i586 or x86-64

pilatus666 · 10-23-2009, 02:07 AM

What OS architecture will run better on this laptop:
-Intel Core 2 Duo T8300 @ 2400GHz
-Westel The Sun motherb.
-2x 2GB RAM
-NVidia 8600M GT 512MB
-320GB HDD
-Intel HDA audio
-Intel WLAN
-Fingerprint Reader
-Built in WebCam
-MultiMedia Remote controller
I know that both type of architectures are working I just want you're opinion with pros and cons about this. So far running Mandriva Spring 2009 x86-64 but have probs with webcam, fingerprint reader, Amarok, Vuze, and sometimes Kaffeine and the remote control. What would you chosse and why?
THX

Lordandmaker · 10-23-2009, 02:26 AM

IT depends mostly on what you want to do with it. The most obvious differences are that 32bit makes things like flash and skype easier to get working, 64 bit lets you use a chunk more memory.

Approximately the same question was asked here.

thegeek · 10-23-2009, 02:49 AM

If you need more than 3.5gb of memory you will need 64bit anyway.

64 bit architecture has a general limit of 256TB of ram, 32bit = 4gb.

pilatus666 · 10-23-2009, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lordandmaker

IT depends mostly on what you want to do with it. The most obvious differences are that 32bit makes things like flash and skype easier to get working, 64 bit lets you use a chunk more memory.

Approximately the same question was asked here.

Just normal everyday computing like browsing Firefox music mouvies amaroK and Kaffeine OpenOffice mainly Calc and K3b... you're right about the flash too sometimes the videos on the net just wont play, I've got a grey box sound works but no image, a couple of refreshings (the page) helps but not all the time and java (azureus/Vuze) seems to go crazy sometimes just boost up 100% one of the cores in the CPU and goes like that until I'm not killing it.... btw I'm also using dual screen twin view frequently...
THX

salasi · 10-23-2009, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thegeek

If you need more than 3.5gb of memory you will need 64bit anyway.

Only nearly true. A PAE kernel would allow you to adress more than 4G of memory, but would only allow an address space of 4G per application. In the long term, the solution is to go 64 bit, the only question is when exactly the decreasing hassle of the 64 bit version is worth it.

Monte Cristo · 11-20-2009, 02:00 AM

I use AMD 64. It was hence obvious to run x86-64 (SuSE).

Mr-Bisquit · 11-20-2009, 02:37 AM

It depends on equipment and design.
laptop gets x86 no matter what.
desktop gets amd64 for linux and x86 for FreeBSD- I have a card and like 3d support.

smeezekitty · 11-20-2009, 02:50 AM

64bit allows you to use 512MB more ram...but it also uses the ram less effeicently.
basically unless you have 6GB or more 64 bit is the way to go.

Mr-Bisquit · 11-20-2009, 04:43 AM

Bit size has to do with address space and maximum word length, think of it as piping.

salasi · 11-23-2009, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smeezekitty

basically unless you have 6GB or more 64 bit is the way to go.

Please explain that comment; it looks to me as if you meant 32 bit (maybe, 32 bit PAE) because you seem to be advising the use of 64 bits for systems with less than 6 GB of memory (and then what above 6 G? 32 bits??).

pixellany · 11-23-2009, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smeezekitty

64bit allows you to use 512MB more ram...but it also uses the ram less effeicently.
basically unless you have 6GB or more 64 bit is the way to go.

The difference is directly-addressable RAM is a whole lot more than 512MB!!!

Run this through your calculator: 2^64 - 2^32

Uses RAM less efficiently??? Please explain.

You meant "32 bit is the way to go", but the breakpoint is not at 6GB.