Re: Switching to 64 bit
On 06/29/2013 06:38 PM, Frank McCormick wrote:
> On 06/29/2013 02:05 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> On 6/28/2013 2:49 PM, Frank McCormick wrote:
>>
>>> For now I will run regular 32-bit Sid..realizing I am wasting
>>> the opportunity to utilize more memory and perhaps faster operations.
>>
>> Your 32 bit PAE Sid kernel can address 64GB. Since your new machine
>> will have less than 64GB RAM you're wasting no opportunity. Your only
>> limitation is 2GB per process. How many of your apps consume more than
>> 2GB of RAM?
>
> None that I am aware of
>
>
>>
>> WRT speed, the vast majority of 32 bit integer programs will execute
>> slightly faster than their 64 bit counterparts due to more efficient
>> cache use--32 bit instructions consume less memory space than 64 bit
>> instructions, thus more instructions fit in L1/2/3 caches. This,
>> combined with plenty of rename registers, offsets the advantage of the
>> extra 8 architectural registers available in long mode.
>
> More good news for me for now anyway.
>
>>
>> And now the kicker. None of the above means squat if you bought a
>> modern fast CPU with plenty of cache. There will be no perceptible
>> difference between 32/64 bit OS platforms running the standard fare of
>> desktop applications.
>
> Can't ask for more. But undoubtedly I will eventually go to a full
> 64-bit installation.
>
>
> Thanks Stan, a clear and easily understood explanation of the
> differences.
>
Just about all the distros now have 64-bit versions. Is this all hype?
I have installed 64-bit Linux on two machines, and have 32-bit on this
one, and I confess that I don't see any performance difference. The only
thing I see is that some standard programs are not available for 64-bit
systems--I'm thinking Adobe Reader and Light-Scribe. So why have we been
bamboozled into running 64 bits if there is no advantage?
--doug
--
Blessed are the peacemakers..for they shall be shot at from both sides.
--A.M.Greeley
Reply to: