What computer to get for bsd and pclinux

[johnlvs2run]

I don't see any place for hardware questions, so am posting this here.

Let me know your opinion of this system, for desktopbsd or pclinux.
I'm currently using an emachines C2280.

Shuttle SD30G2 Plus Intel Socket
Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 Wolfdale 2.53GHz LGA 775 65W Dual-Core
Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 250GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s HD - OEM
G.SKILL 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel
Pioneer 20X DVD±R DVD Burner Black IDE - DVR-115DBK - OEM
https://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion...itle=shuttle+1

Also, should I use bsd x86 or amd64.
My only experience with bsd or linux is that I used ubuntu 6.06 for a year.

Thanks.

[Nirbo]

If you're going to end up throwing a PCI-e card in it later, just remember that the amd64 graphics drivers can suck a bit. From what I've heard, DRI and 3D just don't happen. With x86 you've got the binary nVidia drivers and the open source ATI onesthat do that kind of crap .

Otherwise, it looks like that machien will run BSD pretty solidly.

When I got my new machine, the major problems I had were my SATAII DVD drive messing up (Works fine otherwise, but couldn't install from disc. FTP worked perfectly.) and the onboard gigabit NIC wasn't supported (Attansic L1). I just looked at the specifications, and the shuttle board uses a Marvell one, which is supported by the msk driver Score.

Should be good to go .

[marco64]

Originally Posted by johnlvs2run

Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 Wolfdale 2.53GHz LGA 775 65W Dual-Core

Also, should I use bsd x86 or amd64.

it doesn't look like an AMD. I would use x86.

[DrJ]

Originally Posted by marco64

it doesn't look like an AMD. I would use x86.

Oh my. x86 refers to the 32-bit Intel architecture (including AMD and others) whereas AMD64 refers to the 64-bit Intel architecture (including AMD). It is so named because AMD did it first; it has nothing to do with the brand.

[BSDfan666]

They refer to the x86-64 port as "amd64" simply out of respect, (And because AMD designed it.. thus were the first to release a working implementation.).

[Nirbo]

But I do also believe that the Core2Duo line is all x86 based :O. In fact, I can't think of any Intel 64 bit chips... Itanium? Xeon?... Those are pretty old though.

[FBSDin20Steps]

If you want to go back for a few years... A Pentium 4 will do nicely

[cajunman4life]

Originally Posted by Nirbo

But I do also believe that the Core2Duo line is all x86 based :O. In fact, I can't think of any Intel 64 bit chips... Itanium? Xeon?... Those are pretty old though.

Core 2 Duo is a 64 bit chip. http://www.intel.com/products/proces...ifications.htm

All of Intel's 64-bit linup can be viewed at http://www.intel.com/technology/arch...+tabs_products.

So, the amd64 branch (which is the x86-64 branch of FreeBSD, only named amd because, as mentioned before, amd was the first to release the 64bit line) is for x86-64 based systems.

[Nirbo]

Holy crap. I've had a Core2Quad for a month and didn't know it was a 64 bit chip.

Wow, pointyhat for me.

[johnlvs2run]

It looks like 95%+ of the processors on newegg are 64 bit.

But most people still prefer using a 32 bit os - until other hardware and programs catch up.

And this might take a few years, is this right?

[TerryP]

I don't think Intel has released a strictly 32-Bit CPU in a _long_ time, well pardoning the cheap stuff that is hehe.

[johnlvs2run]

The shuttle description says the motherboard can handle up to 2GB of DDR2 667 memory.

Can there be some advantage with DDR2 800, or would it be better to stay with DDR2 667?

[DrJ]

Depends on the CPU FSB frequency, and if you are overclocking or not. It the -667 matches your CPU 1333MHz, in this case), then there is no advantage to getting memory that is faster. If you overclock the CPU, though, you may want the head room to increase the FSB clock. In that case, you may want the 800MHz speed.

I've no experience with the motherboard you are using, so this is necessarily general.

[johnlvs2run]

Thanks DrJ.

I don't do any overclocking. The FSB is 800/1066/1333MHz.

The reason I'm asking is the 800 is on special and almost the same price ($5 more) as the 667. So there is no upside at all to getting it then?

[FloridaBSD]

I wouldn't recommend emachines as they are kniowbn to have issues with drivers and faulty mainboards. How ever from my experience I can highly recommend HP-Compaq, Lenovo (formally known as IBM personal computer division) or Dell systems.

[DrJ]

Originally Posted by johnlvs2run

I don't do any overclocking. The FSB is 800/1066/1333MHz.

What is the FSB of your CPU? It is likely either 1066 or 1333GHz.

The reason I'm asking is the 800 is on special and almost the same price ($5 more) as the 667. So there is no upside at all to getting it then?

If the price is the same there is no reason not to get the faster memory. You might not use it, but these is no down side.

[johnlvs2run]

Originally Posted by DrJ

What is the FSB of your CPU? It is likely either 1066 or 1333GHz.

Newegg shows 800/1066/1333 - doesn't show one in particular.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16856101059

[DrJ]

That's the motherboard. What CPU do you wish to put in it?

[johnlvs2run]

Thought I had seen this before - 1066.
http://www.newegg.com/product/produc...82E16819115052

This one would be 1333 - if I got it instead.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115029

[DrJ]

You might have mentioned it. If you use the CPU at its stock speed, then there is no advantage to a faster memory speed. If your motherboard allows for increasing the CPU speed (by increasing the FSB), and you use it, then it is an advantage. For $5 it is worth it unless you are opposed in all cases to overclocking.

FWIW, usually you can up the FSB from a 1066 bus to 1333 without a CPU voltage change. The latter bus speed is still 667, but you have some headroom if you use 800MHz memory.