PDA

View Full Version : Best ubuntu version/kernel for Intel Core 2 Duo?



user1397
August 26th, 2007, 06:22 AM
So I've just bought a new computer with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor.

I know it is 64-bit, and I also understand there are some problems with the 64-bit versions of Ubuntu.

Now, if I install from the 32-bit Ubuntu feisty i386 desktop cd, the default kernel I believe is the i686 SMP kernel.

So for both of my cores to be used, I don't have to do anything?

Also, why do they call the 64-bit version of Ubuntu the "AMD64"
version...does it not also work with Intel 64-bit processors?

mikewhatever
August 26th, 2007, 06:33 AM
So for both of my cores to be used, I don't have to do anything?

Also, why do they call the 64-bit version of Ubuntu the "AMD64"
version...does it not also work with Intel 64-bit processors?

That's right.

I think that is a tradition, since Intel's 64 bits cpus are relatively new.

be4truth
August 26th, 2007, 06:42 AM
I am using 2.6.20-16-generic SMP with Fesity 32bit installed and it works great; both CPU in action.

user1397
August 26th, 2007, 09:08 PM
Hmm I jsut notcied that they're actually saying "for 64-bit amd64 and Intel computers" now for the 64-bit option.

Thanks for the info though, I appreciate it.

stmiller
August 26th, 2007, 09:17 PM
The 64bit version has a kernel that is compiled as "x86_64 generic" so it runs on AMD or Intel similarly.

jinx099
August 26th, 2007, 09:20 PM
So I've just bought a new computer with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor.

I know it is 64-bit, and I also understand there are some problems with the 64-bit versions of Ubuntu.

Now, if I install from the 32-bit Ubuntu feisty i386 desktop cd, the default kernel I believe is the i686 SMP kernel.

So for both of my cores to be used, I don't have to do anything?

Also, why do they call the 64-bit version of Ubuntu the "AMD64"
version...does it not also work with Intel 64-bit processors?
What "problems" have you heard about with the 64-bit version? Everything works great for me. If you are talking about the problem where Adobe and Sun are too lazy to make 64-bit versions of flash and java plugins, then this is easily fixed just by running a script. Search the forums.

agurk
August 26th, 2007, 09:35 PM
64-bit will give you a performance hit when it comes to memory bandwidth. Especially if it's a notebook, I'd go with 32-bit instead.

RageOfOrder
August 26th, 2007, 09:59 PM
64 bit would be better if you choose KDE (I guess Kubuntu for you people) since pre-linking makes an astounding difference in performance on a 64 bit cpu.

But you do lose flashplayer and stuff. I run 64 bit gentoo and 32 bit slackware. No difference between em really, but you do have to find 64 bit wireless drivers if you're stuck using ndiswrapper.

Andrewie
August 26th, 2007, 11:15 PM
you can use nsplugin not sure the actual name to use the 32-bit flash with 64-bit. I don't have any studies but I did notice a speed improvement uisng 64-bit. All kernels are compiled to take advantage of dual-core and single-core cpu so using the default kernel you should be ok.

user1397
August 28th, 2007, 12:15 AM
Thanks for all the replies.

~LoKe
August 28th, 2007, 12:20 AM
It's only called AMD64 since AMD had released the Opteron earlier, as the first 64bit processor (x86_64). Intel has the IA64 or something similar.

Then again, I think it's possible that the AMD in the two names mean two completely different things.

user1397
August 29th, 2007, 10:41 PM
All I can say, is that I was able to run both the 32-bit and the 64-bit live CDs of feisty successfully on my new computer.

Thanks again for all the info.