Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 62

Thread: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

  1. #11
    pricetech is offline May the Ubuntu Be With You!
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Beans
    1,656

    Re: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

    I tested using 32 and 64 bit Hardy as well as 32 and 64 bit windows 7 and found 64 bit to be noticeably faster in both test cases.

    You might have some issues with software, but so far everything that I use has just plain worked.

    Except flash. I got tired of it working, then not working, getting it working, then it would quit working, until I said 4377 with it and just use XP in a virtual machine on the rare occasion I want to look at videos.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Beans
    17

    Re: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

    Would you notice a difference switching to 64 bit if you only have 1GB of RAM, or would it be a waste?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Beans
    96

    Re: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

    Quote Originally Posted by dxxvi View Post
    The reason I want to stick with 32bit (and use PAE) is that about a year ago, I tried the 64bit and the 64bit took more memory than the 32bit. Now the Lucid Alpha3 (dist-upgraded daily) on my C2D T6570 4GB took 42 secs to boot and I was advised to switch to 64bit. Let's see if the 64bit gives me any performance wow in the next few days.
    Apr 20th: after I switched to 64bit (not sure if it's because I switch to 64bit or Lucid improves), my start up time is 33s. But I have to switch back to 32bit because there's no 64bit version of Oracle Express Edition (and I never succeed in installing Oracle 11g on Ubuntu although I read and followed a lot of different tutorials).

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Beans
    1

    Re: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

    Hey Guys,

    actually I'm pretty new to Ubuntu, since I did my first steps with 9.10 x64, but still I wanted to share some experiences. It still is true, that 64-bit-stuff hasn't come as far as software, that uses 32-bit-architecture. But my experiences are quite positive.

    I've been using and use Windows x64 for years now and I like the way it works. Ubuntu 10.04 x64, which I have parallely installed, is a very nice OS, too. It is fast, in most cases pretty stable and there seems to be a big pool of available software already. The really important stuff concerning writing, surfing, office and so on seems to have been completely transported.

    But still I had to expierience some issues.

    First of all flash. I know, Mr. Jobs wants to make the whole world believe, that flash is unstable and hazardous crap, that opens the gates of hell right on your system, whenever it is launched. But, besides the fact, that he's a dictator like guru-something, youtube would have been nice. I actually found a very simple way to enable it on x64: There is an easy method, to make a windows Firefox portable capable for playing flash by copying some files. Since I already had one on my USB-Stick, I launched it by using Wine, and to me it works fine. Just google it for more.

    Second and a whole lot more annoying is the lack of hardware support, but this might be a general Ubuntu issue, caused by not driver delivering hardware producers. So my SB X-Fi Xtreme Audio PCIe won't work and, in fact, since 10.04 even my onboard sound card isn't recognized. My TV-Card doesn't do any better.


    So, to come to an end and stop wasting your time x64 is really fast, if your hardware meets the requirements. My PC has 8GB of ram and that is and will ever be the most important point for me. If you own more than 3.5 GB, you should give it a try.

    By the way, did they exclude sun java only for 10.04 x64 or isn't there any in x32, either?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Beans
    364
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

    Quote Originally Posted by uziel144 View Post
    By the way, did they exclude sun java only for 10.04 x64 or isn't there any in x32, either?
    Same in 32 Bit
    They replaced it with an open source version, Google it...
    I have a computer with 4 gigs of ram and a 2.8GhZ Processer should I use 64 bit because I am concerned about the software available and I know 64 bit is the future, what do you think?
    SEX, Now that I have your attention please read my post
    Linux For Life
    Just for future purposes "You're Welcome"

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Beans
    2

    Re: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

    I've been using 64bit ubuntu since 9.04 and I had no problems whatsoever. 64bit is marginally faster than 32bit, but you won't notice it in everyday use. The Phoronix website did a test between 32/64bit ubuntu, and by them 64bit is much faster. However I was unable to reproduce those tests even with their own test suite. But still, 64bit works like a charm.

    That is, until 10.04. I think the problem is related to nvidia closed source driver. My display is quite slow, especially if I have more than 5-6 gnome-terminals open (something I do quite often when working). Compiz-effects are slow and itchy. However, if I run my usual benchmarks (stupid Python/Java/C#/C programs) execution times are the same as they were on 9.10. So, I'll blame nvidia+compiz for that. I just installed 32bit 10.04 and it seems to be working much much better.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    UK
    Beans
    42
    Distro
    Xubuntu

    Red face Re: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

    Having read through this thread my only thought is this: my future is uncertain!

    I'm waiting for an i7-930 based machine w/ 12GB of DDR3 RAM and an nVidia GTX 260 that I ordered a few days ago, and now I don't know if I'm gonna be able to continue using Ubuntu as I happily have been doing since I switched permanently from Windows a few months ago.

    The reason for my concern is using Ubuntu x86 would be simply moronic - given the amount of RAM available - so I'll have to go 64-bit and with all the hardware (and software it seems) related issues many people seem to be having, I might just be headed for a big disappointed.

    I can only hope I won't have to go back to 'doze due to some killer s/hw incompatibility.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Beans
    2

    Re: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

    You don't need to go for a 64-bit OS only for the RAM, since a 32-bit OS can access up to 64 GB of RAM using PAE.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    UK
    Beans
    42
    Distro
    Xubuntu

    Re: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

    Been using Ubuntu x64 and Windows 7 Ultimate on and off strictly for gaming for a week now and have not had any issues whatsoever so far.

    Only issue I had was with setting up Grub on my RAID0-enabled HDDs though that was not x64 related. Other than that, it's been a very joyous ride.

    Thanks for the pointer on PAE, abuy -- wasn't aware of that!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In A Big Pepsi Bottle
    Beans
    211
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    Re: 64 bit vs. 32 bit Ubuntu

    a friend suggested i run x64 but i only got 2.5GB ram and can't boost it unless i remove my 1GB video card and yet on an old laptop with 512MB it seems to perform alright with the 32bit version. i may consider a reinstall but with 32bit ubuntu.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •