32 bit vs 64 bit [SOLVED]

Chat about Linux in general
User avatar
Phuz
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 2:49 pm

32 bit vs 64 bit [SOLVED]

Post by Phuz » Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:22 pm

Though I view this more as a kernal question as opposed to a software question, I didn't see a kernal area so here it lies.

Looking for lots of opines here!

To me, the only advantage I have found in 64 bit is the ability to utilize greater amounts of ram. I've never seen anything conclusive about better security/stability/performance improvements with 64 bit OS's.
Barring gaming wherein the game may require more ram or folks that run with 3,782 applications open... is there really any advantage to using over 3 GB of ram?

I've been running Mint, or Ubuntu since Mint 9 and happily eliminated ALL M$ products from my life. All the renditions of Linux I've run purr along quietly (and fast) on 2 or 3 GB of ram, only using 300-500 MB of ram.
So again, is there any compelling reason I should update my gear/ram and run 64 bit?

Appreciate any and all input!

Cheers!
Phuz
Last edited by Phuz on Sat Mar 25, 2017 4:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Cosmo.
Level 23
Level 23
Posts: 17829
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 7:34 am

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by Cosmo. » Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:39 pm

On the (probably not so) long run 32 bit is dying. Is this compelling enough?

User avatar
Pjotr
Level 20
Level 20
Posts: 10898
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:18 am
Location: The Netherlands (Holland)
Contact:

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by Pjotr » Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:41 pm

As Cosmo. says, the 32-bit ecosystem is crumbling everywhere.... So select 64-bit whenever reasonably possible. :)
Tip: 10 things to do after installing Linux Mint 19 Tara
Keep your Linux Mint healthy: Avoid these 10 fatal mistakes
Twitter: twitter.com/easylinuxtips
All in all, horse sense simply makes sense.

KBD47
Level 7
Level 7
Posts: 1620
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:03 am

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by KBD47 » Sun Jan 29, 2017 4:57 pm

Right now there is nothing wrong with running 32 bit, unless you have lots of ram, but the future is definitely 64 bit and there is no good reason not to use it on a 64 bit machine. Not long ago I had several 32 bit machines, now I am down to just 2 and their time is limited.

User avatar
sphyrth
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 315
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 7:14 am

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by sphyrth » Sun Jan 29, 2017 5:50 pm

I still run my 32bit machine here. But the only benefit left is that it's still surviving.

64bit has been the minimum standard for years now. The only way you'll find 32bit computers is by having someone with a 10+ old computer sell it to you.
I have a favorite game. It's on my Youtube Channel.

English Invader
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:53 am

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by English Invader » Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:20 pm

Not to mention the fact that software developers are increasingly dropping support for 32-Bit. Three years ago, 32-Bit was still viable and most things were still available for it apart from the most powerhouse programs but now 32-Bit support is little more than an occasional surprise to me and things are only going to get worse.

Lemongrass38
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 11:29 pm
Location: Central Europe

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by Lemongrass38 » Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:35 pm

64 bit if possible... I have a few programs that won't run in 32 bit OS (engineering programs running inside a 64 bit Windows 10 virtual box, Autodesk Inventor 2016 has 64 bit version only).

I haven't seen a 32 bit CPU in a long time. Unless the CPU or RAM is really limited, I don't see any reason to install a 32 bit OS. As for now, I don't think you should reinstall a 64 bit Mint instead of your 32 bit Mint if it's good for you, but if you install a new version, I think it should be preferably a 64 bit version.
If your issue is solved, please be so kind and indicate that by editing the topic title in the first post. :)

User avatar
TooMuchTime
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 407
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 10:30 pm

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by TooMuchTime » Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:21 pm

64 bit.

More and more software is being written to take advantage of 64 bit architecture. Eventually, 32 bit will be the outsider, looking in. With 64 bit, you can still run 32 bit software but the reverse is not true. Start off right and install the 64 bit OS if your CPU is 64 bit.

lmintnewb2

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by lmintnewb2 » Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:12 pm

Another +1 for Cosmo,

Op thought the same (32bit would do just fine) but then thought the same as Cosmo, 64bit's everywhere and that I'd may as well accept it and get on with things.

There are supposed to be advantages to 64bit obviously or the tech wouldnt exist but if you prefer 32bit and dont have any compelling reasons to switch, nothing wrong with not doing so until such time as you do have reason.

BEeK
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 10:17 am

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by BEeK » Sun Jan 29, 2017 10:53 pm

lmintnewb2 wrote:There are supposed to be advantages to 64bit obviously or the tech wouldnt exist...
Obviously, there are advantages... But I believe there are areas where the need of something greater than "32 bit" was needed (e.g. servers, other specific processing of data, etc...).

But "64 bit" has disadvantages too, while it has more overhead than in "32 bit" (e.g. larger pointers, addressing, registers, etc..)... You need to overcome that overhead first before you can actually process data faster than "32 bit", and that happens in specific cases.

But I believe "64 bit" has more pros than cons... Then why not!?

What I said is my opinion, it can be correct or not... If not, please feel free to correct.

Thank you!

User avatar
Phuz
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 2:49 pm

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by Phuz » Mon Jan 30, 2017 1:45 am

lmintnewb2 wrote:Another +1 for Cosmo,

Op thought the same (32bit would do just fine) but then thought the same as Cosmo, 64bit's everywhere and that I'd may as well accept it and get on with things.

There are supposed to be advantages to 64bit obviously or the tech wouldn’t exist but if you prefer 32bit and don’t have any compelling reasons to switch, nothing wrong with not doing so until such time as you do have reason.
Exactly my point. I've been in IT for 27 years (just recently retired) and never found ANY compelling reason for the change to 64 bit except for gamers (which seem to be the driving force behind hardware improvements (not that there is anything wrong with gaming) and for supporting massive memory (which is in large, due to gaming and one or two apps like cad or photoshop)).

So again, I ask the question which seems to have escaped many, are there any real world advantages anyone has, for 64 bit over 32 bit? "It's going away" is not really an answer.

Has anyone seen any security/stability/performance improvements in 64 bit? Anything that is compelling enough to drive this fairly significant change? All my processors are 64 bit. But they are on 6-8 yr old boards.
Sure, I could go purchase gazillions of new ram, but why? So far, I see no rational benefit. I'm not running databases anymore, not gaming other than an occasional "urban terror" (which runs fine in 32 bit with 3 gigs),
so I'm asking a real question. Some have replied that it's logical and warranted just because "everybody is". I'm looking for a real world, compelling reason for the shift other than just that you can run more ram.

Again, any and all 'relevant' answers appreciated! ;)

User avatar
xenopeek
Level 24
Level 24
Posts: 22918
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by xenopeek » Mon Jan 30, 2017 2:19 am

For performance differences between 32 bit and 64 bit you can look at this comparison on Ubunt 16.04 LTS on which Linux Mint 18.x are based: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... -1604-3264. As expected the gains are in programs that do repetitive operations on large quantities of data (creating or transforming multimedia files, encryption, rendering graphics, and so on). Besides the wider data bus (64 bit instead of 32 bit, moving more data per instruction) this is also due to 64 bit being a different processor architecture that has more dedicated registers and instructions heavily optimized for particular tasks.

As for RAM; this isn't Windows :wink: Linux Mint 32 bit can address 64 GB physical RAM in total but is limited to 4 GB address space per program. With today's computers Linux Mint 64 bit has no such limits. It can address 256 TB physical RAM (future processors allowing 4 PB, 16 times as much) and has 256 TB address space per program (future processors allowing 16 EB, 65536 times as much). Such a large address space allows the program to use lots of physical RAM and to use features like virtual memory for mapping files to memory where the operating system transparently loads portions of the file on demand into physical RAM when the program accesses that part of the memory mapped file in virtual memory. The kind of programs that benefit from 64 bit performance are also the kind of programs that can benefit from being able to use more than 4 GB address space.

Aside from that, as others have already pointed out, more and more Linux distros are dropping support for 32 bit or are considering it. That is due to decreasing users on 32 bit which make a case to justify cutting maintainer work in half by dropping 32 bit. According to DistroWatch the following 80 Linux distros only come in 64 bit (noted with their popularity ranking on DistroWatch):

Code: Select all

6	elementary OS
12	Antergos
13	Solus
14	PCLinuxOS
21	KDE neon
33	Black Lab Linux
35	Netrunner
37	KaOS
45	Red Hat Enterprise Linux
46	GeckoLinux
52	Korora Project
57	AryaLinux
58	Sabayon
59	Container Linux
60	RancherOS
62	Maui Linux
64	Ubuntu DesktopPack
69	ChaletOS
70	Qubes OS
75	SteamOS
82	AUSTRUMI
91	GoboLinux
92	Chakra GNU/Linux
93	ExTiX
96	Rockstor
103	SolydXK
104	Linux Kodachi
105	Chapeau
106	NethServer
110	Neptune
112	Parted Magic
116	siduction
133	CAINE
143	Proxmox
145	Linux From Scratch
149	Porteus Kiosk
151	Pisi Linux
152	OpenMediaVault
160	Zentyal Server
164	SELKS
165	Void
168	PelicanHPC GNU Linux
169	Whonix
170	3CX Phone System
171	Funtoo Linux
176	DuZeru
178	CRUX
179	Endless OS
183	Sonar GNU/Linux
188	EasyNAS
191	URIX OS
193	Bio-Linux
194	Linpus Linux
197	KXStudio
201	Leeenux
202	LinHES
217	BlueOnyx
222	Exe GNU/Linux
223	Exherbo
225	PoliArch
227	VortexBox
230	Linux Mangaka
233	TurnKey Linux
236	Network Security Toolkit
241	Fermi Linux
243	MAX: Madrid_Linux
244	Rocks Cluster Distribution
246	StressLinux
256	Baruwa Enterprise Edition
262	Kwort Linux
269	eZeY
270	BitKey
271	Volumio
275	Resulinux
276	Asianux
277	Clear Linux
278	Keysoft
279	Subgraph OS
280	Fatdog64 Linux
284	OviOS Linux
That said there are 33 Linux distros according to DistroWatch that are 32 bit only:

Code: Select all

25	Tails
48	Simplicity Linux
50	KNOPPIX
72	4MLinux
95	Wifislax
100	Elive
119	blackPanther OS
120	SystemRescueCd
126	LinuxConsole
128	PrimTux
137	Berry Linux
138	MakuluLinux
144	ConnochaetOS
147	APODIO
148	Endian Firewall
166	Legacy OS
167	OLPC OS
174	GALPon MiniNo
181	Toutou Linux
187	Trusted End Node Security
210	SymphonyOS
213	BOSS GNU/Linux
218	Finnix
224	IPCop Firewall
226	Sophos UTM
238	Thinstation
245	Securepoint Security Suite
260	Webconverger
261	Hanthana Linux
263	LliureX
267	ToriOS
268	Ulteo Open Virtual Desktop
272	SuliX
Image

lmintnewb2

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by lmintnewb2 » Mon Jan 30, 2017 3:20 am

Thanks Xenopeek, interesting read, as usual learned something.

Op, an obvious shift in tech isn't a 'others are doing it' thing, it's an obvious trend in tech and something any reasonable person would take into consideration. Aka: which way the wind is blowing.

Sure in many things backwards compatibility will be kept up indefinitely. So if you're happy with 32bit, nobody's trying to convince you otherwise.

User avatar
Moem
Level 16
Level 16
Posts: 6784
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2015 9:14 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by Moem » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:14 am

Phuz wrote:Some have replied that it's logical and warranted just because "everybody is".
That's not what anyone said. They said it's warranted because otherwise you'll be left with less and less choice in software. That is a 'real world' reason; whether you find it compelling is up to you.
Image

If your issue is solved, kindly indicate that by editing the first post in the topic, and adding [SOLVED] to the title. Thanks!

User avatar
Pjotr
Level 20
Level 20
Posts: 10898
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:18 am
Location: The Netherlands (Holland)
Contact:

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by Pjotr » Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:26 am

Moem wrote:
Phuz wrote:Some have replied that it's logical and warranted just because "everybody is".
That's not what anyone said. They said it's warranted because otherwise you'll be left with less and less choice in software. That is a 'real world' reason; whether you find it compelling is up to you.
Exactly. You've hit the nail on the head.

Note that the main cause for the shrivelling of the 32-bit ecosystem isn't at the level of the distributions. It's upstream, where the applications are being made. Application developers are starting to dump 32-bit, simply because it costs them too much time, effort and sometimes even money, to produce and maintain two versions of the same application.

So the amount of 32-bit software is diminishing, and that process will probably accelerate. You may like that or dislike that, but it's a fact.
Last edited by Pjotr on Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Tip: 10 things to do after installing Linux Mint 19 Tara
Keep your Linux Mint healthy: Avoid these 10 fatal mistakes
Twitter: twitter.com/easylinuxtips
All in all, horse sense simply makes sense.

lmintnewb2

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by lmintnewb2 » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:17 am

Had some more thoughts on this too but worried Op might not consider the post 'relevant' enough. Oh well am willing to chance it. :)

Personally take comfort, that both my processor and OS are able to live up to their full capabilities. Am willing to put up with the slight increase in overhead 64bit brings. Have 2 gnu/Nix os's on this laptop. At boot up 1 uses 290mbs idle, other 190mbs. Both 64bit.

Not like its a massive difference and on a system w 4gbs-ddr3 I can live with it. A poss problem I can anticipate if I went w a 32bit install. Been quite awhile since I've seen this topic, findings at the time remember being that a 64bit proc started in 32bit mode either outright couldn't or couldn't properly execute 64bit code.

While the reverse wasn't true. So if I wanted to install a 64bit only app(more n more common and might not even be found in 32bit repos, unless someone ported it) or say I wanted to install one of the ever growing list of distros Xenopeek provided in a vm, it might fail or be buggy as hades and might not occur that the issue was the underlying 32bit OS.

English Invader
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:53 am

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by English Invader » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:14 am

I still rely on 32-Bit for legacy applications that I run through Wine and 64-Bit Wine is still inadequate for that task and personally I haven't experienced anything from 64-Bit to suggest that it does anything better than 32-Bit could have done but I'm not into high end gaming where the benefits of 8GB+ RAM are more obvious. So, from my point of view, the only reason I need 64-Bit is diminishing software support for 32-Bit and there are no apparent technical benefits from it just minor inconveniences as a result of switching over.

lmintnewb2

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by lmintnewb2 » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:40 am

^ Install a window$ OS in vm? :) If your hardware's up to it anyway. Have a win8 install disc laying around. Don't plan on reinstalling it but if ever get a wild hair, vm it will be.

Surely should work better than using wine.? If system isn't up to it, then likely are better off going with 32bit really. Have nothing against 32bit. Only way I'd do it is if I got ahold of hardware that only had a 32b proc or 1.5gb or less of ram.

2 cents, am gonna shut-up now. :)

English Invader
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:53 am

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by English Invader » Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:41 am

lmintnewb2 wrote: Surely should work better than using wine.? If system isn't up to it, then likely are better off going with 32bit really. Have nothing against 32bit. Only way I'd do it is if I got ahold of hardware that only had a 32b proc or 1.5gb or less of ram.
Sadly, that's not the case with gaming. The demands of emulating a Windows OS don't leave a lot of power left over for the games you want to play. A highly configurable compatibility layer is infinitely more desirable for older games from the Windows XP era and earlier.

Last year, I was on a personal mission to prove that Linux was better for old PC games than a post-XP Windows OS because Wine is more configurable than the Windows compatibility mode (especially if you use PlayOnLinux) and it hasn't been an entirely unsuccessful venture - there are games I'm able to run that Windows 7/8/10 users have had trouble with and often the games that haven't worked have posed the same problems on Windows.

lmintnewb2

Re: 32 bit vs 64 bit

Post by lmintnewb2 » Mon Jan 30, 2017 9:06 am

^ Thanks, interesting. Haven't ever tried wine. Have thought about putting win8 vm in gnu/Nix host. If only for a learning experience.

Really do gotta go now. Gotta leave for work soon. If 32bit could get rid of the need for that, would install it in a heartbeat, lol. Hope everybody has a good dy/nt. :)

Post Reply

Return to “Chat about Linux”