Very simple and general question. When it comes to Windows, it is a question as to whether I want to take advantage of all of my 8 gigs of RAM or want more software compatibility.
Is this the case with Ubuntu? Either way, make your case.
-
-
This is not the case.
-
I am not a linux user. But is there really a 32 and 64 bit versions of linux?
-
Yes, there are. I have heard that one can detect and address more than 3.5GB with a patched 32-bit kernel, but this requires quite a bit of work and technical knowledge. The easiest thing to do is download Ubuntu's 64-bit version off their website.
-
WhoreofSpamylon, as you may guess, 64-bit version will be much more effective for applications with intensive RAM usage. But in fact 64-bit Linux kernel is more effective even for applications with almost no RAM usage at all (e.g. cracking crypto-keys). This happens because modern 64-bit CPUs have special arithmetic registers which are 64-bit only and are not used if the CPU is in 32-bit mode. On average, the same CPU is 10-15% more effective in 64-bit mode than in 32-bit mode. You easily see it yourself: run "pv -c /dev/urandom > /dev/null" in 64-bit and in 32-bit mode.
erwallie: FYI, Linux is supporting 64-bit CPUs for more that 10 years. Because of its open nature, porting device drivers from 32-bit to 64-bit is relatively easy, and if your camera or a USB-network card works with 32-bit Linux, 99% chanses are that it will work with 64-bit. NOT THE CASE FOR CLOSED-SOURCE WINDOWS. It seems that right now 64-bit Linux supports more hardware than 64-bit Windows. This is another reason for you to switch from the dark side and start using Linux. -
In Linux, it's 3.5GB of RAM or 8GB of RAM, software all runs fine, even software under wine and such.
Make your own choice(I run 64bit on all of my systems)
-
The only software compatibility problem I have had is with SML/NJ. I doubt you'll be needing to run it unless you're a computer science student though.
Another small issue I had was installing 32-bit Firefox in order to get Flash, which was only offered in 32 bit at the time. A 64 bit version of Flash came out recently, but I do not know how usable it is. -
ALLurGroceries Vegan Vermin Super Moderator
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=341727
Edit: Sorry I forgot to mention that you need to use the --force-architecture switch when you install nspluginwrapper, so it would be:
Code:sudo apt-get --force-architecture install nspluginwrapper
-
I think the 64 edition would be alright if you don't have any issues with it. -
nspluginwrapper shouldn't be needed anymore
-
With Linux, the newer kernels have PAE support built-in. While the 4GB limit is still "there", these kernels can hop over it. The aforementioned issues with hardware and software don't go away just because it's Linux. PAE inflicts a known performance hit and everything *does* need to know how to cooperate with it.
64-bit Linux for the end-user is a no-brainer. The support is fine, the apps work. Ubuntu 64-bit even properly handles getting Flash working in Firefox, not to mention Adobe has a early release Flash 64-bit for Linux which seems to work rather well. -
I was talking about compatibility, sorry!
-
-
if its only for ram just install the server kernel on 32bit and it would see it all i believe
lots of things doesn't work well under 64bit environment from what i hear -
I have been running 64 bit Ubuntu for over three years on a laptop (HP L2000 Special Edition first and now a Thinkpad T500) and my experience is that most things do run well on 64 bits. Anything that is not available in 64 bit build can usually be run as a 32 bit executable. For example, in the early days, it was necessary to run a 32 bit browser because there were no 64 bit versions of plugins like Flash. As time goes on and more things become available built for 64 bit systems, the need for that decreases.
If absolute minimum tweaking for your system is a requirement, then you can stick with a 32 bit system. If you don't mind some minimal tweaking to gain 64 bit performance and addressing capability, then I do not hesitate to recommend a 64 bit installation. I have done that on my T500 and at present, the only thing I find that does not work out of the box is the remote control capability of the LogMeIn remote connection web page. I will probably install a 32 bit browser to overcome that limitation.
best,
hank -
It's always the ones that haven't used 64-bit that say they think that it has compatibility issues. This is incorrect.
-
Been using 64bit for a while. Using a 32bir OS when you have a 64bit CPU is just rediculous. I run both 64bit Vista and Ubuntu. Ubuntu has less issues, Vista doesn't have too many though. Go 64bit.
-
wow great news !
time for me to upgrade to 64bit then
do i need to reinstall on top of my current installation from another CD or i can upgrade normally? -
need to reinstall. Every program on your system needs to be replaced.
-
Look for ia-32 libs. That'll take care of the few compatibility probs you might run into.
-
The wikipedia article will give you a good overview of how PAE works, if you're interested in the technical aspects. From a user aspect, you just need to use a kernel with PAE enabled (only the server kernels in Ubuntu). I had to compile my own kernel when I had my 32bit Xeon desktop with 5GB of RAM because PAE and Xen don't play nice with the NVidia driversThat should get you enough info to speak knowledgeably about it.
-
reinstalling programs is not a problem, my files is the most important
i did it and faced some issues, read this thread for more info about my experience -
Whore, I use 32 bit for compatibility reasons, although now that might not even be valid because there are workarounds.
Ubuntu: 32 or 64 bit?
Discussion in 'Linux Compatibility and Software' started by HorrorofSpamylon, Dec 2, 2008.