Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Originally Posted by JimBone
Well I just received the email about this poll and I am already too late to vote. Here it is anyway:
I use both x86_64 and x86_32 cause I want more than one machine to mess with. I prefer 64 bit by a long shot.
Unlike the MCA polls, these polls do not have an end date.
but it is my understanding that the real purpose of developing 64 bit systems is to prepare for the expansion of addresses (IPv4 to IPv6.
No, that has nothing to do with the IPv4/IPv6 switch (network addresses). You can use larger memory arrays on 64 bit systems with less overhead on smaller memory arrays (>892MB), but additional to that x86_64 also has larger and more registers than x86, so that many programs will have a performance gain, but not all. On a PC with "normal" usage (browsing the web, playing music/videos, doing some office work) you won't see performance differences, but for some other tasks the performance increases are huge.
On the first post I missed many Linux devices which I use everyday. So instead of editing the original post I will add them below.
Originally Posted by crazypenguin
I voted for x86_64, x86, and ARM. The break down is as follows.
5 Desktop (Daily users) PCs x86_64
1 Laptop x86_64
1 Netbook x86_64
3 Desktop Test PCs x86_64
4 Legacy PCs x86 (two of them probably should be scrapped out)
4 Android devices running ARM
1 Raspberry Pi embedded Linux ARM
Synology 213 ARM
Roku 3 ARM (Some of the older models used MIPS)
WD Live MIPS
Sony Bravia Blu Ray Player MIPS
Vizio Blu Ray Player MIPS
AVerMedia Game Capture HD MIPS
Netgear Router WNDR4500-100NAS MIPS
Netgear Router WNR3500L MIPS
Zytel DSL Modem MIPS
Cisco Home Router MIPS
8 Trendnet Switches MIPS?
4 Security Cameras W/built in web server MIPS
HP Printer MIPS
Epson Printer MIPS?
I have been using x86 in Ubuntu 10.04 and 12.04. Recently I purchased a new PC with an Intel CI5 cpu and a Gigabyte motherboard. I installed Ubuntu 12.04 64bit. It is a lot faster than the 32bit version. I use Clementine and have found that the sound quality is much better than in the 32bit version. However I have some issues with it. I have installed the GNOME Classic desktop and have found that Alt+Tab does not work. My other issue is that it is stuck on 1024x768 screen resolution. It does not read the Intel graphics on the motherboard. I dual boot with Windows 7 Ultimate which reads the Intel graphics without any problems.
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
I have far fewer machines than a lot of people here at only two:
A desktop with a FX 8120 running Debian Sid 64 bit and Slackware 64 bit sometimes,
An EEEPC running Debian Sid 32 bit since it's a single-core Atom.
I hope to expand that with a Pi soon when time/money/everything else permits.
A friend made the move from 32 bit Ubuntu to 64 bit and found the performance increase staggering -- when I mentioned that the extra instructions alone could account for a lot of it he swore at me for not telling him sooner. The larger registers and addressable memory of AMD64 may not mean it's faster than i386 by default but the fact most i386 distros and programs are compiled for a limited instruction set mean if you've a 64 bit processor you ought to find a 64 bit OS faster.
I guess I could see for someone with computers on a very tight budget (money\time\whatever) but the (entertainment\*) value vs coast is capacious. Most people already have the screen, speakers, mini-USB-cable (e.g.) WiFi-thumb-drive, etc but good portable ones can be cheap too, along with breadboards and doodads+++
Last edited by jamison20000e; 09-25-2013 at 06:40 AM.
Location: France, Languedoc-Roussillon (pre frontiere espagnol)
Distribution: Puppy Linux!
I have, in reality, PC's with 2 to 6 cores, 64 bits, but I've not yet found a flavor of Linux that I like in 64bits. I'm a Pupy Linux lover, and don't want to swap it for a blown up distro, but the 64bits Puppies are a bit limited. I'll be changing soon, but with a 32 bits option, an essential for me, as 64bits isn't totally adopted, as yet
I've also a Raspi, but it's not yet in action. I'll install Puppy on that too, as it's only around 100Mb for the distro complete
Even I have a 64-bit cpu since 4 years, however I've only used pure 32-bit Linux because this laptop supports only 4 GB of max. RAM. And I anyways found no compelling reason to use 64 bit OS with 3 GB of RAM it came with.