64bit linux vs 32 bit linux.

[MBrown]

How much faster does a 63bit linux os run than a 32bit one. I'm guess there is no difference only if you are running 64bit apps right?

 

[n0cmonkey]

It probably depends on your architecture. IA64 running 32bit apps is supposed to be a dog.

 

[bdoople]

63Bit?

I run FC4 x64 and Novell Suse AMD64 I don't honestly see much of a difference if any from the 32bit counterparts. I mean it's vastly different. Blah blah registers buffer overflows yadda yadda. It has nothing to do with penises and everything to do with me educating people.


64-bit OS's are faster, and can handle more RAM.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: bdoople
63Bit?

I run FC4 x64 and Novell Suse AMD64 I don't honestly see much of a difference if any from the 32bit counterparts. It's kinda just an e-pen 15 thing now.

I don't know how much the Linux devs are taking advantage of them, but there are features in some 64bit archs past the penis thing people like you like thinking about.

 

[bersl2]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: bdoople
63Bit?

I run FC4 x64 and Novell Suse AMD64 I don't honestly see much of a difference if any from the 32bit counterparts. It's kinda just an e-pen 15 thing now.

I don't know how much the Linux devs are taking advantage of them, but there are features in some 64bit archs past the penis thing people like you like thinking about.

Such as doubling the number of general-purpose and SIMD registers for register-starved x86.

 

[Sureshot324]

Since most linux software is distrubuted as source code, and then compliled by whatever compiler is on your system, any software will preform better and take advantage of the extra 64bit registers, because it will be compiled by a 64bit compiler. Am i wrong?

Practially though, you're better off using 32bit linux though. You won't notice a speed difference, and there are some things that won't work or at least won't work easly in 64bit. Take flash for example. It's distributed as binary, not source, and there are no 64bit binaries, so it will only work if you run a 32 browser.

 

[drag]

Almost ALL open source software is now 64bit compatable. You just have to find the packages or compile them yourself. Distros like Suse or Gentoo have had 64bit versions for quite some time now.

Also some distros like Debian have 64bit systems on Alphas and Sparc systems since many years ago and now have unofficial 'stable' and official testing/unstable versions for people to use.

There are a lot of reasons why you'd want to use 64bit. For isntance if your want to use something like cinelerra for video editing of high definition video the data sizes are large enough (over 512megs) that the regular x86 system will be unstable and choke on. You need the 64bit-ness for fast proccessing time of things like floating point RGB color and the large amounts of data.

The principal bad thing about 64bit is that closed source software is still almost all 64bit except for a handfull of games (ut2004 has had native 64bit in Linux for a year or so now) Things like Flash and win32 codecs will require 32bit versions of programs on your 64bit system in order to play.

If it wasn't for that then there is no real reason NOT to run 64bit Linux. The open source drivers are all there, nvidia and even ati have 64bit versions. The only hardware you'd have to avoid is stuff like certain wifi cards can only work thru ndiswrapper.

 

[bdoople]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: bdoople
63Bit?

I run FC4 x64 and Novell Suse AMD64 I don't honestly see much of a difference if any from the 32bit counterparts. It's kinda just an e-pen 15 thing now.

I don't know how much the Linux devs are taking advantage of them, but there are features in some 64bit archs past the penis thing people like you like thinking about.

Haha.. that people like me think about eh? Sarcasm is a wonderful thing, especially on the internet. I am far from a non-linux guy.. I just don't see any real need for X64 in a home user environment. X64 Linux as well as Windows runs about twice as fast (Especially from what I've seen in 2k3 Server). It's fun.. but there's not really anything to huff and puff about.
n0c, I can't help but take offense at the "people like you" comment.

 

[doornail]

Until you get into some seriously heavy lifting, both architectures will benchmark pretty close to each other. When (pre-Linux) OS's went from 16 to 32 bits the effect was greater because we were actually fighting the constraints imposed by 16 bit computing. There's still plenty of breathing room in 32 bit systems. My plan is to run 32 bit Linux on my Athlon 64 for the next year or so to let support mature, then upgrade. Basically waiting for "nearly painless" to become "completely painless".

You can build a perfectly functional 64bit Linux desktop right now but since modern chips run i386 code so well I don't think you'll notice a stunning difference.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: bdoople

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: bdoople
63Bit?

I run FC4 x64 and Novell Suse AMD64 I don't honestly see much of a difference if any from the 32bit counterparts. It's kinda just an e-pen 15 thing now.

I don't know how much the Linux devs are taking advantage of them, but there are features in some 64bit archs past the penis thing people like you like thinking about.

Haha.. that people like me think about eh? Sarcasm is a wonderful thing, especially on the internet. I am far from a non-linux guy.. I just don't see any real need for X64 in a home user environment. X64 Linux as well as Windows runs about twice as fast (Especially from what I've seen in 2k3 Server). It's fun.. but there's not really anything to huff and puff about.
n0c, I can't help but take offense at the "people like you" comment.

Take offence all you want, but people like you keep bringing up penises in regards to computers when there are huge benefits to architectures like AMD64, sparc64, and alpha.

Besides the registers mentioned in other posts, these archs (and others like PowerPC970) include technologies like NX. Although they won't stop all attacks, they can help prevent buffer overflows. With the amount of crappy software out there, this can be important.

Keep bringing up penises instead of real benefits. Yeah, that'll help educate people. :roll:

 

[silverpig]

In general use I don't notice much of a difference, but apparently encoding tasks see massive performance increases... It'll only be a matter of time before more applications get tailored to 64-bit.

 

[bdoople]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: bdoople

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: bdoople
63Bit?

I run FC4 x64 and Novell Suse AMD64 I don't honestly see much of a difference if any from the 32bit counterparts. It's kinda just an e-pen 15 thing now.

I don't know how much the Linux devs are taking advantage of them, but there are features in some 64bit archs past the penis thing people like you like thinking about.

Haha.. that people like me think about eh? Sarcasm is a wonderful thing, especially on the internet. I am far from a non-linux guy.. I just don't see any real need for X64 in a home user environment. X64 Linux as well as Windows runs about twice as fast (Especially from what I've seen in 2k3 Server). It's fun.. but there's not really anything to huff and puff about.
n0c, I can't help but take offense at the "people like you" comment.

Take offence all you want, but people like you keep bringing up penises in regards to computers when there are huge benefits to architectures like AMD64, sparc64, and alpha.

Besides the registers mentioned in other posts, these archs (and others like PowerPC970) include technologies like NX. Although they won't stop all attacks, they can help prevent buffer overflows. With the amount of crappy software out there, this can be important.

Keep bringing up penises instead of real benefits. Yeah, that'll help educate people. :roll:

I mentioned nothing of penises. All I did was try and help educate people.