The 64-bit System...

[John Summerfield]

Michael J Gruber wrote:
> Brian Chadwick venit, vidit, dixit 10.03.2009 12:38:
>> to be fairer, how much faster is the processor as well? any new 64-bit 
>> processor is faster than the top of the line 32 bit one of a few years 
>> ago, mind you my Athlon Xp-3200+ is heaps for me
>>
>> Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>> Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
>>>   
>>>> There is no doubt that this has sped up this computer manifold. After only
>>>> a few hours, this seems like an entirely new machine.
>>>>     
>>> To be fair, the extra RAM probably also helped.
>>>
>>>         Kevin Kofler
> 
> I think he only compares (speedwise) the 64bit system with x+2GB to the
> same with just x, x probably being 1GB (I don't think it's lame with 2
> to start with). Memory consumption wise, he seems to compare 64 bit
> distro to 32 bit distro on the the same box. Firefox and Thunderbird
> consume quite some memory in their 64 bit incarnations (more than twice
> as much compared to 32 bit, which I would understand), for the "system"

they do? Strewth!
I've got three programs atm using more than 1 Gbyte virtual. They are X, 
firefox and seamonkey.

I've just migrated off 32-bit, so I can't so easily compare, but I 
reckon I had Mozilla using 700M and more on RHL 7.3, That seriously 
creaked. I don't really think either firefox, Thunderbird or the system 
as a whole uses twice as much RAM.

Except, maybe, if you also support 32-bit. I have no 32-bit libraries.

This system has 5 Gbytes, so I _might_ not noticed.

I have another, similar, system  with 2 Gbytes RAM. It runs Fedora-64 
well, better than my Pentium IV with 1 Gbyte ran RHEL5-clone.


> itself it's not that bad.
> 
> Michael
> 


-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu  Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

You cannot reply off-list:-)