32 bit... still recommended?

[Paqman]

it goes without saying that 32 is obsolete and the future will all be 64.*

i find this particularly interesting because I installed 16GB ram in my new U-box.

the Performance Monitor has yet to indicate 2GB in use. it usually runs very close to 1GB even. it's showing 1.0GB right now and I have Firefox, Thunderbird, and Audacious active

I just now opened GeoGebra ( the math program ) and memory use went to 1.2GB wooo wooo!

This is why I'm a bit baffled by people recommending 8GB or 16GB RAM for Ubuntu machines in this forum. For general use 4GB is still more than sufficient. Ubuntu will run ok on a 1GB machine (I know, I have a couple).

so what's the point of 64 bit? 32 bit can use up to 4GB installed memory ...

64-bit is faster. The ability to address more memory is a nice bonus IMO, but that extra RAM is only useful for the really RAM-hungry desktop jobs like CAD or Windows VMs. Obviously in the future that will change, and you'll actually need 4GB+ of RAM for Ubuntu.

Besides, current versions of 32-bit Ubuntu can address 4GB+ of RAM anyway. Memory size is a non-issue.

The main reason to install 64-bit is to use your CPU at full speed, instead of being throttled down to 32-bit speeds.

[bullmecha]

I don't really mind the 32bit versions, as I run it on my old Athlon Xp 3k system. Its fun to tinker around and play with as I am fairly new to Ubuntu / Linux. I play a various assortment of games so I am testing them slowly with WINE on the older system, once I am ready I will attempt the move to my i7 system and shall see what happens.

[Artemis3]

I have ran into a few issues with 64-bit and using Wine when it wants 32-bit libraries...

You should have the wine1.4-386:386 package installed. I have both (the other is wine1.4-amd64), and have zero issues (but i have never tried running 64 bits windows apps).

Steam is 32 bits, because Debian implemented multiarch, 32 bits apps pull their 32 bits dependencies on their own resulting, again, in zero issues.

There is no reason to use 32 bits unless you have a pentium 4 or older.

[Artemis3]

I don't really mind the 32bit versions, as I run it on my old Athlon Xp 3k system.

That cpu supports 64 bits...

[Artemis3]

Besides, current versions of 32-bit Ubuntu can address 4GB+ of RAM anyway. Memory size is a non-issue.

PAE lets you address the extra memory, but it still restricts how much a program (or thread?) can address at once; so a single app can't get more than 2g. There is no point in PAE unless you have a really old server (say, p4 era) with lots of ram. A highly unlikely scenario for workstations. Also, the older processors which actually need 32 bits, most likely don't support PAE. So... make your conclusion.

[bullmecha]

That cpu supports 64 bits...

That system is a single core AthlonXP3000 processor, 2100mhz, 2GB DDR2 RAM, ATI 3850 8x AGP Card. The 64 bit, 12.04 LTS I have on my USB drive will not load on that system.

[Artemis3]

That system is a single core AthlonXP3000 processor, 2100mhz, 2GB DDR2 RAM, ATI 3850 8x AGP Card. The 64 bit, 12.04 LTS I have on my USB drive will not load on that system.

Oh, thats the first with (p3) SSE instructions, never mind then.

[Paqman]

PAE lets you address the extra memory, but it still restricts how much a program (or thread?) can address at once; so a single app can't get more than 2g. There is no point in PAE unless you have a really old server (say, p4 era) with lots of ram. A highly unlikely scenario for workstations. Also, the older processors which actually need 32 bits, most likely don't support PAE. So... make your conclusion.

I agree, it's a hacky solution to a problem that only a small amount of old hardware would ever have.

[forrestcupp]

Unless you're dealing with specialized hardware, there is nothing wrong at all with 64-bit. It has come a very long way in the past few years. In my opinion, they should recommend 64-bit, but maybe include a warning to make sure your hardware can support it. I think they need to have a simple app available to download that can tell you if your hardware supports 64-bit. I wonder if it would be possible to create a web app to do that without even having to download anything.

I have ran into a few issues with 64-bit and using Wine when it wants 32-bit libraries... other than that 64-bit works really well for me.

Especially if you're using Winetricks to install dlls or something, you run into a lot of trouble for that. The way I take care of that is to set Wine to run win32 instead of 64-bit. The problem with that is that you have to delete your .wine directory and start over. But if you were willing to do that, just delete your .wine folder and do this:

export WINEARCH=win32
winecfg

64 is doggy
my brother installed it in virtual box as 64 bit and it didn't work
also it took 6 hours to download
32 is fine

Like someone else said, your hardware has to support 64-bit in virtualization, and you have to mess around with the settings in your VM to get it to work properly. In a VM, 32-bit is probably better, but on bare metal, 64-bit is definitely the way to go. The benefits are definitely worth it, and being able to handle more than 4GB of RAM is only one of the many benefits.

Am I misreading your post or does that sound like a contradiction? If your machine does not support 64-bit you simply can't run 64-bit Ubuntu.

Never say "can't". I forget who it was, but someone on here posted about a guy who created an emulator on the 8-bit Commodore 64 that actually emulated a 32-bit processor, and he got Ubuntu working on it.

Edit: I don't think it was a C64, but it was 8-bit, whatever it was. Here's an article about it.

[monkeybrain2012]

Somebody posted a thread on the absolute beginner section apparently having problems with wine running on 64 bit machines (Honestly I didn't even know that before)

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2083878&page=2

Unfortunately I am not a big wine user and never use it on 64 bit machines so couldn't really help. OP has switched to 32 bit in the end. Wish some of you here were there to give better advice.