Home > Mandriva, Mandrake, Lycoris > Mandrakelinux 10.0 Beta 2 for AMD64Mandrakelinux 10.0 Beta 2 for AMD64 Eugenia Loli 2004-04-11 Mandriva, Mandrake, Lycoris 10 CommentsThis is the second beta release of Mandrakelinux 10.0 for AMD64, DistroWatch reports along with more info on the release and direct links for the 3 CDs. About The Author Eugenia LoliEx-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 10 Comments 2004-04-12 6:42 am I am wondering how this runs on a AMD 64. Anyone tried it out yet? 2004-04-12 9:59 am For the $784.00 they currently are asking for that processor, I for one, am going to keep right on wondering.It will be a terribly cold day in hell before I believe a cpu is worth that kind of cash, at least for home use. 2004-04-12 10:32 am It doesn’t start at that price. From Price watch, the cheapest AMD 64 processor starts at $173.That’s about the same price for a P4 of a similar clock speed. 2004-04-12 11:28 am i got a athlon 64 3200+ with 1 GB ram and a few SATA ide drives. I installed the first “beta” of this Mandrake version for AMD64 and even though i am no fan of Mandrake (fedora/slack user) I DO have to admit, it was the only Linux distro that installed out of the box onto my SATA drive, configured my radeon 9600 XT correctly and my gigabit ethernet controller. Speed is blazingly fast when running applications and overall i am VERY pleased with it. in contrast: Fedora Core 2 TEst2 , will not boot into gui installer, says video card unable to probe. And will not let me install at all , says CDrom Drive not found (ironic, it booted from it). Well i will try this release as well. I must say i am a bit saddened though by the fact that Beta1 of MDK 10 did not ship with quanta + which is my preferred editor. If this one ships with it i might even think of using this more…//vicAs for price of the Athlon64, it was 220 Euros here and conpared to my wifes 3ghz P4 its no contest this fels MUCH snappier…. 2004-04-12 2:00 pm What’s the difference between running the AMD64 version and the standard 32-bit version of MDK 10 on an AMD64 machine? Will I be better off running the native 64-bit version or the standard 32-bit version of the OS?The reason I ask is a lot of people say that the beta version of Win XP 64-bit Ed. is nowhere near as good as the standard 32-bit version. 2004-04-12 2:19 pm Well, you can’t run ndiswrapper, and the proprietary drivers from ATI don’t work either, though the free Xorg drivers work just fine, just not yet with accelerated 3D for newer cards.Furthermore you are currently unable to use 32-bit proprietary codecs and plugins in 64-bit applications.GHC (glorious Glasgow Haskell Compilation system) hasn’t got a registerised build as of now, and the Synaptics touchpad driver segfaults too at startup.But aside from that, you won’t notice any difference aside from the speed. 2004-04-12 2:48 pm That’s good to know about the Fedora Core 2 thing. I’ve tried installing it with no success, having the same problems you’re describing. Guess I’ll be giving Mandrake a spin. 2004-04-12 5:59 pm I bought one of those Athlon 64 3200+’s and have had nothing but crappy experiences with many 64 bit distros and even XP 64bit beta. The chip runs blazingly fast at 32 bit so I really find no reason to keep trying these mediocre distros out. Suse 9 64 was great however. I am looking forward to 9.1 64. 2004-04-12 6:22 pm yea i hear you, suse 9.0 was ok but it was a pain for me to install since their default CDs shipped with no SATA support (or very little) so i had to use the patch CD, jump in the mifddle of the installation to text console and install it via that, then reboot with the patch CD and manually edit fstab.. so , not good experience… but the mdk10 B1 was very nice… not complete but very nice.. i just wish other linux distros would get on their way… 2004-04-12 7:14 pm Has anyone tried this distro yet? How is beta2 compared to beta1? I’ll probably give it a shot tomorrow when I get to university.