I've downloaded and put onto USB sticks both versions of Crunchbang Waldorf.
When running as a live session, why is it that the 32-bit version of #! uses 92 MB of RAM at initial boot but the 64-bit version uses 148? By initial boot, I mean that I'm at the desktop. I've not started any programmes; I've not even connected to NetworkManager.
My laptop is a Dell Latitude D520 Intel Core 2 1.66GHz with 3 GB RAM.
Would it be better/quicker/snappier for me to run the 32-bit #!?
Last edited by mharrison (2013-03-20 19:07:27)
If you've got less than 4GB of ram you don't really need 64 bit and any benefits are negligible. One thing I found years ago, around 2006, that 64 bit installations were more stable (less to no application crashes), but I haven't noticed that in a long time now, guess it depends on the distro. These days I'm running 32 bit again due to better compatibility with some games and Skype - no need to install multilib.
I read somewhere that 64 is only advised if you got serious amounts of ram, as using it with 4GB would essentially be similar to running 32 bit with 2 GB due to the way it addresses memory. Not sure if that's true. For an underpowered machine like yours 32 is probably better.
64-bit means more overhead, but it doesn't flat-out double memory use. The 'natural' difference in RAM use is quite small, but can grow if we need to load the same libraries in 32- and 64-bit versions.
There are quite a few advantages other than how much RAM can be addressed, but programs have to make use of them. A lot of proprietary software isn't available in 64-bit versions, and if it is that may get less attention... a bit problematic if that applies to drivers. Not a problem with free software.
I'd avoid 64-bit if...
- there are serious compatibility problems
- my most demanding applications only come in 32-bit anyway AND memory is relatively scarce.
LEGO won't be ready for the average user until it comes pre-assembled, in a single unified look, and glued together so it doesn't come apart.