Jump to content

Real difference between 32 and 64 bit install


ac_dispatcher
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

 

I have a AMD X2 5600+. From past experience I always just downloaded the 32bit distro disks. questions:

 

1. Is the 64bit version of <insert Distro> really faster than the 32 bit? Can you see the difference?

 

2. How large is the package repos for 64bit compared to 32? Say for Mandy.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think you can run 32bit packages on a 64 system - right? If so do you run into to many problems with it? Isnt there issues with flash or java when it comes to the 64bit packages?

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are issues with the java plugin on 64-bit systems, but I just installed the 32-bit Firefox and used the 32-bit java-plugin.

 

(If I remember correctly, I was able to work around the problems with 64-bit Flash. I'm not running 64-bit ATM.)

 

There are equally as many pkgs available for 64-bit and 32-bit AFAIK. Even if not, you can always install *.src.rpms. It may have been my imagination, but the 64-bit install seemed to me to be quite a bit faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 to what Steve says. AFAIK 64-bit distros comes with 32-bit flash in wrapping so it works with 64-bit browsers. In the next version of Sun Java will be 64-bit supported or use IcedTea instead.

You can get the same stuff on 64-bit as in 32-bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a 64bit processor, and I use both 32bit and 64bit operating systems. I find it impossible to detect any speed difference between the two. Having said that I have never done any proper benchmarking to prove it one way or the other and I never deal with heavy graphics files like movie editing. I do edit photos but there is no discernible difference there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

64-bit packages are some 15-20% larger than the 32-bit ones... but this is not a rule.

With your 4 GB of RAM, the 64-bit version will be a tad slower than the 32-bit one. If you upgrade to 8 GB, and change all your hardware to pure 64-bit capable one (that is- not JUST the CPU, but also mainboard, GPU, etc), then the 64-bit version will be somewhat faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On newer models that run 64-bit it should be a problem ;)

 

Don't Average users editing pictures, movies etc. ? There's a big boost to do so on 64bit. But if if we're talking about browser and e-mail, minesweeping I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did some benchmarking, read my 2008.0 review.

 

Bottomline: depends on what you do with your machine, in most cases the machine is waiting for you, so you'll never notice. With a stopwatch in hand you may be able to tell the difference, it's not always the 64 bit that wins the race though.

 

I just run 64 bit whenever I can out of spite, since windows users can't (unless they accept much worse hardware compatibility issues then Linux users have lately) - except for Vista users, but then anyone worth his salt knows Vista's a dud anyway - 32 bit Linux will outshine Vista in 32 or 64 bit on the same hardware anyway...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...