Linux x64 Team

There's an x64 team for Windows, right? Now theres one for Linux!

I'm currently running Xubuntu AMD 64 8.04.1.
Its nice

 

x64 here too No problems, works like a charm

 

My understanding of the purpose for these teams is to let people know that you have experience with whatever the team is about (ex, Linux) and that you can help them with regards to that topic, however I feel that the 64-bit teams are pointless since you don't need the experience to know how 64-bit works. The same doesn't go for Linux, BSD, or whatever.

 

Hmm... I feel all the teams are pointless.

 

Ain't nothing but a thing. lol.

 

I think you meant ain't not thang—but it ain't no thang

 

Ubuntu Hardy 64-bit here

I don't know if it's just me, but I notice a slightly faster performance increase w/ 64-bit distros, especially when compiling from source. Lol, not a bad topic for an experiment or something...

 

Another point to add is that a 64-bit Linux team is pointless because upgrading from 32 to 64-bit Linux offers the same advantages as upgrading from 32 to 64-bit Vista. In other words, there is nothing unique about 64-bit Linux as it as the same pros/cons of 64-bit Vista. So if you want to offer help specifically to 64-bit "noobs", just join the 64-bit team! If you want to offer help specifically to Linux "noobs", join the Linux team!

The second thing is that hardly anyone uses 64-bit Linux. Why don't I create a BSD team?

 

Thanks for the correction on that one....lol Ha!, haven't been to the Urban Dictionary in a while, getting rusty....

 

Do you guys even have 3+ GB of RAM on the systems your running Linux on, or do you just use it since you have a x64 capable cpu?

Also Ive heard flash, java, wine have issues with 64 bit. All 64 bit is doing is just making it run in 64 bit, there are no optimizations like most of the 32 bit based distros have and hence I see no point in keeping a 64 bit version when the 32 bit counterpart works much better.

 

For flash there is a workaround: Flash 9 install script for AMD64 (nspluginwrapper)

 

No they don't they all work for me.
Xubuntu x64 is considerably faster for me.

 

I have 3 gb, but for me compatibility is key, and with my hardware, Mandriva runs like a sexually assaulted primate on 32 bit. IMHO With Sabayon, I do notice a difference with 64.

 

A few rambling thoughts while I avoid real work.

There's actually an advantage to moving to 64-bit if your programs are compiled for 64-bit regardless of the amount of ram you have. amd64 was an architecture leap as well as an expansion to 64-bits memory addressing and 64-bit registers.

The example that comes to my mind is that in 64-bit mode, you now have 16 registers instead of 8.. one benchmark I saw a long time ago when amd64 was being introduced is that the improved number of registers alone means you cut the number of times you have to reference the stack (in memory or cache) by a third. You don't get that benefit running 32-bit apps on a 64-bit host, of course.

In 64-bit mode (amd64) you get to make some nice assumptions about the cpu too..because only modern CPUs are 64-bit, you can assume it has certain post-1999 features. i.e., amd64 mandates using the SSE unit for all floating point arithmetic by default, while 32-bit code will use the x87 unit first, which is less efficient for most tasks.

And yes, you do get the benefit of flat page tables, so each memory page lookup in the OS can go faster, and you can address more then 4GB of memory without even further redirects (redirects=memory references=slower). I'm glossing over this here, but you get the idea.

In real world numbers, almost everything should benefit a little, and NOTHING should be slower (unless you're talking about x64 windows video drivers, which until recently were second class citizens and never were updated... Linux open source drivers don't have this problem since thy use the same code, they're just a recompile away).

'64-bit only helps if you have more than 3gb of memory' (or 2GB as it was back in 2001/2002 when amd64 came out)... is a half-truth at best. Conspiracy theorists would argue MS (or Intel) was spreading this argument to cover for the fact they didn't have 64-bit ready CPUs or OS's to take advantage of the other nice features. It is not true.

Now, Intel Core 2 cpus used to not do certain optimizations in 64-bit mode which made them a bit slower compared to running in 32bit mode.. (uOP fusion I think it was), but AMD cpus suffer no such disadvantage between the modes. I'm not sure about current intel cpus.

64-bit linux users still suffer unique problems from non-open-source vendors (flash, java, wireless drivers, etc..). Some distributions ship with both a full 64-bit and 32-bit environment to work with everything (Fedora, I think), while ubuntu (and debian) install only a pure 64-bit environment so that you're sure that all your apps are using the full potential of your computer.

I run ubuntu 64-bit, and have for many years. I installed swiftfox 32-bit for when i need it, but I actually rather enjoy browsing the web without java or flash in my default firefox 3.0.. it makes the web a -much- nicer place. However, the java problem is being resolved with the open sourcing of java. The flash problem still remains and no one really knows what adobe's problem is.

I'm not a big forum person.. I'm just browsing these forums because I'm in the market for a new laptop. But, well, I'm a computer architecture nut and I couldn't resist.

-pm

 

I understand that, there's quite a few discussions like that going on over at Ubuntu Forums, why don't you hang over there, it's mostly in the Community Cafe. I made a thread over there "Any way to get better Flash?" and voiced my opinion along with a lot of other people, there's still much to be said though...

 

My wireless worked great..and its a pan in the ass to get working some times..lol
I have no problems with it, I have all my drivers, flash, etc.
Its all good
Apps do run considerably faster to

 

You can "have flash" but until they "fix" flash, it will be buggy at best.

It'll work for a week and then you'll just randomly lose sound.

Adobe and Sun both have their head in the sand. (Although, it's understandable from Adobe. . . they've had it stuck there for years)

 

There is a fix for the 'no sound' problem too http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=655825

 

I have no other choice but 64 bit on Compaq v3000z. But I have no complain for 64 bit whatsoever. Audio, video, wifi, webcam, eyecandy. Just only a few web page with midi doesn't like 64 bit driver.

 

What do you mean "no choice"?

 

Has anyone dual booted Vista 64bit and Ubuntu 64bit? I want to do it on my 1520 but I want to do some research on it first.

 

Dual booting Vista 64bit and Ubuntu 64bit should be exactly the same as dual booting any other two flavors of Linux and Windows.

 

Okay. this may be a stupid question. I'm running 32 bit Ubuntu 8.04 on my laptop with a Core 2 Duo...I'm pretty sure the core 2 duos are 64-bit..., so all I should need to do is redownload the 64-bit version of Ubuntu and install the same way as before?

 

ya i think that should be it.

 

Get rid of the idea of stupid questions; you're only stupid if you *don't* ask questions when you know that you don't know something.

As arjunned answered, yes, thats what you have to do. You can't upgrade from 32-bit to 64-bit; you need a clean install.

 

Alright thanks, I'll try a clean install tonight. Hopefully, I shouldn't run into any driver issues.

 

Exactly....the key is to know what you DON'T know and step up.

 

wine seems to be buggy on 64, but other then that...iunno what to say, since i have only used 64 bit lol.

 

Did you make sure to get Wine 1.0?

 

Or Wine 1.1.1.
Available here, link.
Check Wine HQ for full release details; link.

 

Isn't 1.1 and up in development?

 

Yep, 1.1.1 is a development release but only 1.0 was a stable release.
Not much use waiting another 15 years for the next stable version so it's development releases again for the next 15 again .
(J/k about the 15 year period, not meant as *****ing towards the Wine folks!)

 

Compaq V3000z doesn't allow me to install 32 bit Ubuntu, and I don't want to change my distro flavor. So there is no other choice for me but 64 bit.

 

lol thats the first time i hear that. what happens when you try to install 32 bit

 

It's hardcoded to stop you from installing 32 bit lol?

Anyway I've successfully installed Ubuntu 64 bit after 3 tries...Somehow I kept getting the "Errno 5" error until I burned another CD with another program lol...wtf?

 

Considering x64 systems are capable of 32 bit OSes as well, I doubt this.
Also, Windows probably came on that machine, and was probably 32 bit.