32-bit vs. 64-bit Ubuntu 13.04 Linux Performance
Phoronix: 32-bit vs. 64-bit Ubuntu 13.04 Linux Performance
While nearly all modern Intel/AMD x86 hardware is 64-bit capable, among novice Linux users the question commonly is whether to install the 32-bit or 64-bit version of a given distribution. We have previously delivered benchmarks showing Ubuntu 32-bit vs. 64-bit performance while in this article is an updated look in seeing how the 32-bit versus 64-bit binary performance compares when running Ubuntu 13.04 with the Linux 3.8 kernel.
Am I missing something or is your comment on the OpenArena tests on the second page innaccurate?
Yes, that's exactly what I wanted to point out (independently). For OpenArena 32-bits seem certainly better (from the graphs), not the other way.
Originally Posted by bawkbawkboo1
It also might be interesting how x32 compares (not in Ubuntu ATM). http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTEwMTk
Last edited by vcunat; 04-25-2013 at 04:52 AM.
Reason: Additional comment
Well, again, its only better for ancient intel graphics, the story would be completely different with at least ivy bridge, or even better - with a real graphics card with real CLOSED source drivers
I confess, I use 32Bit Xubuntu. I use it for compatibility and because I have only 4GB Ram. I also use it because, at the time I got the ISO, the page actually recommended I use the 32Bit version. There are still people having issues with 64bit believe it or not and a lot of software only has 32bit versions. I can say with confidence, I'll be using 32bit for the foreseeable future. At least until I get 8 or 16 GB of Ram, then I'll move to 64Bit. But right now I have zero use for it, 32Bit is working out fine for me. I understand I may sound odd to some of you, but it's working out great for me.
Any ideas why the big difference in some cases? I was hoping they were more or less equal, maybe with the 64 to have an edge.
Mike, on Linux you really want to use 64-bit kernel even physical RAM of 1GB (or larger, of course). Due to the way Linux partitions the virtual memory space, there's only 960MB in the kernel-reserved area to map physical memory. So it often has to remap if it needs to access RAM that is not mapped at the moment. I don't know how much it slows down the system - maybe not by any signifficant amount - but why bother. Just use 64-bit kernel and 32-bit userland. The 32-bit support on 64-bit kernels is flawless.
Originally Posted by Mike Frett
BTW, are you sure you have access to all your 4 gigs of RAM. If you use non-PAE kernel you' probably have 3.5GB or sth like that. Windows keeps it like that even for PAE kernels. I don't know how it is with PAE-enabled Linux kernels. But Linux calls PAE "an ugly hack". I've switched to 64-bits and never looked back.