PDA

View Full Version : [ubuntu] Am I running on 64Bit?



Johnecash
August 4th, 2009, 02:56 AM
I have Ubuntu runnning on this

Compaq Presario Desktop PC 1.6 GHz AMD Athlon X2 4200 Dual Core Processor, 1 GB RAM

I dont recall it asking for me to select 32 bit or 64 bit on install - can anyone help?

Is there a command to check?

I intsalled ubuntu version 9.04

juancarlospaco
August 4th, 2009, 02:59 AM
uname -a ; lsb_release -a

Sef
August 4th, 2009, 03:00 AM
Applications > Accessories > Terminal

then copy and paste this command:


uname -a

If you have 64-bit, it will say this (my highlighting):


Linux jokat0 2.6.28-14-generic #47-Ubuntu SMP Sat Jul 25 01:19:55 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Johnecash
August 4th, 2009, 09:42 AM
Hi guys I get this

-desktop 2.6.28-14-generic #47-Ubuntu SMP Sat Jul 25 00:28:35 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description: Ubuntu 9.04
Release: 9.04
Codename: jaunty

is there anyway to tell if I can get it running on 64 Bit?

lisati
August 4th, 2009, 09:49 AM
Hi guys I get this

-desktop 2.6.28-14-generic #47-Ubuntu SMP Sat Jul 25 00:28:35 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description: Ubuntu 9.04
Release: 9.04
Codename: jaunty

is there anyway to tell if I can get it running on 64 Bit?

It looks like you're using the 32-bit version. I don't know of a "quick and easy" way of "upgrading" to 64-bit without making a backup of your data and oing a fresh install of the 64-bit version. I understand that the process can sometimes be simplified if you've set up a separate partition for your data.

binbash
August 4th, 2009, 09:59 AM
You are using 32bit

Johnecash
August 4th, 2009, 10:00 AM
I am happy to do the back-up and upgrade

is the 64 bit version heaps better?

do you think my box will handle 64 bit anyway?

Viva
August 4th, 2009, 10:07 AM
You won't see too much performance gain. I'd say, keep it as it is for now and try the 64 bit version when Karmic is released.

Johnecash
August 4th, 2009, 10:11 AM
ok will do thanks for the advise

theozzlives
August 4th, 2009, 10:15 AM
With only 1 GB RAM, you really don't need 64 bit.

eternalsword
August 4th, 2009, 10:19 AM
Unless you're doing cpu intensive stuff (scientific computations, 3D rendering, video encoding encoding, significant amount of source code compilation, etc) you probably would not notice much of a performance difference.

To determine if you are capable of running 64-bit, just check your cpuinfo for the lm flag.


grep flags /proc/cpuinfo

If lm is listed, you can run 64-bit.

3rdalbum
August 4th, 2009, 11:15 AM
64-bit operating systems do use a little more RAM than 32-bit. If you've only got a gigabyte of RAM, then you might want to stay with 32-bit as it will result in more memory available for cache.

mikechant
August 4th, 2009, 03:50 PM
Unless you're doing cpu intensive stuff (scientific computations, 3D rendering, video encoding encoding, significant amount of source code compilation, etc) you probably would not notice much of a performance difference.

I do a lot of video rendering, so I benchmarked 9.04 32bit vs 64 bit using the 'DeVeDe' application (which I believe uses mencoder for video conversion) and got exactly the same results on 32 and 64 bit. I used the relevant repository versions in each case so they should have been correctly built for 32 or 64 bit. Still, maybe I was doing something wrong...