GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
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.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
So the AMD64 processor was released some time ago and then shortly it was this big thing for most to get an AMD64 and now Intel Core 2 64 bit compatable CPU. Sure every Linux distro is 64 bit it seems and so is Microsoft but I just don't see what the benefits are.
Many things just don't work in 64 bit true environments and if they do, so what - I don't see any performance between the 32 and the 64. Even at work we elect to use the 32 bit versions of RHEL / CENTOS / W2K3 Server.
I am wondering if perhaps someone can shed some light on why you prefer the 64 bit OS over the basic 32.
It just doesn't seem to be the standard yet which reminds me of HD programming 3 years ago. Not many channels to pick from, expensive, just all around not worth it on the hardware.
CPU's have got to a point where they can't just increase the clock speed anymore, it takes electrons too long to get from one side of the die to the other. So hardware manufacturers need to look at other methods to increase performance of their products.
We're in a transition period where by technology and software is migrating from 32 bit platforms to 64 bit. This transition period can't be instantaneous, though it is taking longer than I would have expected.
I think you've answered your own question: "It just doesn't seem to be the standard yet"
BTW 64 bit processers have been around for awhile. Digital Equipment Corporation released the DEC Alpha back in 1992. IBM had a supercomputer back in 1961 that was 64 bits. With 64 bits you can address more memory as well as manipulate numbers better since they also have larger data registers.
In the desktop PC world new hardware is out sooner than software is available that can use it to its full potential. In the mean time there is a hardwar compatability mode where the older 32 bit OS can still be used.
Right now, the only real reason to upgrade to a 64-bit environment is to be able to access more than 4 GB of RAM.
A lot of high-end needs already need more than 4 GB of RAM, so there is real demand for 64-bit computing out there.
If you have to ask, you probably don't need a 64-bit system; but since it's just a matter of time before it trickles down to home consumers, some people like to get on the cutting-edge and try it out anyway.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.