Re: Advantages of 64-bit Installation?

"E11" <edwinlee.11@xxxxxxxxx>,
In a message on 14 Dec 2005 23:37:54 -0800, wrote :

"> Hi moma,
">
"> moma wrote:
"> > This PC has:
"> > o...32 bits Ubuntu 5.10 Desktop (daily production usage).
"> > o...32 bits Ubuntu 6.04 develpment/test only.
"> > o...64 bits Ubuntu 5.10 development/testing.
"> > o...64 bits Fedora Core with Xen (just for fun).
">
"> Do you mean to say that you a multi-boot set up?
">
">
"> > The 64bit kernels and 64bit applications run slightly quicker than the
"> > 32bit counterparts, as one could expect. I have no exact measures of
"> > this, just a firm feeling.
">
"> Well, that is to be expected, but the questions are
"> - whether the better performance is "all in the mind"?
"> - whether this difference in performance is worth the trouble (below)?

For the normal user, probably not. For really heavy, memory-bound
computation, yes, the performance gain is more than worth it. The
Computer Vision Lab at UMass (where I used to work) has a dual AMD
Optiron system with 4gig of RAM and 4 gig of swap and definately runs
the heavy memory bound jobs much faster than some of our other machines
(which have less memory and are 32-bit).

">
">
"> > - Shortage of pre-compiled 64bit java/flash plugins may be a problem.
"> > The reason I still (daily) run 32bit Ubuntu is that all Firefox
"> > plugins/mp3/dvd/ etc are very easy to setup. 64 bit Ubuntu is more
"> > challenging in that matter!
">
"> Precisely! This is the very reason i'm tempted to redo everything with
"> a 32-bit installation. Currently its just the firefox plugins. i'm
"> concerned that later on i may find more applications which i need to
"> use and do not have support for 64-bit yet. so i'm wondering about the
"> trade-offs and whether its more worth it to switch to 32-bit.
">

The 64-bit compute server at UMass does not even have an X11 server
installed, much less a web browser installed -- it is not a desktop
machine. It has no mouse, and shares a monitor with two other server
machines and lives in a server machine room. *Nobody* sits at it for
any reason -- all logins are over the 'net from workstations or off
campus.

">
">
"> Thanks and Regards,
"> Edwin
">
">

\/
Robert Heller ||InterNet: heller@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.deepsoft.com/ ||FidoNet: 1:321/153
http://www.deepsoft.com/~heller /\







.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: XP Problem
    ... Each installation is different. ... If I did not load the application on the server I would have ... to be installing this program almost weekly on 12 machines. ... >>>If the executable is copied to the client machine it will run fine, ...
    (microsoft.public.fox.programmer.exchange)
  • Re: Linux clients in network - experiences?
    ... as you're bound to buy more machines, deal with hardware failures, etc. ... can deal with installation, tough you may want to hack it so that most ... you'll need a secure channel to the install server (we use a dedicated ssh ... the Packages.gz lists that apt-get uses on "normal" ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: AutoGenerateColumns wont set to false
    ... Same behavior on two machines, Laptop and server. ... I haven't installed any patches on either machine this week. ... > security installation logs for that server. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet.datagridcontrol)
  • Blank pages, text windows and About Internet Explorer
    ... Another strange occurance is that all three machines ... where it says the logo is not approved and installation ... The server is a Win2000 Back Office and we access ... the internet directly via a DSL hub and not through the ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6.browser)
  • Performance optimization vs satisficing (was Language Oriented Programming)
    ... >machines that were too small. ... Microsoft has been a leading offender here. ... >arcane issue for server engines. ... magnitude slower, yes, I recall working on a 200mb database, trying to ...
    (comp.object)