| 1 |
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:52 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 7/16/12, Nilesh Govindrajan <contact@××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> So the same old query again I guess. |
| 4 |
>> What architecture should I use for a machine with 3GB RAM and a 64bit |
| 5 |
>> processor? |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> I believe 64bit should be given serious consideration only if RAM is gt or |
| 8 |
>> = 4 GB, even there 32bit is allowable with PAE if I'm not wrong. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> So what is recommended? There are as such no special use cases to go 64bit |
| 11 |
>> for me. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Why 32? ... Flash, win32 codecs, probably Wine but not sure as it has |
| 15 |
> been years... |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
64-bit WINE worked for me. Even for running 32-bit WoW. (Though I was |
| 18 |
running a multilib profile. Uncertain if that had an impact.) |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Why 64? ... Virtualization... |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Depends on what you want and/or need. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
IMO, it's worth the 'overhead' to run 64-bit, if only for the greater |
| 26 |
number of GPRs and other architectural improvements. There's honestly |
| 27 |
a lot of good stuff in x86-64 beyond the larger address space. The |
| 28 |
increased address space also helps long-lived programs avoid address |
| 29 |
space fragmentation. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
:wq |
Archives