any drawbacks to 64-bit versus 32-bit install?
Bill Davidsen
davidsen at tmr.com
Mon Nov 17 20:22:41 UTC 2008
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> perhaps a dumb question but i have to toss together a temporary
> linux box for someone to take to a trade show, so i'm going to install
> f10 preview on one of my gateway mx7120s, which has a 64-bit AMD CPU.
> obviously, either a 32-bit or 64-bit install will work fine, but are
> there any compelling reasons why i might want to use the "safer"
> 32-bit version? i don't know of any, but i'm willing to be persuaded
> one way or the other. i have no strong opinions on the topic.
>
I would say "more tested" rather than "safer" here, there are some things not
available in 64 bit, there are workarounds, I have never seen the "huge
performance increase" with 64 bit, nor the "huge performance hit" people claim
for the PAE kernel.
Other than spending a bit of time fiddling with running some 32 bit only code, I
would call the differences "measurable but not noticeable." I currently run all
32 bit because I have systems which don't have 64 bit CPUs and don't want to
invest time in having multiple versions of anything I don't need.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list