LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Slackware (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)
-   -   Why should I install 64 bit if all works well in 32 bit? (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/why-should-i-install-64-bit-if-all-works-well-in-32-bit-881951/)

george-lappies 05-21-2011 09:23 AM

Why should I install 64 bit if all works well in 32 bit?
 
I got hold of the 3 cds needed to install full 32 bit Slackware 13.37 It installed perfectly and all is configured and running very smoothly. I have 4gb of RAM in my laptop so compiled the 2.6.38.4 kernel with PAE support and slackware sees 4gb of RAM. It will really be mission for me to get hold of the 64bit ISO as I do not have have uncapped bandwith (3g - UMTS).

Will I really benefit by installing the 64bit version, and if so how?

H_TeXMeX_H 05-21-2011 09:27 AM

Performance for one:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...u_32_pae&num=1

GazL 05-21-2011 10:18 AM

Even when they're done well (and that's something I'm always suspicious of with Phoronix), benchmarks and general day to day use are two very different things. If you're happy with the performance of your 32bit install then I wouldn't worry about it. Stick with what you have and leave going to 64 bit until the next time you need to do a reinstall or update and kill two birds with one stone.

H_TeXMeX_H 05-21-2011 10:25 AM

Certainly, you don't have to upgrade to 64-bit, especially if you have limited bandwidth and that's your only way to get slackware.

cascade9 05-21-2011 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GazL (Post 4362898)
Even when they're done well (and that's something I'm always suspicious of with Phoronix), benchmarks and general day to day use are two very different things. If you're happy with the performance of your 32bit install then I wouldn't worry about it. Stick with what you have and leave going to 64 bit until the next time you need to do a reinstall or update and kill two birds with one stone.

I dont know why people are that suspicious of phoronix, but its fair enough to never trust a single set of benchmarks unless you are foced to (and in that case, when you get whatever setup, then post the results in case anybody else is in the same situation).

The phoronix 32bit vs 64bit figures dont really have much 'real world' focus. You can see these benchmarks as well-

http://www.tuxradar.com/content/ubun...bit-benchmarks

A bit more of a real tasks focus. Sure, its over 2 years old now but AFAIK if anything 64bit should be more out in front performance wise than back in 2009.

That said, I probably wouldnt bother reinstalling to move from 32bit to 64bit...unless the OP is going to do a lot of audio or video encoding, or other tasks that do have a large performance increase from 64bit.

rg3 05-21-2011 10:51 AM

If you're fine with the performance of your computer, you don't have to worry about 64-bits until 2038.

TobiSGD 05-21-2011 10:53 AM

It totally depends on your kind of usage of the machine if you should install a 64 bit OS. If you are only surfing the net, watching some videos or do office work then you won't see a significant performance gain. But if you do some "number crunching", like rendering 3D images/videos, media encoding, editing large images and such stuff you will see a good performance gain. But as said above, if you don't have the bandwidth and you are happy with your performance just don't change. I am running 32 bit with PAE on my laptop which is mainly used for surfing and watching videos, and I am perfectly fine with that.

Woodsman 05-21-2011 12:46 PM

As far as obtaining additional DVDs/CDs, before I had a broadband connection I had a "broadband buddy" in the city who would let me download ISO images. Possibly that idea could work for you too.

I have a 64-bit CPU and 4 GB of RAM but I continue using 32-bit. I don't do any hard number crunching or serious video processing. Everything I have read indicates I am therefore unlikely to notice any significant performance gains.

I need to support older 32-bit hardware, which means building packages for those systems. I lack the time and motivation to deal with multi-lib. I could multi-boot between 32-bit and 64-bit versions solely for the sake of building 32-bit packages, but 64-bit has not proven to be a high priority for me.

That is only my experience and perspective but perhaps will help you decide.

TobiSGD 05-21-2011 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsman (Post 4363008)
As far as obtaining additional DVDs/CDs, before I had a broadband connection I had a "broadband buddy" in the city who would let me download ISO images. Possibly that idea could work for you too.

The best solution would be to support Slackware with buying the DVD. ;)

Woodsman 05-21-2011 02:46 PM

Quote:

The best solution would be to support Slackware with buying the DVD. ;)
Granted, this is the Slackware forum, but I was writing generically about any ISO image I wanted before I had a broadband connection. Further, many people prefer to test a distro before sending funds to provide support. At only 18 posts within this forum, the original poster might not yet be in that position. ;)

kgs 05-21-2011 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsman (Post 4363008)
As far as obtaining additional DVDs/CDs, before I had a broadband connection I had a "broadband buddy" in the city who would let me download ISO images. Possibly that idea could work for you too.

I have a 64-bit CPU and 4 GB of RAM but I continue using 32-bit. I don't do any hard number crunching or serious video processing. Everything I have read indicates I am therefore unlikely to notice any significant performance gains.

I need to support older 32-bit hardware, which means building packages for those systems. I lack the time and motivation to deal with multi-lib. I could multi-boot between 32-bit and 64-bit versions solely for the sake of building 32-bit packages, but 64-bit has not proven to be a high priority for me.

That is only my experience and perspective but perhaps will help you decide.

This is my exact same story.

I have also heard that the 64bit flash plugin (and perhaps other software) for Linux is buggy. Can anyone confirm this?

If you are running a 64bit system some software won't be available at all. For example, Wine. And while you can always go the multi-lib route, it seems like a pain in the neck to me.

I'll switch over to 64bit when it is the norm. For now I am perfectly happy with 32bit.

TobiSGD 05-21-2011 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgs (Post 4363136)
I have also heard that the 64bit flash plugin (and perhaps other software) for Linux is buggy. Can anyone confirm this?

Nope, runs fine here.

zasavage 05-21-2011 03:06 PM

I have 2 PC's running 13.37 Both identical hardware
One is 32 bit and the other 64 bit with multilibs ( Thanks to Alien Bob )
I use my one pc for mixing sound and editing videos as well as some GIS applications

I can tell you that the 64 bit is much faster on the same specs machine for these type of applications

My 2 cents ..

Lawrence

marnold 05-21-2011 03:54 PM

If you plan on adding more memory and also plan on using a program that will access >4G memory at a time, a 64bit OS is the only way to go. I went 64bit more or less because I can. :) It also seemed a bit (har!) silly to put a 32bit OS on a 64bit CPU. I've never done any tests to see if 64bit is faster vis a vis 32bit. Perfectly happy with Slack64 and multilib.

EdGr 05-21-2011 06:51 PM

Your next PC will run a 64-bit OS.

It's more a question of when you want to switch. You could switch now, or you could switch when you buy your next PC.
Ed


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:27 PM.