Hi,
I read this on Wikipedia:
The main disadvantage of 64-bit architectures is that relative to 32-bit architectures the same data occupies more space in memory (due to swollen pointers and possibly other types and alignment padding). This increases the memory requirements of a given process and can have implications for efficient processor cache utilization.
Is it true?? Based on the reply I’ll decide between OpenSUSE 32 or 64 bit.
Regards
Mukul
The difference in memory requirements is insignificant, and won’t adversely affect the operation of your PC at all (unless you’re trying to run you computer with 512MB of RAM). There are many more factors you should be considering in choosing between 32-bit and 64-bit.
That said, everything I use is 64-bit and I haven’t had any troubles with it at all. While, as the Wikipedia article may say, memory allocation is “less efficient”, general processing is certainly much more efficient (twice as much data getting processed at once), and the fact that it can address substantially more memory, the slightly less efficient allocation is a moot point.
Can you list the main points to consider:
Regards
Mukul
Why are you running some tiny amount of ram, I’m struggling to take over 1gb then I have a light weight DE. I purposefully tried and gave up when the chip cried enough, I clearly don’t know how to effectively fill my ram. One day if I ever see it go over 1gb I may actually try to suspend into my 1gb swap just to see what happens.
As for insignificant I did find this discussion and it is kind of known that 64bit will use more. View topic - 32bit vs 64bit memory usage :: For Linux & Unix Server Administrators and Developers :: BlueQuartz.US
I am sorry but I couldn’t understand this. Can you elaborate it.
Thanks
Mukul
One day I may actually use 2gb of ram at the moment in day to day use I average 300mb. Which presuming the discussion is correct would be significantly less if I ran 32 bit.
Then in trying to find out what happened when I swapped I opened 4 vmware machines, all machines had ff running plus other bits then 2 images open a ff open, a couple more apps open by about then I still hadn’t got over 1gb of usage, but the response from the dual core chip was unbearable. I just wanted to get my machine to use over 1gb ram to test what happened when I hibernated.
So unless you intend to use some ram hungry app(Please do enlighten me) then I find the reason for not using a non-reason. ymmv but though there does seem to be significant extra bits used with 64bit google will show this, I’ve found in day to day usage even with my miserly 2gb I have plenty.
cool, it makes sense to me now. I don’t use any RAM hungry programs.
So in nutshell, whats your say: 32 or 64?
Personally I don’t benefit from running 64bit, but I do run 64bit and have had no issues I find it very transparent. More so now that java and flash have finally caught up.
Very occasionally if you go out of the box, you can get the occasional issue, but I’ve not encountered one for years that isn’t to say you won’t.(My last one was several years ago with a custom compile java app)
Then Suse has one of the most transparent 64bit installs and very often a troublesome app can be installed as a 32bit with no more fiddling than changing a radio button.
I always think this question is up the asker to answer.
I am running Suse 64bit now. I am not seeing any issue with anything especially the memory. Here is a little bit from my computer info. Notice the memory usage.
I haven’t rebooted my system in a couple of days.
CPU Information
Processor (CPU): AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4000+
Speed: 2,100.00 MHz
Cores: 2
Temperature: 40°C
Memory Information
Total memory (RAM): 3.9 GB
Free memory: 54.4 MB (+ 3.3 GB Caches)
Free swap: 5.0 GB
[QUOTE]
I decided to reboot my computer.
Memory is now showing this. The free memory part is a bit misleading considering how Linux in general handles memory.
Memory Information
Total memory (RAM): 3.9 GB
Free memory: 3.2 GB (+ 411.4 MB Caches)
Free swap: 5.0 GB
I should have been clearer when I wrote my post (it was late afterall 
). By insignifcant, I meant to say that the end user, for basic usage, won’t notice that their programs are using more memory.
Some of the extra overhead to 64-bit partly comes from the fact that most 64-bit distros currently load 32-bit compatibility libraries as well. I am sure if one were to remove those and have a completely 64-bit system, some of that extra memory usage would go down a tad.
Anyways, glad you made a decision.
For under 4GB of ram you might as well use a 32bit kernel, for over 4GB of RAM then 64bit is the way to go.
you can use more than 4GB on 32bit too (PAE). Also, 64bit is not just for “above this certain amount of RAM, go for 64bit, below it stick to 32bit”. Even with less RAM on 64bit you can gain performance in some apps, mostly in number crunching and multimedia. I run 64bit with “only” 2 GB of RAM 
Guys,
Thanks for your input. I believe I made the right choice by picking OpenSUSE 11.2 as my first 64-bit OS. Until now I’ve been using all 32-bit OS: Windows/Debian/Ubuntu etc.
Hope I wont find any prob with 64.
Thanks
Regards
Mukul
Possibly no problems with 64-bit, but note that openSUSE-11.2 has not been released in a stable version yet. openSUSE-11.2 has been released only for testers. It has a large number of bugs and of unfinished work. Your uncertainty wrt 32-bit and 64-bit suggests to me you are not ready to be a tester?
If you wish a stable openSUSE, then IMHO openSUSE-11.1 is the way to go. In November this year, when openSUSE-11.2 is released as a GM version, it could be safely installed then, … although it may be better to wait until February-2010, and only then install openSUSE-11.2.
All IMHO.
Hahaha, maybe I should create a 48-bit OS for those people who can’t make up their minds. 
I don’t know what computers we’ll be reading this forum on in 5 years time, but I’m sure we will still have 32/64 bit? threads.
yes I know, but in most cases 64bit is optional.
Its less optional then it used to be as 64bit support has increased greatly but for the average user using 64bit is not really needed.
I am not dissing 64bit mind you, but for most users 32bit is fine.
Even if I had a dualcore and over 4GB of ram I would still probably use 32bit, considering that some apps and devices still lack 64bit support.
what is the “average user”? most people who run their Linuxes and are classified as “average users” do a lot of multimedia related stuff like encoding music from their CDs, encoding video (from DVDs or for youtube), some maybe making full blown DVDs with 2ManDVD or such. “Average users” nowadays do a lot of multimedia and 64bit can benefit them. All multimedia apps support 64bit and if for some reason some don’t, SUSE has one of the best 32bit implementation inside 64bit systems so installing the few 32bit libs that app depends on, is no big deal and easy to do
so you’ll be buying a 64bit CPU but not use its capabilities? Remind me again why you’ll buy it or do such thing? 64bit support in Linux is pretty much excellent (with few oddities here & there) compared to Windows
Well yes the term “average user” can vary, my definition of an average user does the following things:
Internet (Browsing, chat, E-mail)
Multimedia (Listening to MP3’s, watching DVD’s, etc)
Gaming (Though Linux has a low gaming ratio compared to windows, but meh I am not a computer gamer anyway)
Home office (Word processing, spreadsheets)
Graphics editing
Multimedia production can fit in there too, but the major factor into using 64bit over 32bit is compiling. One can compile software much faster under 64bit on the right processor.
Performance however is a factor that depends on what you what you need it for.
For me multimedia playback and production is just fine under 32bit, but for the more intensive stuff then maybe 64bit is a better choice.
I know of the performance advantage of 64bit over 32bit but there are still many things 64bit lacks on.
Proper java and flash support are what is missing in 64bit, granted there has been a lot of advancement in this area and the 32bit compatibility layer stuff has got better but java 64bit native and flash native are both fresh faces and sometimes the backwards compatibility doesnt live up.
But 64bit support is getting better for many, within the next few years 64bit can possibly take over for 32bit but there is still people who use 32bit so the jump is slow going.
so you’ll be buying a 64bit CPU but not use its capabilities? Remind me again why you’ll buy it or do such thing?
Well yes I know linux has wonderful 64bit support, the best 64bit compliant system on the market.
But the oddities you speak of can cause a lot of moans and groans from people who dont even know what 32bit or 64bit means.
This ignorance comes from a windows environment, as both XP and Vista are more optimized for 32bit then 64bit.
XP has horrid 64bit support, but as long as its around 32bit will still be wanted by many.
Granted with windows 7 on the horizon this can change as I heard win7 will be the first windows OS to have full optimization for 64bit (Vista also has good 64bit optimization but its still reliant on 32bit) but 32bit wont die there, most people still use 32bit compliant processors and will use them for some time until they get a newer computer.
Still applications make the OS as does hardware, a lot of apps people need still have 32bit only in mind, a lot of hardware also has this issue.
With linux the gap is marginal but for windows its like the grand canyon.
I never had problems with 64bit java and flash plugins and they run just fine so your argument about “many things lacking” is pretty moot, considering that the word “many” covers a very broad range of things, and 64bit does not lack “many” things
Yes, compilation is a bit faster (not that faster anyways) and graphics editing is also better under 64bit. What you provided is no excuse for not using 64bit since it’s better to have that bit of performance when you may need it than not to have it due to being stuck in 32bit land and the only possibility to get it is to reinstall… can you predict what your future needs may be?
Further, and this is away from average users, DBs usually operate much better under 64bit environments, especially with huge DBs and tables in them
All in all, 64bit is the way to go if you don’t have that piece of grumpy HW that doesn’t work in 64bit or no drivers are available for it. If this isn’t the case, then go 64bit