I have a computer that has a 64-bit Core 2 duo CPU and an Asus P5K, which claims to have 64 bit support.
Up until now, I’ve used the 32-bit version of openSuSE, as that’s what I had before and use(d) on all my other computers which aren’t 64-bit.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of switching to 64-bit? How about staying in 32-bit?
TIA!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
64-bit… better use of RAM… especially if you have significant
amounts of it. For systems with 4+ GB you cannot access all of the RAM
without a 64-bit machine. My personal opinion is that if you CAN run
64-bit you should. Back when 64-bit was new the software wasn’t as
tested and there were issues, of course, but my laptop (this one) has
been purely 64-bit with SLED 10 (not even the 11 line of code) and has
been great and I have access to all four gigabytes of RAM so I can play
with all kinds of fun things. Also if you plan on doing any
virtualization of 64-bit machines you must have a 64-bit host.
Good luck.
VintagePC wrote:
| I have a computer that has a 64-bit Core 2 duo CPU and an Asus P5K,
| which claims to have 64 bit support.
| Up until now, I’ve used the 32-bit version of openSuSE, as that’s what
| I had before and use(d) on all my other computers which aren’t 64-bit.
|
|
| What are the advantages and disadvantages of switching to 64-bit? How
| about staying in 32-bit?
|
| TIA!
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFIVeW13s42bA80+9kRAsLQAJ0ZcjklGRN+il13pzllfjM4R7BXXQCeKOVB
WXXe4YPjleMkV4EWeT0mB3Q=
=1slP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
hmmmmm…2 questions:
back about v10.1 i loaded up my AMD Athlon™ 64 with a 64-bit openSuSE
and liked it–except there were problems (as i recall now dimly) with
missing 64-bit Firefox plug ins, and Java and maybe some other things
that didn’t work in 64…
have all of those little frustrations been solved? (or is it still
necessary to use a lot of 32 bit software?)
and, second…someone somewhere told me that since i only have 1 GB ram,
and don’t (often, if ever!) need to load up multi-GB files, then i don’t
need 64 AND 32 will run what i do need faster…
true?
tia,
DenverD
ab@novell.com wrote:
> 64-bit… better use of RAM… especially if you have significant
> amounts of it. For systems with 4+ GB you cannot access all of the RAM
> without a 64-bit machine. My personal opinion is that if you CAN run
> 64-bit you should. Back when 64-bit was new the software wasn’t as
> tested and there were issues, of course, but my laptop (this one) has
> been purely 64-bit with SLED 10 (not even the 11 line of code) and has
> been great and I have access to all four gigabytes of RAM so I can play
> with all kinds of fun things. Also if you plan on doing any
> virtualization of 64-bit machines you must have a 64-bit host.
>
> Good luck.
>
>
>
>
>
> VintagePC wrote:
> | I have a computer that has a 64-bit Core 2 duo CPU and an Asus P5K,
> | which claims to have 64 bit support.
> | Up until now, I’ve used the 32-bit version of openSuSE, as that’s what
> | I had before and use(d) on all my other computers which aren’t 64-bit.
> |
> |
> | What are the advantages and disadvantages of switching to 64-bit? How
> | about staying in 32-bit?
> |
> | TIA!
> |
> |
i’m still not convinced by 64bit just yet, i have a 64bit laptop with 2gb ram but still run 32bit, since 64bit can be so easily broken by updates and then requires some fixing to do. for sure 64bit will run quicker, but if it’s stability you are after then stick with 32bit, at least for another year or so. sled 10 is bound to be that little bit more stable, since sled is more tried and tested.
64 isn’t any faster on normal daily usage anyway - if you get any speed improvements they’re so neglible as to be almost invisible. In some cases, such as many current games, 64 bit can actually be slower.
I used 32-Bit OpenSUSE but on my Windows Partition I switched to 64-Bit due to the fact that I have 4GB RAM. I’ve tried other Linux Distributions and 64-Bit versions I think are a little snappier than the 32-Bit versions, but this may be because they make use of the full 4GB RAM.
The only disadvantage I’ve found is that the Java Plugin doesn’t work on the 64-Bit version of Firefox. Apart from that, all my hardware works, all drivers work and all plugins except for Java work, happy 64-bit computing!
I’d recommand 64 bit if you do a lot of audio and/or video processing.
That’s true but then again if you’re hardcore into audio/video editing, you most likely have over 4GB anyway and you’ll see the benefits realized.
If you don’t have lot of memory (+4Go) and don’t do lot of intensive CPU task (scientific computation, video compression), my advise is to use 32 bits.
For a standard use of computer (like 98% of users), the 64bits technology won’t give you any advantage… and some time you will have lesser performance in some situation (games, no 64bits plugins, …).
I’ve done lot of research in the past, but never find any real advantage for my computer use. The “64bits” label is a big marketing for usual people, nothing more.
However, Dual core technology is the future with real higher perf.
This is in the hardware forum, so I’m wondering how different the on chip execution of 32-bit vs. 64-bit code is on AMD? Does this difference change comparing AMD to Intel?
For software side, yes, you don’t need 64-bit unless you really need 64-bit. Unless you’re using more than 1 Gb per single process you should be ok with 32-bit.
I recommend 64-bit if you know your way around linux, I have always been using it, and recommend it.
2 thing to note
Flash works fine via nspluginwrapper, java doesn’t, but icedtea should fix that pretty soon 
(hopefully by the time 11.1 is released)
Also if you ever compile software with configure/autogen add this parameter
–libdir=[PREFIX]/lib64
where prefix is by default, /usr/local
(python setup.py works with no changes :D)
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 04:01 +0000, ab@novell.com wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 64-bit… better use of RAM… especially if you have significant
> amounts of it. For systems with 4+ GB you cannot access all of the RAM
> without a 64-bit machine. My personal opinion is that if you CAN run
> 64-bit you should. Back when 64-bit was new the software wasn’t as
> tested and there were issues, of course, but my laptop (this one) has
> been purely 64-bit with SLED 10 (not even the 11 line of code) and has
> been great and I have access to all four gigabytes of RAM so I can play
> with all kinds of fun things. Also if you plan on doing any
> virtualization of 64-bit machines you must have a 64-bit host.
>
The downside of 64bit is that some applications won’t work right
unless you use the 32bit versions. For example, if you go default
and install a 64bit Firefox, Java applets will not work right.
Progress has been made with OpenJDK, but still, if this is important
to you, then you’ll have to install the 32bit version of Firefox
and the java plugin for that. It makes doing some things a bit
painful because of that.
Some say there are some other examples where 32bit apps work
better than their 64bit cousins, but IMHO, Java applets are pretty much
the one area that doesn’t work right. Most of my machines now
are 64bit.
Ah… pretty much the same deal the last time I raised this question… since I have 2GB ram, and I don’t do video processing or so, I think I’ll leave it at 32… Particularly since it would otherwise mean burning a DVD for only one machine.