32bit vs 64bit

zagmund · 02-10-2011 09:46AM #1

I'm bringing an old (2007) HP Pavillion tx1000 back to life at the moment but I'm having a few little glitches.

I started off downloading Mint 64bit (since the sticker on the device said it had an AMD Turion64). The basic OS works fine, but when trying to install a printer driver I got an error message back about "wrong architecture - i486". I think it was i486 anyway. Also, the wireless didn't work, then I installed the relevant drivers and it worked, but now ndiswrapper blows up when loading and I can't get the OS back.

I'm about to give the 32bit version a lash, but I'm wondering whether there's any value in persevering with the 64bit approach at all ?

The main use is going to be web browsing so a powerhouse is not required.

z

Khannie · 02-10-2011 04:14PM

32bit ftw I'd say. It sounds like you tried to install 32bit drivers anyway, that should be handily rectified by getting the 64bit ones if they exist. The only thing is they're less likely to exist, especially for an older laptop.

Stuxnet · 02-10-2011 08:59PM

nah, you really only need x64 if your running over 4 gigs of ram !

Pygmalion · 02-10-2011 10:00PM

iPwnage wrote: »

nah, you really only need x64 if your running over 4 gigs of ram !

3GB really, the upper 1GB of a process' address space is reserved for system stuff or something.

pickarooney · 02-10-2011 10:48PM

Pygmalion wrote: »

3GB really, the upper 1GB of a process' address space is reserved for system stuff or something.

I love the way that sentence goes from sounding really specific to completely woolly in the space of a couple of words

zagmund · 03-10-2011 08:24AM

Thanks. I went with the 32bit version in the end. After some wireless wizardry I'm now up and running with no further problems. The device itself can only handle 2gig max, so 64bit wasn't going to help there.

z

Johnboy1951 · 03-10-2011 10:10AM

iPwnage wrote: »

nah, you really only need x64 if your running over 4 gigs of ram !

Dunno how you came to this conclusion.

If you want to make use of up to 64GB of memory all you need is a pae kernel ....... in a 32 bit OS.

Khannie · 03-10-2011 11:26AM

From my memory banks, PAE / bigmem kernel is costly. I think a 3% hit in performance is normal.

Glad you got sorted OP.

Stuxnet · 04-10-2011 09:28AM

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Dunno how you came to this conclusion.

If you want to make use of up to 64GB of memory all you need is a pae kernel ....... in a 32 bit OS.

true...i had "really" in italics, i wasnt laying down the 32/64 bit law, i'm not sure the average joe knows about pae kernel,

Johnboy1951 · 04-10-2011 09:36AM

iPwnage wrote: »

true...i had "really" in italics, i wasnt laying down the 32/64 bit law, i'm not sure the average joe knows about pae kernel,

nor about 8bit/16bit/32bit/64bit either

I would imagine a lot of distros have a pae kernel for their 32bit offerings .... but I have a vivid imagination

When using Win I was rather peeved at MS for not allowing 'ordinary' users access to their pae kernel.

32bit vs 64bit

Comments