# Which architecture release of FreeBSD should I download



## saurabhaggrw (Dec 28, 2012)

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..


----------



## SirDice (Dec 28, 2012)

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.


You've just answered your own question. IA-64 is for Intel Itanium processors.


----------



## saurabhaggrw (Dec 28, 2012)

but boot process is not starting up
what should i do?


----------



## SirDice (Dec 28, 2012)

Do you have an Intel Itanium processor? So which version should you use if the IA64 version isn't for your system?


----------



## saurabhaggrw (Dec 28, 2012)

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'


----------



## fonz (Dec 28, 2012)

saurabhaggrw said:
			
		

> Sir, could you please give me suggestions what should i*I* do in case ia-64 version is not booting up while i*I* restart my pc.


Use the right version. If it's not ia64, it must be that other one.

Fonz


----------



## SirDice (Dec 28, 2012)

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?


----------



## saurabhaggrw (Dec 28, 2012)

I have Intel core i5 2500 (2nd Gen.) 3.30 GHz Processor.


----------



## saurabhaggrw (Dec 28, 2012)

Should I try "amd-64" Release of FreeBSD?


----------



## fonz (Dec 28, 2012)

saurabhaggrw said:
			
		

> Should I try "amd-64" Release of FreeBSD?


Congratulations, you've won a toaster oven.

Fonz


----------



## Beastie (Dec 28, 2012)

saurabhaggrw said:
			
		

> Should I try "amd-64" Release of FreeBSD?


Yes, exactly. As others have already said the ia64 ISOs are for the Itanium/Itanium 2 architecture and the amd64 ISOs are for all other 64-bit architectures.

http://www.freebsd.org/releases/9.0R/hardware.html


----------



## fonz (Dec 28, 2012)

Beastie said:
			
		

> and the amd64 are for all other 64-bit architectures.


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


----------



## UNIXgod (Dec 29, 2012)

saurabhaggrw said:
			
		

> Should I try "amd-64" Release of FreeBSD?



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.


----------



## bbzz (Dec 29, 2012)

saurabhaggrw said:
			
		

> Should I try "amd-64" Release of FreeBSD?



Have you tried Ubuntu?


----------



## fonz (Dec 29, 2012)

bbzz said:
			
		

> Have you tried Ubuntu?


If there's a BSDubuntu, then when the hell did that happen? 

Fonz


----------



## dave (Dec 29, 2012)

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.


----------



## Beastie (Dec 29, 2012)

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.


----------



## saurabhaggrw (Dec 29, 2012)

Thanks to all amd64 solved it out


----------



## dave (Dec 29, 2012)

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.


----------



## fonz (Dec 29, 2012)

dave said:
			
		

> The ia64 / amd64 confusion has surfaced here on the forums several times.


I once fell into that one, too :r

Fonz


----------



## UNIXgod (Dec 29, 2012)

saurabhaggrw said:
			
		

> Thanks to all amd64 solved it out



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


----------



## throAU (Dec 31, 2012)

I wish people would just call it "x64" (which seems to be what most people call it in real life) and be done with it.


----------

