32-bit or 64-bit?

[Pythzor]

Is there any reason(s) why folks might prefer a 64-bit os over 32-bit (Mint or Ubuntu) other than that they have a computer with a 64-bit architecture? Just curious. Would Mint 12 perform better as 64-bit than as 32-bit on a 64-bit architecture?

[colyn]

In order to use 64 bit you have to have a 64 bit computer. If not use 32 bit..

32 or 64 bit will run on a 64 bit computer..

[Moggertron]

In order to use 64 bit you have to have a 64 bit computer. If not use 32 bit..

32 or 64 bit will run on a 64 bit computer..

I think the question was about if people prefer one over the other when they have the choice. If you have a 64bit pc, which to choose and why is what I think the question was.

[Lazy and Stupid]

Most people advise to use a 32 bit system unless you have a special need for 64 bit. They say the 32 bit systems are more stable. From what I have read, 64 bit isn't going to do anything special for you unless you have software written for it and may actually run 32 bit software slower. However I have some software written for 64 bit systems so I installed 64 bit with some trepidation after reading all this advise. I have to say the 64 bit system has been no faster that I can see but on the other hand I have had zero problems. I use the compter a lot for rendering, graphics, sound, and video. Absolutely no problems. So I think that the 64 bit system is just as stable as the 32 bit system. At anyrate, 64 bit is the future, so I didn't want to have to install an upgrade later. Also you should know some 32 bit software will not install on a 64 bit machines but there are work arounds to install it (I don't remeber how I did it now but I just followed the instructions on someone's blog and it worked). Once installed, those prgrams seemed to work OK. I think based on my user experience I advise using the 64 bit system if nothing else so as not to have to change later.

[kindofabuzz]

With my system, Mint12 32bit is much, much more stable that the 64bit version.

[johnnydotexe]

I have been wondering the same thing...x32 or x64 on an x64 system?

On the one hand x32 is said to be more stable, but on the other hand x64 will see all of your memory if you have more than 2gb. I have 8gb so x64 is important to me because I need to be able to utilize all my RAM for the apps I use and the gaming I do.

[nunol]

With my system, Mint12 32bit is much, much more stable that the 64bit version.

I have Mint 12 64bits on the netbook and have no problem!

Ubuntu (Mint 12 is based on Ubuntu) recommends that you use the 64bit version unless there is a strong reason to use the 32bit version: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/32bit ... _Choose.3F

[iBodhi]

I am just about to build my own Desktop and was wondering an identical question tonight - so thank for this.

I would be interested to know though what software would not work in x64 Mint?

[xenopeek]

This topic has been covered extensively on the forums before. The people using 32 bits software on 64 bits hardware and the people using 64 bits software on it each have their own reasons to do so. You should not need to fear 64 bits software, it is not some "experimental" software and it will generally run all your software

Some topics to read up on:
http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=90&t=78222
http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=62374

I'm looking forward to having the same discussion on 128 bits vs 64 bits in a few years

[iBodhi]

This topic has been covered extensively on the forums before.

Thanks for the links Vincent - I did do a search in the forum for 32 bit and 64 bit but I couldn't find anything as it said it was too common a search:

The following words in your search query were ignored because they are too common words: bit 64.
You must specify at least one word to search for. Each word must consist of at least 3 characters and must not contain more than 14 characters excluding wildcards.

[xenopeek]

This topic has been covered extensively on the forums before.

Thanks for the links Vincent - I did do a search in the forum for 32 bit and 64 bit but I couldn't find anything as it said it was too common a search:

The following words in your search query were ignored because they are too common words: bit 64.
You must specify at least one word to search for. Each word must consist of at least 3 characters and must not contain more than 14 characters excluding wildcards.

Yeah, the forum search is not always helpful

You can easily get better search results, by using your normal searchengine and restricting it to search this website. For example if you want to search for "32 vs 64 bits" on Google, you would enter:

Code: Select all

site:linuxmint.com 32 vs 64 bits

That is how I found the older posts

[nunol]

I'm looking forward to having the same discussion on 128 bits vs 64 bits in a few years

That's in about 60 to 90 years! Don't think I am going to live that long...

Here is how I did the math:
Let's take a look at the data in this page: http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/research-charts-memory/
You can see that in 2011 there are already some computers with over 16GB of RAM and that the average installed RAM is doubling every 2 to 2.5 years since 2007 but was slower until 2007.

So lets assume that in the beginning of 2012 you need to support computers with 32GB and double the supported RAM every 2 or 3 years. This should be ok for a "normal" user, but not enough for servers, supercomputers, etc.

In 2012 we support 32GB of RAM (35bits)
In 2014-2015 we support 64GB of RAM (36bits, MAX for PAE).
In 2016-2018 we support 128GB of RAM (37bits, you have to go to a 64bits CPU and OS).
In 2018-2021 we support 256GB of RAM (38bits).
In 2020-2024 we support 512GB of RAM (39bits).
In 2022-2027 we support 1024GB of RAM (40bits).
In 2024-2030 we support 2TB of RAM (41bits).
...
In 2070-2099 we support 16777216TB of RAM (64bits, MAX for 64bits)
In 2072-2102 we break 64bit support and have to go to PAE2, 128bits or something else.

Let's run this backwards:
In 2012 we support 32GB of RAM (35bits)
In 2009-2010 we support 16GB of RAM (34bits)
In 2006-2008 we support 8GB of RAM (33bits)
In 2003-2006 we support 4GB of RAM (32bits, MAX for 32bits)
The first AMD64-based processor, the Opteron, was released in April 2003.

[kindofabuzz]

Unless you are compiling software or encoding audio/video often there really is very little speed difference between the two operating architectures. Meaning that most people who just use the computer for everyday tasks such as webrowsing will not notice a difference between the two.

For the average desktop user the applications issue, especially with flash - something most of us use everyday, is the driving factor to use a 32 bit version of your Linux distro of choice. If you are using your system as more of a work station (compiling and decoding) then maybe the 64 bit version is a better selection for your needs.

http://jeffhoogland.blogspot.com/2010/0 ... hoose.html

[nunol]

You can see for yourself when it's faster and when it's not: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... ae64&num=1