I am running an i386 kernel on AMD, is this advisable? Or is generic
prefered?


Larry

--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users

the difference is that i386 processors work in 32-bit, whereas AMD
processors can work in 64-bit, a 64-bit kernel can only work on 64-bit
CPUs, but 64-bit CPUs can still run the lower 32-bit kernel and 32-bit
programs in general. that is the technical part. as for which is
better, i usually prefer 32-bit systems due to past issues with 64-bit
ones, even though 64-bit systems have become much more stable lately.

On 4/14/08, Larry Hartman <larryhartman50@vzavenue.net> wrote:
> I am running an i386 kernel on AMD, is this advisable? Or is generic
> prefered?
>
>
> Larry
>
> --
> kubuntu-users mailing list
> kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users
>

--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users

On Sunday 13 April 2008 11:26:26 pm Willy Hamra wrote:
> the difference is that i386 processors work in 32-bit, whereas AMD
> processors can work in 64-bit, a 64-bit kernel can only work on 64-bit
> CPUs, but 64-bit CPUs can still run the lower 32-bit kernel and 32-bit
> programs in general. that is the technical part. as for which is
> better, i usually prefer 32-bit systems due to past issues with 64-bit
> ones, even though 64-bit systems have become much more stable lately.

So then there is no mismatch taking place in my configuration?

Incidentally I tried 64-bit a couple of times, never could get the live cd to
boot.... essentially ended up being more trouble than it was worth.

Larry

--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users

Larry Hartman wrote:
> Incidentally I tried 64-bit a couple of times, never could get the live
> cd to boot.... essentially ended up being more trouble than it was
> worth.

Which CPU do you have? Not all AMD CPUs are 64 bit capable.


Nils

--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users

On Monday 14 April 2008, Larry Hartman wrote:

> So then there is no mismatch taking place in my configuration?

i386 is the lowest common denominator, built only with the instruction set for
the old 80386, which everything supports.

I really don't know how kernels work these days, with all this
new "linux-image-generic" and stuff flying around. I have no idea, and I
didn't find an easy reference quickly. If you really care, you'll have to do
your own homework.

In the meantime, you can stop worrying about a mismatch. Your system will run
fine. I used to screw around with kernels to optimize everything perfectly
for my specific hardware. Two things resulted from that. First, there was
never any performance gain I could detect with the naked eye, so to speak.
Second, if my mobo fried and I had to move my hard drive to a different
computer, I now had a pain in the ass to deal with.

You're probably fine like you are.
--
D. Michael McIntyre

--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users

The generic kernel is more optimized than the 386. It also supports SMP
for multi-core processors and SSE SSE2, ect...

AMD athlon xp's are not 64 bit.

--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users