Which architecture release of FreeBSD should I download

S

saurabhaggrw

I have Intel core i5 2nd gen(2500) processor.
Which architecture file should I download amd64 or ia64 for this processor?
I have already tried ia64 architecture but it is not booting up.
Please help!!
Thanks..
 
saurabhaggrw said:
Which architecture file should I download amd64 or ia64 for this processor?
I have already tried ia64 architecture but it is not booting up.
Click to expand...
You've just answered your own question. IA-64 is for Intel Itanium processors.
 
Do you have an Intel Itanium processor? So which version should you use if the IA64 version isn't for your system?
 
Sir, could you please give me suggestions what should i do in case ia-64 version is not booting up while i restart my pc.
'My first boot device is set to CD/DVD ROM already'
 
saurabhaggrw said:
Sir, could you please give me suggestions what should iI do in case ia-64 version is not booting up while iI restart my pc.
Click to expand...
Use the right version. If it's not ia64, it must be that other one.

Fonz
 
Let me rephrase what I already said, IA64 is for Itanium and Itanium only! You do NOT have an Itanium processor.

So, given 2 choices, A and B. And you already figured out A isn't the correct one. Which one do you think is left?
 
Beastie said:
and the amd64 are for all other 64-bit architectures.
Click to expand...
That reminds me: don't be fooled by the amd part in [red]amd[/red]64. Unlike the name might suggest, it's not for AMD processors only. As Beastie says, it's for (most) 64-bit architectures, including Intel ones.

Fonz
 
saurabhaggrw said:
Should I try "amd-64" Release of FreeBSD?
Click to expand...

AMD's implementation of 64-bit is on the Intel chips as well. Ironic is it not? AMD clones Intel 32 bit processors. AMD implements 64-bit instruction set on top of their Intel cloned 32-bit processors. Intel uses AMD's 64-bit implementation in it's core series and later chips.

The confusion comes in also because Intel renamed AMD64 to EM64T. I betcha it's for marketing purposes. Intel wouldn't want it's user-base to think that they croud-sourced technology into their chips due to their shortcomings in the failing Itanium architecture.
 
The problem here is not the user, but the architecture naming convention. A characteristic of any good system is that it should be self-descriptive. The FreeBSD amd64 architecure naming convention is far from self-descriptive.
 
If people can be bothered to check the "Announcement" to get the URL of an FTP server on which they can find the ISO images, they can as well check the description of supported systems in the "Hardware Notes".

If they can't do that, then they won't read the documentation and won't be able to use the system, let alone configure it to suit their needs.

We all went there one day.
 
The ia64 / amd64 confusion has surfaced here on the forums several times. Perhaps part of the issue is that the shortcut links for the recent releases at the top of the FreeBSD home page under "Get FreeBSD Now" and "Latest Releases" link directly to the Announcement page for a partcular release, which doesn't really give the whole picture. There's no link on the Announcement page to the hardware notes. Whereas the links for Get FreeBSD Now and LATEST RELEASES links lead to pages where the Hardware Notes links are at least beside the Announcement links.
 
saurabhaggrw said:
Thanks to all amd64 solved it out
Click to expand...

No problem. It's a common mistake. Manufacturers and marketing. Almost as if we knew the truth intel might lose some revenue as users may consider AMD to be equal seeing it's actually their implementation ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top