> dual-core laptop for quite a while still. >> >> (I have access to Sparc 64bit grid ;-) to run my simulations on) > > Hello Dima, > I guess the issue here was deprecating the -386 in favor of taking ad

Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...

2009-05-19 Thread Dmitrijs Ledkovs
2009/5/19 Markus Hitter : > > Am 19.05.2009 um 01:24 schrieb Daniel J Blueman: > >> A number of benchmarks show a significant performance loss on 32bit >> ubuntu over 64bit [...] >> Just how much user experience do we trade away for i386/i486 legacy >> compatibility these days? > > IMHO, you draw a

Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...

2009-05-19 Thread Markus Hitter
Am 19.05.2009 um 01:24 schrieb Daniel J Blueman: > A number of benchmarks show a significant performance loss on 32bit > ubuntu over 64bit [...] > Just how much user experience do we trade away for i386/i486 legacy > compatibility these days? IMHO, you draw an odd conclusion here. You recognize

Re: [rfc] improving 32bit user performance/experience...

2009-05-18 Thread John Moser
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 7:24 PM, Daniel J Blueman wrote: > A number of benchmarks show a significant performance loss on 32bit > ubuntu over 64bit [1], on the same hardware. This is partially due to > restrictions on the instruction set and partially due to worse > instruction scheduling (others r