Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD-64 laptops?

Last response: in Laptops & Notebooks
Share
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 17, 2004 12:22:43 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

So what's around in AMD64 laptops these days? I know E-machines has
one but I'm wondering who else does. Thanks.

More about : amd laptops

Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 17, 2004 10:57:57 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Paul Rubin wrote:
> So what's around in AMD64 laptops these days? I know E-machines has
> one but I'm wondering who else does. Thanks.

At least a couple from Compaq too:

http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News...

Yousuf Khan
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 17, 2004 10:57:58 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> writes:
> > So what's around in AMD64 laptops these days? I know E-machines has
> > one but I'm wondering who else does. Thanks.
>
> At least a couple from Compaq too:
>
> http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News...

Thanks. What's happened to high-resolution (1600x1200) screens?
Don't they exist any more?
Related resources
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 17, 2004 6:08:41 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

I bought Sharp AV-18-R with AMD Athlon, 1.3g-hz(40 gbyte)., so I think it is a
64-bit. I paid $900 when it was on sale last month. If I buy Dell with
same features, it will be $1800. This is my 3rd Sharp laptops. Last one
I bought was 8 years ago( update 20 g-hard disk 4 years ago) three years
after that Sony start put out same light weight laptops. I still use it
now, until move all stuff to new this new one. One of the reason I still
use old one because it is just fast as this USB portis very usful now.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 17, 2004 6:08:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

hugohh3h@aol.com (Hugohh3h) wrote in
news:20040517100841.22537.00000644@mb-m29.aol.com:

> I bought Sharp AV-18-R with AMD Athlon, 1.3g-hz(40 gbyte).

AMD Athlon is different than AMD-64, which personally i can't see of being
any use at all until software is written for it.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 17, 2004 6:08:43 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Good Man <heyho@letsgo.com> writes:
> > I bought Sharp AV-18-R with AMD Athlon, 1.3g-hz(40 gbyte).
>
> AMD Athlon is different than AMD-64, which personally i can't see of being
> any use at all until software is written for it.

GCC supports the AMD-64 and this is used to good effect even by
mundane programs like Emacs, which are constrained by the 32-bit ints
on the x86. Emacs's 128MB buffer size limitation (now 256MB I guess)
comes from cramming several tag bits, a sign bit, and a 28-bit fixnum
into a 32-bit int. 128MB of course used to be a heck of a lot of
space, but not any more. With 64-bit ints, that problem goes away.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 18, 2004 2:58:47 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Paul Rubin wrote:

> So what's around in AMD64 laptops these days? I know E-machines has
> one but I'm wondering who else does. Thanks.

voodoopc.com have a few models.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 18, 2004 4:00:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Hugohh3h <hugohh3h@aol.com> wrote:
> I bought Sharp AV-18-R with AMD Athlon, 1.3g-hz(40 gbyte)., so I
> think it is a 64-bit. I paid $900 when it was on sale last month.
> If I buy Dell with same features, it will be $1800. This is my
> 3rd Sharp laptops. Last one I bought was 8 years ago( update
> 20 g-hard disk 4 years ago) three years after that Sony start
> put out same light weight laptops. I still use it now, until
> move all stuff to new this new one. One of the reason I still
> use old one because it is just fast as this USB portis very usful
> now.

It's doubtful that for that price you got an Athlon 64. You probably got the
Athlon XP-M instead. If you do a right-click on propreties of your "My
Computer" icon, you can most likely see what processor you really got in
there. The Athlon 64's are a much higher end processor.

Yousuf Khan
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 20, 2004 11:09:13 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On 17 May 2004 02:58:26 -0700, Paul Rubin
<http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote:

>"Yousuf Khan" <news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> writes:
>> > So what's around in AMD64 laptops these days? I know E-machines has
>> > one but I'm wondering who else does. Thanks.
>>
>> At least a couple from Compaq too:
>>
>> http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News...
>
>Thanks. What's happened to high-resolution (1600x1200) screens?
>Don't they exist any more?

hp/compaq zv5000z and r3000z can be configured with wuxga 1920x1200
displays.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 20, 2004 12:23:53 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

kal wrote:
> On 17 May 2004 02:58:26 -0700, Paul Rubin
> <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote:
>
>> "Yousuf Khan" <news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> writes:
>>>> So what's around in AMD64 laptops these days? I know E-machines
>>>> has one but I'm wondering who else does. Thanks.
>>>
>>> At least a couple from Compaq too:
>>>
>>>
http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News...
>>
>> Thanks. What's happened to high-resolution (1600x1200) screens?
>> Don't they exist any more?
>
> hp/compaq zv5000z and r3000z can be configured with wuxga 1920x1200
> displays.

Dell have 1600*1200 and 1920*1200 options.

--
Email replies will not be read. Please reply to newsgroup.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 20, 2004 12:24:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Tiny Tim wrote:
> kal wrote:
>> On 17 May 2004 02:58:26 -0700, Paul Rubin
>> <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote:
>>
>>> "Yousuf Khan" <news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> writes:
>>>>> So what's around in AMD64 laptops these days? I know E-machines
>>>>> has one but I'm wondering who else does. Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> At least a couple from Compaq too:
>>>>
>>>>
>
http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News...
>>>
>>> Thanks. What's happened to high-resolution (1600x1200) screens?
>>> Don't they exist any more?
>>
>> hp/compaq zv5000z and r3000z can be configured with wuxga 1920x1200
>> displays.
>
> Dell have 1600*1200 and 1920*1200 options.

Oops! But not with an AMD 64 processor :-(

--
Email replies will not be read. Please reply to newsgroup.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 29, 2004 6:48:18 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Who cares about 64bit software? a64 runs 32bit stuff faster than the P4.

"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote in message
news:7xoeomkdp5.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
> Good Man <heyho@letsgo.com> writes:
> > > I bought Sharp AV-18-R with AMD Athlon, 1.3g-hz(40 gbyte).
> >
> > AMD Athlon is different than AMD-64, which personally i can't see of
being
> > any use at all until software is written for it.
>
> GCC supports the AMD-64 and this is used to good effect even by
> mundane programs like Emacs, which are constrained by the 32-bit ints
> on the x86. Emacs's 128MB buffer size limitation (now 256MB I guess)
> comes from cramming several tag bits, a sign bit, and a 28-bit fixnum
> into a 32-bit int. 128MB of course used to be a heck of a lot of
> space, but not any more. With 64-bit ints, that problem goes away.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 29, 2004 3:03:53 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"lewdvig" <plongin@hotmail.com> wrote in news:SRStc.578001$Pk3.30795
@pd7tw1no:

> Who cares about 64bit software? a64 runs 32bit stuff faster than the P4.

maybe because of the speed of the processor, but it sure isn't using any of
its 64-bit technology....
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 30, 2004 1:45:49 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

My point is that 64bits should be considered icing on the cake.


"Good Man" <heyho@letsgo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94F87ABB9402Dsonicyouth@216.196.97.132...
> "lewdvig" <plongin@hotmail.com> wrote in news:SRStc.578001$Pk3.30795
> @pd7tw1no:
>
> > Who cares about 64bit software? a64 runs 32bit stuff faster than the P4.
>
> maybe because of the speed of the processor, but it sure isn't using any
of
> its 64-bit technology....
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 30, 2004 3:48:15 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"lewdvig" <plongin@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hw7uc.584333$Pk3.186580@pd7tw1no:

> My point is that 64bits should be considered icing on the cake.


still, its like selling a product that is 'theoretically' better. you just
can't get the full performance of the chip at this time unless you have
software specifically written to take advantage of it, and that software is
very few and far between.

if you want to buy a product that can't even offer full performance yet,
hell, go for it!
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 30, 2004 9:10:00 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Good Man wrote:
> "lewdvig" <plongin@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:hw7uc.584333$Pk3.186580@pd7tw1no:
>
>
>>My point is that 64bits should be considered icing on the cake.
>
>
>
> still, its like selling a product that is 'theoretically' better. you just
> can't get the full performance of the chip at this time unless you have
> software specifically written to take advantage of it, and that software is
> very few and far between.
>
> if you want to buy a product that can't even offer full performance yet,
> hell, go for it!
Hi,
Hardware is always going ahead of software. That the way it is.
So it may make you feel good but not much is gained having it.
Tony
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 31, 2004 4:25:53 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Good Man" <heyho@letsgo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94F9824118EDsonicyouth@216.196.97.132...
> "lewdvig" <plongin@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:hw7uc.584333$Pk3.186580@pd7tw1no:
>
> > My point is that 64bits should be considered icing on the cake.
>
>
> still, its like selling a product that is 'theoretically' better. you
just
> can't get the full performance of the chip at this time unless you have
> software specifically written to take advantage of it, and that software
is
> very few and far between.
>
> if you want to buy a product that can't even offer full performance yet,
> hell, go for it!

This makes no sense. Without 64 bit technology AMD is still offering better
performance. So you're saying that because its better but still not as good
as it could be consumers should buy an inferior product?
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 31, 2004 6:27:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Good Man <heyho@letsgo.com> wrote:
> "lewdvig" <plongin@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:hw7uc.584333$Pk3.186580@pd7tw1no:
>
>> My point is that 64bits should be considered icing on the cake.
>
>
> still, its like selling a product that is 'theoretically' better.
> you just can't get the full performance of the chip at this time
> unless you have software specifically written to take advantage of
> it, and that software is very few and far between.
>
> if you want to buy a product that can't even offer full performance
> yet, hell, go for it!

One thing you're not realizing is that 64-bits is by no means the only
improvement in Athlon 64. "64-bits" gets most of the glory, but there is
considerably more in here than just 64-bit. There is the Hypertransport and
onboard memory controller which splits up the I/O and memory buses from each
other, and puts them into their own dedicated roads. This works whether
you're talking about 64-bit or 32-bit (or even 16- or 8-bit for that
matter).

The other thing is that even unchanged 32-bit programs tend to run faster
under a 64-bit operating system than in a native 32-bit one. That's because
each 32-bit application gets its own dedicated 32-bit memory space, unshared
with other 32-bit apps. So even without full 64-bit apps running on the
64-bit OS, there are benefits to be had.

Yousuf Khan
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
May 31, 2004 5:43:47 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Good Man <heyho@letsgo.com> writes:
> still, its like selling a product that is 'theoretically' better. you just
> can't get the full performance of the chip at this time unless you have
> software specifically written to take advantage of it, and that software is
> very few and far between.

There are not yet very many 64-bit programs for the a64, but there are
a few, and some of those happen to be what I want to use. That's why
I'm interested in the a64, ok?
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
June 1, 2004 12:30:32 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote in message
news:7xaczo49a4.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
| Good Man <heyho@letsgo.com> writes:
| > still, its like selling a product that is 'theoretically' better. you
just
| > can't get the full performance of the chip at this time unless you have
| > software specifically written to take advantage of it, and that software
is
| > very few and far between.
|
| There are not yet very many 64-bit programs for the a64, but there are
| a few, and some of those happen to be what I want to use. That's why
| I'm interested in the a64, ok?

Even without considering 64bit apps, the A64 will run most 32 bit apps
considerably faster than a P4. One exception is most encoding apps. The
reason they still seem to perform better on the antiquated P4 is that they
rely heavily on raw processor speed. I am still in Athlon XP world on my
desktop, but recently purchased an A64 notebook after checking out several
Intel and AMD systems for a few days each. The A64 was noticeably faster and
fit my needs much better than the P4 3.2.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
June 1, 2004 2:43:40 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Good Man <heyho@letsgo.com> wrote in
news:Xns94EC855787A84sonicyouth@216.196.97.132:

> hugohh3h@aol.com (Hugohh3h) wrote in
> news:20040517100841.22537.00000644@mb-m29.aol.com:
>
>> I bought Sharp AV-18-R with AMD Athlon, 1.3g-hz(40 gbyte).
>
> AMD Athlon is different than AMD-64, which personally i can't
> see of being any use at all until software is written for it.

SUSE Linux 9.1 Professional (64-bit) absolutely screams on the
Athlon64s and Opterons we have at work. And you would be amazed at
the amount of software already written for it that comes with the
SUSE distribution.

Screams, I say!

--
Paxton Sanders
pcsanders@yahoo.com

"That's not art; that's just annoying!" -- Squidward
!