Some of my hardware is only 32bit. See here.

Well yesterday I upgrade slackware 12.1 to slackware-current on my other machine.The machine is Pentuim 2 with 256mb RAM and 300Mhz proccesor,applied non-smp kernel patch.On that machine i use xfce and my machine feel's good feel responsive,boot time is about 1 minute to desktop.

Sorry for my english,i hope you can understand me.

I use both 64 and 32 bit versions. I have applications and devices that are not supported on 64 bit as well as some older paltforms that are not 64-bit compatible.

On my gaming machine I run 64-bit, because it has more RAM than a 32-bit machine can register.

My older machine, which runs Slackware full time, has an AthlonXP 32-bit processor. I use that machine for a 2nd desktop, media player/server, etc. There is no technical reason I still use a 32-bit machine other than not enough money to upgrade at the moment.

Once I can get a new computer, I don't see myself using the 32-bit again, as then both of the machines I use will have 64-bit processors.

I run 64-bit where hardware will allow, but I have an Acer netbook and an old Dell laptop that are 32-bit only.

Fortunately, now that I've kicked my World of Warcraft habit I don't need to setup multi-lib anymore.

I have two 32 bit machines running i386 (or is it i586?) and when i installed Slackware on my newer machine i realized too late that i had 64-bit processors on this one and 32-bit Slack was running fine soooo i let it go , never felt the need for 64-bit operating system and i figured i would give the developers time to fine tune 64-bit world.

There is also an option to run a mixed 64 bit kernel 32 bit userland configuration (of course not officially supported), which I used, before Slackware64 became available. It removes the memory management limitations while keeping things simple.

Linux itself (the kernel) benefits from 64 bits already at memory sizes above 896 MB.

But the main reason why I still use ia32 OS is that you need hardware virtualization for running x86_64 OS in a paravirtual machine. Binary Translation only works with IA32 code. And still many x86-64 capable machines ship without the essential Virtualization CPU feature, because most end-users don't need it.

maybe tell us, why to use x64 at all, if you have less than 4 ( ok, 3.2 ) Gb RAM? i do not see any advantage...only a disadvantages such as use multilibs to run x32 apps, sometime compiling problems on x32 soft, and consumation more RAM for the same tasks...

in what situations i can see this benefit? i have c2d computer with 2 Gb RAM and slack 13.37 x64 at work, and on home desktop my previously OS be a Mandriva x64, and now is Slack 14 x32 - only difference i see, is x64 consume more RAM for the same tasks. no see any benefits on x64 versions...

Have you looked into Moneydance? It runs on Linux, mac, and windows.


I voted Pure 64-bit BTW

This is not what the thread is about. However, there are performance benefits to 64-bit, and I'm sure your next computer will probably have more than 4 GB of RAM.

no, it is - this is thread about 32 vs 64 bit slackware.
a that time i dont want more than 3 gb ram because that ammount is enought for my tasks - even in novadays crappy soft ( yes, slackware too going this way! i remember times when 2 - 4 megabytes is enought, tday without 128 Mb you cannot install slackware in normal way at all! i remebrer demoscenes and what a graphic and audio masters pack into 64 kilobytes!!! niowadays crappy tetris require gigabytes space on HDD, and gigabytes RAM for run - it is very sadly for me. computers, who times ago make a nuclear blact modelling, now cannot run average desktop - software has become more and more resource consuming, in that same time not giving any valuable plusses over old one...).

also i not seen any easy seen performance benefits of x64, othervise i maybe choose to run x64 on my machines.

Benchmarks:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...204_3264&num=1

Let me say this about that:
(1) This is on Intel Core i7 720Q @ 1.60GHz (8 Cores). I do not have that in my laptop.
(2) I won't ever use any of the applications on which this benchmark is based.
(3) This benchmark's conclusion : "The performance advantage of 64-bit over 32-bit Ubuntu is clear" applies to very demanding software run on very powerful machines (by today's standards). This is certainly true but:
(a) I'm not sure a benchmark was really needed to get to that conclusion.
(b) This is of no use for people who do not run this kind of software and do not own this kind of hardware.

PS Kind of stupid to use such a processor with only 4 GB RAM anyway IMO

3 members found this post helpful.