LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 03-22-2009, 12:50 PM   #1
Quads
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2008
Location: Indiana
Distribution: Fedora, Ubuntu, Slackware
Posts: 203

Rep: Reputation: 34
32bit kernel on dual core amd


This may be a stupid question, but at this point is there any reason to continue to run a 32 bit version of linux? Some people say yes, and some say that the 64 bit versions have been thoroughly tested and work fine. Does the 32 bit kernel fully optimize the dual core processors?
 
Old 03-22-2009, 12:57 PM   #2
reptiler
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 184

Rep: Reputation: 41
I'm using Fedora 64-Bit on my PC since F7 or F8 and cannot say that I had any problems that I'd not have with the 32-Bit version which powers my notebook.

I clearly suggest using the 64-Bit version.
 
Old 03-22-2009, 01:40 PM   #3
salasi
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Location: Directly above centre of the earth, UK
Distribution: SuSE, plus some hopping
Posts: 4,060

Rep: Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quads View Post
is there any reason to continue to run a 32 bit version of linux?
...for some people yes, and for some people no.

Quote:
Some people say yes, and some say that the 64 bit versions have been thoroughly tested and work fine.
...both of those would be correct, then.
Quote:
Does the 32 bit kernel fully optimize the dual core processors?
The phrase 'optimise the dual core processors' is a bit obscure; I assume you mean use (or optimise the use of) to the maximum. Well, if you have more than 4G of memory, you'd probably say no....well unless you were considering the PAE kernel, although you may prefer not to go there.

Really, the disadvantage of the 64 bit is if you want proprietary apps, and the app provider hasn't (yet) provided a 64 bit version. You can get round this, but if 32 bit just works for you, you might ask why you would bother. (And its less of a problem than it once was, as proprietary software providers get with it.)
 
Old 03-22-2009, 01:46 PM   #4
AlucardZero
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2006
Location: USA
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 4,817

Rep: Reputation: 610Reputation: 610Reputation: 610Reputation: 610Reputation: 610Reputation: 610
32/64-bit has no relation on whether all cores are used. SMP/non-SMP does; all modern Linux distros have SMP-enabled kernels and will use all cores.

We are just on the cusp of widespread 64-bit adoption. I can tell you that Flash and Java work in my browser on 64-bit Linux.. but on the other hand I have 2GB RAM so there's no real benefit for me going 64-bit.

As computers start to come with 3.5+ GB RAM routinely, that will also spur 64-bit adoption and development. (With a 32-bit processor, you only get 4GB of total address space, including RAM and video card RAM).
 
Old 03-22-2009, 01:46 PM   #5
reptiler
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 184

Rep: Reputation: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by salasi View Post
PAE kernel, although you may prefer not to go there.
What's wrong with PAE? I see it as an advantage as it also enables the NX-bit (No eXecute) of the CPU.

Quote:
Originally Posted by salasi View Post
Really, the disadvantage of the 64 bit is if you want proprietary apps, and the app provider hasn't (yet) provided a 64 bit version.
Usually distributions provide both 64- and 32-bit software in their repositories.

As said, on my PC I use Fedora 64-Bit. Skype is 32-bit, thus has dependencies which are 32-bit. They are all available in the Fedora-repos.
 
Old 03-22-2009, 02:22 PM   #6
Quads
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2008
Location: Indiana
Distribution: Fedora, Ubuntu, Slackware
Posts: 203

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 34
Yes, I ran 64 bit Kubuntu 8.10 for a while, but it seemed to have issues, unrelated to it being 64 bit, just the fact that it didn't seem as polished as it could be. I am now running mandriva 2009 with a 32 bit kernel and it runs like a dead duck on this fast machine. Although watching the cpu usage it stays low, it just seems way too slow. That is why I thought maybe using the 64 bit version would make it move a little quicker.
 
Old 03-22-2009, 02:37 PM   #7
Tinkster
Moderator
 
Registered: Apr 2002
Location: in a fallen world
Distribution: slackware by choice, others too :} ... android.
Posts: 23,067
Blog Entries: 11

Rep: Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910
The major advantages of the 64-bit version come to play when you're
about fast memory usage. So, if you're planning on using a RDBMS
like PostgreSQL on your machine, by all means. In terms of performance
(CPU utilisation) you won't see much difference.

That said: given the word-length in 64-bit you'll probably see the
64 bit counterparts of your programs consume more RAM than the 32 bit
versions ... ;}


Cheers,
Tink
 
Old 03-22-2009, 02:55 PM   #8
Quads
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2008
Location: Indiana
Distribution: Fedora, Ubuntu, Slackware
Posts: 203

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 34
Well here is a question maybe slightly unrelated, but why does it seem like the system always utilizes one core more than the other? It seems like a large disparity watching the cpu usage graphs, and it doesn't seem to be the same one all of the time. Sometimes cpu0 is high while cpu1 is low, or vice versa?
 
Old 03-22-2009, 03:15 PM   #9
AlucardZero
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2006
Location: USA
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 4,817

Rep: Reputation: 610Reputation: 610Reputation: 610Reputation: 610Reputation: 610Reputation: 610
They just switch around.

Applications do have to be written to take advantage of multiple cores.
 
Old 03-23-2009, 05:27 AM   #10
salasi
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Location: Directly above centre of the earth, UK
Distribution: SuSE, plus some hopping
Posts: 4,060

Rep: Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by reptiler View Post
What's wrong with PAE? I see it as an advantage as it also enables the NX-bit (No eXecute) of the CPU.
There is an amount of feeling out there that PAE is a bit of a hack that shouldn't have got in (http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-L.../msg01728.html, http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...hel5.2-689609/). I am currently using it on my laptop, so my personal objection isn't very strong, but, for others they may have other opinions.


Quote:
Usually distributions provide both 64- and 32-bit software in their repositories.
Which is absolutely fine, unless you need a bit of proprietary software that the closed supplier doesn't make available. There is nothing that the distro can do to fix that, really, until the proprietary supplier decides that its worth their while to fix the problem.

Tinkster wrote:
Quote:
That said: given the word-length in 64-bit you'll probably see the
64 bit counterparts of your programs consume more RAM than the 32 bit
versions ... ;}
Have you measured it; I wouldn't have expected it to be all that much; of the order of 5-10%, I would have guessed.

Quote:
The major advantages of the 64-bit version come to play when you're about fast memory usage.
Big yes; if you have a database that is over 4G (or even close), 64 bit seems sensible. But again, within the limits of a 32 bit kernel, I wouldn't have expected the speed to be noticeably different, so I'd be interested if anyone has test results to share.
 
Old 03-23-2009, 05:46 AM   #11
reptiler
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 184

Rep: Reputation: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by salasi View Post
There is an amount of feeling out there that PAE is a bit of a hack that shouldn't have got in (http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-L.../msg01728.html, http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...hel5.2-689609/).
Thanks for those links. I'm gonna dig into it.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
32bit vs 64bit, dual core vs quad, and clock speeds colinstu General 22 05-21-2007 03:31 AM
Suse 9.3 AMD 4400+ Dual Core installation APIC kernel panic lostowl SUSE / openSUSE 6 12-27-2006 07:22 AM
AMD Dual Core Not noticed in ubuntu need a k8 smp on 32 bit kernel can't find! dannyboy374 Ubuntu 1 05-29-2006 09:20 AM
Fedora Core 4 x86_64 on a Shuttle XPC SN25P with an AMD 64 X2 (Dual core) gwiesenekker Linux - Hardware 4 12-06-2005 11:53 PM
AMD Opteron or AMD 64 dual core difference? GATTACA Linux - Hardware 1 10-22-2005 09:46 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:36 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration