[GRLUG] 64bit Linux

[Raymond McLaughlin]

Collin Kidder wrote:
> Benjamin Flanders wrote:
>> Anyone have any experiences with 64bit linux lately?  I've been
>> running i386 because I didn't want to mess with the the headaches that
>> seemed to dog the 64bit releases a few years ago.
>>
>>   
> I've been looking into this as well as I recently got a core2 duo 
> machine. However, from what I'm seeing there just isn't that much of a 
> reason to go 64 bit. It's faster in some apps but slower in others, it's 
> still somewhat problematic, etc. What I've seen is that it seems better 
> to instead build a 32bit linux kernel with support for advanced features 
> of the newer processors.

I pretty much "me too" this assessment. In August I finally built myself
a new Core2 Dual desktop machine, demoting my 1.1 GHz PIII the rank of
backup computer.

At first I ran the 32 bit version of SuSE 10.2. I was very pleased. Of
course it was much faster, and quicker than the machine it had replaced.

After a couple of weeks I got brave and installed the 64 bit version on
a spare partition. Everything works just like on the 32 bit version. But
I can't say it was really worth the trouble. I've used it for a month
and a half now, and it doesn't really seem quite as quick to open new
windows, etc, as I remember the 32 bit. But that assessment could also
be colored by the newness of the machine at first.

The machine still can dual boot, but I haven't bothered in several
weeks. So far I've stayed with the 64 bit mostly "because it's there".

I'm thinking of doing some time trials between the two at. Say mpg
encoding, which is the kind of thing at which the 64 bit is supposed to
shine. But for my own day to day use the difference hasn't really been
worth the time spent worrying about it.

My $0.02
Raymond McLaughlin