On the last episode (Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:14:18 +0200 (CEST)), Wojciech
Puchar <wojtek@tensor.3miasto.net> said:

> >>> my Shuttle SN85G4v3. I've just tested WinXP-64 on it and have issues
> >>> (which we don't care here ;) too.
> >>
> >> tested too - actually slower than WinXP/i386 ;)
> >>
> >
> > oh ? how is it possible ??? M$ homepage states it's a brand new thing
> > enabling users to gain significant perfomance enhancement, ... :p
> 
> since the beginning of Micro$oft new version is always slower and has more 
> bugs than old. this is no exception.
> 
> took about 55 minutes to install.
> 

seemed to me it was long too... but this is off-topic, for sure :)

> >> actually in NetBSD/amd64 there are some problems running 32-bit
> >> non-native apps, like 64-bit only linux emulation.
> >>
> >
> > have you tried running NetBSD/i386 apps on NetBSD/amd64 too ?
> 
> yes i do run mks_vir for NetBSD/i386 (polish antiviral software, no amd64 
> binary yet). works fine.
> 
> > as I have play with NetBSD/i386 on this machine and build packages, I
> > thought I may be able to run some apps (namely nvtv ;) in
> > /emul/netbsd32.
> 
> should work. but is there only NetBSD/i386 binary? can't you compile it 
> from pkgsrc for amd64?

well, I tried (in fact, the first OS my barebone saw was NetBSD/amd64
BETA_3.0) but the Makefile denies it. so I tried to do it myself and it
complains about... don't remember exactly, but it was something about
i386 headers. as I'll re-install netbsd/amd64 (probably this week-end),
I'll dig this... seems this app is available with debian/amd64 (but not
freebsd/amd64). running nvtv in 32bit will really be OK/enough if it
can't be compiled in 64bit.

> >>> My question is, when you have to run NetBSD/i386 on an AMD64 machine
> >>> (for driver or app support), to what extend do you get the benefits
> >>> from the AMD64 architecture ?
> >>>
> >> you will have exactly the same driver support on NetBSD/i386 and
> >> NetBSD/amd64 because NetBSD is really designed to be cross-platform.
> 
> > yep, I knew that (my Adaptec U160 sits in my Ultra5 because of this :) -
> > I was thinking of performance issue/benefits. The thing I'm wondering
> > if I am still (really) faster (in i386 mode) with my Athlon64 3200+ than
> > if I had an AthlonXP 3200+ (or P4)...
> >
> 
> difference in ordinary software with athlon64 and 32 or 64 bit mode isn't 
> high but it is - 64-bit software doesn't run slower for sure :) and 
> binaries are little bit larger - but not ab. 2 times like with sparc.
> 

right.

> > there :
> > http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1469&page=13
> > didn't seem to show real advantages in having amd64 when running 32bit
> > apps.
> >
> 
> yes. but all apps i run are 64 bit
> 
> 
> > eventhough it's windows benchmarks, I would have expected better amd64
> > marks.
> 
> windows is windows. you asked about some real software

heh, sure.
what I meant was, as amd64 is (so) highlight buy vendors, I would have
expected a bigger difference, even on redmond's window manager.