Author Topic: Mini 64?  (Read 682 times)

Offline Just17

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Super Villain
  • *******
  • Posts: 10668
  • MLUs Forever!
Re: Mini 64?
« Reply #15 on: March 08, 2013, 07:54:12 AM »
32 bit is as good as 64 bit in most cases (not all).

Remember the push to 64 bit was forced by MS because they would not give their non-corporate users access to their pae kernel to allow them access to >4GB ram.
So the users had no choice but to move to 64 bit to utilise the >4GB ram now being fitted to most PCs sold.
MLUs rule the roost!

Linux XPS 3.4.38-pclos1.bfs  64 bit
Intel Core2 Quad CPU Q9450 @ 2.66GHz
4 GB RAM
MCP51 High Def Audio
GeForce GTX 550 Ti
PHILIPS  ‎DVD+-RW DVD8701
‎Logitech ‎BT Mini-Receiver
Afatech DTT

Offline pags

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2519
  • Keep it clean.
Re: Mini 64?
« Reply #16 on: March 08, 2013, 10:49:41 AM »
32 bit is as good as 64 bit in most cases (not all).

Remember the push to 64 bit was forced by MS because they would not give their non-corporate users access to their pae kernel to allow them access to >4GB ram.
So the users had no choice but to move to 64 bit to utilise the >4GB ram now being fitted to most PCs sold.

And, possibly better, in some.
More applications, more drivers (particularly for older hardware)...

Yes, smaller datasets and datapaths, so real-world benefits will vary depending on usage (and, having access to both allows a better choice to be made).

As soon as I can free up some relavent HW, I hope to test it (only in VM, so far).

Offline gseaman

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3798
Re: Mini 64?
« Reply #17 on: March 08, 2013, 10:57:31 PM »
I find 64-bit slightly faster overall. I don't have a particularly fast system, either (1.7 ghz dual core intel). And only 1 gigabyte of ram. Worth it, but not life changing. ;)

Galen