PDA

View Full Version : [ubuntu] i am new to linux should i use 32 bit or 64 bit



sublimemovement
August 18th, 2009, 05:54 PM
I am new to Linux and I was wondering if I should use the 32 bit or 64 bit version.

I have an AMD athlon 64 x2 dual core processer+
slot: Socket M2
size: 2100MHz
capacity: 3GHz
width: 64 bits
clock: 1GHz
And I have 4 GiB of memory.

My mainly use my computer for going on the Internet, music, movies, and games.

I will be doing a dual boot with vista and I mostly want to learn how to use Linux.

thanks

theozzlives
August 18th, 2009, 05:56 PM
With 4 GB RAM, I would say 64 bit.

wizard10000
August 18th, 2009, 05:57 PM
I am new to Linux and I was wondering if I should use the 32 bit or 64 bit version.

I have an AMD athlon 64 x2 dual core processer+
slot: Socket M2
size: 2100MHz
capacity: 3GHz
width: 64 bits
clock: 1GHz
And I have 4 GiB of memory.

My mainly use my computer for going on the Internet, music, movies, and games.

I will be doing a dual boot with vista and I mostly want to learn how to use Linux.

thanks

I'd install the 64-bit version. Hardware support is pretty good - especially for hardware that's a little older. I'm running Jaunty 64-bit on a Core i7 and everything works right except hardware monitoring and that should be coming soon.

sublimemovement
August 18th, 2009, 06:07 PM
Thanks for the quick reply. I just was not sure I would have hardware support issues using the 64 bit version.

thanks again

nhasian
August 18th, 2009, 07:02 PM
64 bit is great. we even have a 64 bit java and flash. life is good :)

kuja
August 18th, 2009, 07:09 PM
I'd install the 64-bit version. Hardware support is pretty good - especially for hardware that's a little older. I'm running Jaunty 64-bit on a Core i7 and everything works right except hardware monitoring and that should be coming soon.

It's supported as of kernel 2.6.29, so you can compile a newish kernel or wait for Karmic.

Ric_NYC
August 18th, 2009, 07:16 PM
I have a 64 bit computer. I tried the 64 bit Ubuntu version.
Then I decided that a 32 bit would give me more applications running.
I'm happy running a 32 bit version of Ubuntu in a 64 bit computer.

:)

wizard10000
August 18th, 2009, 11:20 PM
It's supported as of kernel 2.6.29, so you can compile a newish kernel or wait for Karmic.

Guess I'll wait the two months ;)

k3lt01
August 19th, 2009, 09:57 AM
My fathers laptop is an amd64 bit, it originally come with 32 bit Vista so I initially installed 32 bit Ubuntu 8.04 iirc. I then downloaded and installed 64 bit Ubuntu 8.04 and we have stayed with 64 bit ever since.

Soooooo, if you have the RAM, which you do, and a processor capable of using it then I would advise going 64 bit.

Nburnes
August 19th, 2009, 09:59 AM
64 bit is great IMO

riazrahaman
August 20th, 2009, 10:26 AM
Go for 64bit. Have been using 64bit on my desktops and laptops for more than a year now.

Performance is very good.

Grenage
August 20th, 2009, 10:41 AM
It becomes a lot more important when you have more than 3.5-4GB RAM, but I recommend it on any 64-capable system.

Cheesemill
August 20th, 2009, 11:01 AM
There's no reason not to use 64-bit.

Grenage
August 20th, 2009, 12:16 PM
There's no reason not to use 64-bit

There are plenty of things that won't run on AMD64 architecture, and I have in some instances been forced to use x32; thankfully they are uncommon enough that your average user won't run into problems.

Copernicus1234
August 20th, 2009, 12:23 PM
I have yet to see any real performance benefits from 64-bit. Sure it will make games run a few fps faster, but will it affect application performance, bootup times etc? I dont see it.

The advantage of being able to use extra memory is nice, but I really dont see any other incentive. Maybe someone else does?

Grenage
August 20th, 2009, 12:29 PM
Yes and no. AMD64 is theoretically faster, although it's generally marginal. The main benefit is better use (or use at all) or larger memory sets.

Hamchan
August 20th, 2009, 01:45 PM
Yes and no. AMD64 is theoretically faster, although it's generally marginal. The main benefit is better use (or use at all) or larger memory sets.

Is that really a noticeable benefit for the average user? I'm running the 32 bit Ubuntu on a machine with 4 gigs of ram. Sure, it only allows me to use 2.95 gigs, but I'm only using 323 megs right now and have only once broken the 2 gig barrier when I was playing with a virtual machine.

How many people actually have a use for 4 gigs of ram and consider themselves "Average Users?"

Grenage
August 20th, 2009, 01:52 PM
How many people actually have a use for 4 gigs of ram and consider themselves "Average Users?"

Rather a lot, these days. Few computers worth buying come with less than 4GB of RAM. The differences are noticeable to some extent for the average user, so it's uncommon that someone could justify running x32 over x64.

wizard10000
August 20th, 2009, 02:15 PM
How many people actually have a use for 4 gigs of ram and consider themselves "Average Users?"

As you mentioned anybody doing virtualization. I generally allocate 4GB of RAM to a VM.

3rdalbum
August 20th, 2009, 02:55 PM
Windows has difficulty with 64-bit because many software developers wrote their programs and drivers with the assumption that they would only be used on 32-bit x86 processors, because that's mostly all Windows would run on.

When 64-bit came around, they were disadvantaged because their code was not written to be portable to 64-bit architecture, and even if it was, users relied on the developer releasing a recompiled 64-bit version (because Windows-based developers don't release their source code).

Linux developers have always written their programs to be portable to other processor architecture, because Linux runs on so many of them. If your program runs on x86 32-bit, Arm, PowerPC, MIPS and SPARC, it is pretty much guaranteed that it can be just recompiled to run on 64-bit x86.

And users don't have to wait for the developer to recompile the software - they can do it themselves, because most Linux software is open-source.

As a result, Linux works very well on 64-bit and in regular use it's indistinguishable from 32-bit.