any drawbacks to 64-bit versus 32-bit install?

[Bill Davidsen]

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