Dear lazyweb: 64-bit or not?
My laptop contains – amongst other things – a dual-core AMD Turion™ 64 X2 which is unsurprisingly a 64-bit processor. When I purchased the machine and shoved Vista to the side to install Ubuntu I opted for the 32-bit version because, well, basically I’m lazy.
One upgrade, multiple updates, and various package installs/removals later and I think things are starting to get a bit crufty. Combining this with my growing resentment of Vista hogging a part of the hard disk that I rarely use, and I’m thinking it’s time to re-install and do it properly this time.
This leaves me with one question though – should I go 64-bit or not? I’ve heard various stories with varying degrees of horror and wonder, and I just don’t know if it’s worth it or not.
Related posts:
- bzr status schwuk Well it’s been a while I wrote here (if you...
- Dear Lazyweb: Software for groups and organisations I’ve been involved with various organisations and charities over the...
- Counting Down to Hardy Heron The other day I upgraded to the Hardy Heron beta,...
- Letting the air out of the Air Unless you have been living under a rock for the...
- Nokia N800 After a rather late (or more accurately early) night, I...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
look good
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
My rule of thumb is to go 32-bit unless you have a pressing reason to go 64. Life is just generally easier on 32-bit, though 64 has gotten good enough that it’s livable for most folks. It just takes a little more effort is all. Just to provide a random anecdotal datapoint, all my "desktop" systems are 32-bit, and all the servers I take care of are 64.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
I’ve found (with Debian, at least) that there’s no reason to use 32-bit unless you really need something like Flash.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
64 bit is continually improving (flash is now autowrapped in 7.10, so it works without much headache at all), but the Java plugin still has a ways to come (probably Java7 will finally resolve this). Other than that, most programs will work or can be made to work, since 32 bit apps load and run as long as the 32 versions of the libraries they depend on are installed, too (ia32-* packages help here). There also seem to be few benefits to running in 64bit mode. Most apps run about the same, and power consumption is the same if not worse than 32bit.
In short, 64bit is more doable on the desktop than it has been in the past, but why bother with it?
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
I have an Athlon64 X2 (not ideal for a laptop), and the 64-bit version of Ubuntu has not failed me at all. While all other repo’s (Linux Mint, Mediubuntu, and a bunch of others) have worked fine, Ubuntustudio’s repo’s where the only problem. No big deal, because that repo has meta-packages of the software that I can get from all of the other repo’s (as of gutsy’s release, Ubuntu Studio is supposed to has 64-bit support).
That said, you have a 64-bit CPU, so take advantage of it. Let the 32-bit CPU users wish what could be. Enjoy the 64-bit bliss.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
I wouldn’t even consider running a 32 bit OS on a 64 bit processor…any more.
There was a time when trying to run a 64 bit Distro was a big pain in the back end, but things are much smoother now, and you will find everything will better.
Give it a shot and see, you won’t go back…I promise!
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
I’ve had this discussion over and over again recently with many of my co-workers. We’re in an all Linux shop and a lot of them seem to be running 64bit. I finally caved to their pressure and have installed 64bit. My thoughts and why…
1) I really don’t see any immediate benefit in 64bit. The machine is not blazingly fast and I don’t see a big performance increase, but everything does work–I’d say about the same.
2) I finally have switched on principle. 64bit will never improve if none of us run it and report issues. If the user base for 64bit were very few it will not get the attention that it needs for widespread adoption. If you’re confident in your Ubuntu abilities I’d say switch over and help improve it. So far, again, I have not had any show-stopper issues so I’d say you’re probably safe.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
Running Ubuntu 7.10 x86-64, have had absolutely no issues, on an HP dv6000 laptop with AMD Turion64×2.
Don’t have Java installed yet, as I haven’t needed it yet. Flash works fine, videos play fine, music files work just fine, everything else works as it should. That it’s easy to install 32bit libraries helps for the occasional odd program ( Postal2 in my case ).
I strongly believe more *nix users should run 64bit versions of their distros — let’s discover and report some bugs, so the devs can keep polishing.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
Older versions of Ubuntu had a few minor snags (Flash) when trying to go 64-bit. Gutsy has been perfect. Even Flash installed from the repos and worked automatically for me, with no need to configure a wrapper for it.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
64 bit. Practically all of the machines we have at work (desktops and servers alike) now are running 64 bit opensuse no bother.
If it don’t work the way you want then you can always change back…
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
I had 64-bit at home for a while but put 32-bit back on simply because I use or require Flash and Java applets. Flash does not work very well in 64-bit with nspluginwrapper (let alone on it’s own), and 64-bit Java applet plugin is still nonexistant. You can install the 32-bit Firefox and plugins under 64-bit linux but it’s a bit of a pain. If you don’t require Flash or Java plugins, most other things work well. The only other major issue I have noticed is that there are lacking some video decoders, but for some it isn’t an issue.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
I’ll vote with the rest who say that as long as you don’t need the flash or java plugins, 64-bit is quite livable. I have "firefox32" installed, and use that for the times that I really need either one of those plugins. Otherwise, my music playing , cd ripping/burning, finance, browsing, email, writing, and cosmetic fiddling are absolutely no different from 32 bit (well… with the obvious performance increase in the ripping/burning area).
I have not tried wine or crossover yet to see how that works. So perhaps if there are any "windows" applications you need to run under either of those might need a test drive.
I figure that the more I use it and weigh in as a statistic, the sooner 64 bit will be more widely supported. It is pretty ignorant (IMO) of companies (like Adobe and Sun) not to adopt it because … it’s 64 bit!
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
Yes, you should go with the upgrade. I have recently upgraded my laptop and desktop to 64 Gutsy and have been very happy with everything, except java.
Java works but I had to install an 64bit alpha call Icetea
If you check the ubuntu forums there is a 3rd part repo out there that has a newer version that work quite well
Other than that it’s been a nice little speed up.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
My machine is a 64-bit AMD Turion (HP Pavilion dv5000), running 64-bit gobuntu, and I’ve not had a single problem with it. Gnash does youtube now, which is all I ever used Flash for anyway
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
Going 64-bit is going to more-or-less halve your effective memory.
On a machine like a laptop with (relatively) little memory and a (relatively) slow HD, that memory can be better used for caching.
Stick with 32 unless you have a compelling reason.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
When I first went to a 64 bit CPU (seems like ages ago), I was bound and determined to run a 64-bit OS. I did so, on Gentoo, which seemed to have a leg up on the other distros in 64-bit-ness. It was a pain in the neck, and I wound up installing a lot of 32-bit apps (mplayer, to use the 32-bit proprietary codecs; firefox, to use java and flash; cedega, to play games). Eventually (inevitably?) my system broke. It wasn’t unrepairable per se, but I decided making a fresh start made more sense. I went back to 32-bit and was much happier. Since then, I’ve tried (in recent months) 64-bit versions of Sabayon, Mepis (older Debian based and newer Dapper based), and finally Ubuntu Feisty. Still not satisfied. Simply put, I don’t see any advantage that makes it worth the extra headache. And I still think Gentoo is the best system to go 64-bit on. Unless they’ve dis-improved. For my money, 32-bit Gutsy is where I’ll be staying for a while.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
I ran 64-bit Ubuntu for the last 14 months and this weekend I just switched back to 32-bit Ubuntu. I have a nice dual-core PC (Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 processor) but my primary motivator was the ability to use my full 4 GB of RAM. Things like nspluginwrapper in 7.10 make the experience much better but it still freezes and hangs a good bit and the lack of Java support was also annoying. Instead I just used the Ubuntu server kernel and now I get my 4 GB of RAM back
No restricted modules pkg for the server kernel but using Alberto Milone’s Envy nets me 3D effects again.
It’s much better than it was, but it’s not quite there yet. If you don’t mind the occasional hassle, then go for it. I just got tired of having to find workarounds for popular things.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
I have been running 64 bit for close to three years. I struggled with it at the beginning due to lack of support, which is actually why I switched to Ubuntu (or Kubuntu rather) from Debian. Debain kept promising a 64 bit release, but it was continuously pushed back, Ubuntu however had a spot on release schedule and was based on the Debian architecture (bonus points for that).
Earlier adoption with Ubuntu and 64 bit was extremely experimental, but that is why I went ahead with it. I wanted to be forced to fix problems, as it is a great way to learn the operating system and its internals. Tweaking and playing with the operating system is exactly why I love Linux. I know I can try anything I want, and when I break it, I can just re-install and go again leaving my home partition intact.
64bit has grown immensely since I began tinkering with it. I am proud to say I have only had two or three crashes recently (all of which I can’t recreate on my own actions, so it has to be a weird combination of events), but I am beginning to believe it deals with one of my hard drives going bad.
Some quick pointers have already been mentioned, which is the poor support for Java in 64 bit, but Ubuntu can’t be entirely blamed there. Another would be that not all applications have been converted (this can be partially blamed on Ubuntu, but for the majority the blame lies on the project developers, seriously, they just need someone to rebuild them under a 64 bit architecture and potentially fix any compile errors). But overall, I do not have any complaints with Gutsy Gibbon (7.10). The issues with flash were by far the worst issue I had with the previous versions, it was just an annoyance.
I honestly hope you go the 64 bit direction. You won’t see a ton of performance gain, but you will find it runs just as well, I primarily blame this on the lack of 64 bit applications, but I could be wrong.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
You already have a dual boot setup, right? So wipe Vista, install 64 bit Gutsy, and test drive it side by side with your existing 32 bit installation. I tried 64 bit a year ago on my HP laptop and it wasn’t quite ready for everyday usage, IMO. Let us know what your experience with it is!
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
in my new laptop a Compaq Presario V3415LA don’t work in 32bits (even with FreeBSD), is crashing everytime.
With ubuntu in 64bits work perfectly don’t crashing anymore :D.
25 Nov 2007 9:13 pm
64 bit what the hell is the point of a 64bit arch if your not going to use half of it
13 Sep 2008 9:43 pm
[...] November I pondered moving to 64-bit. Last week after a few stability and performance problems (entirely [...]