Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
- If You have less or equal to 4GB RAM -> definitely i386 (*1)
- if You have more than 4GB RAM -> 64bit or PAE (*2)
1. 64 bit systems and programs are generally slower than 32bit systems/programs - this is because generally 64bit address computations are significantly slower than for 32 bit -> and that's why the ia32 Linux version is still supported and developed -> lower memory usage, faster execution of binary code.
2. PAE (Physical Address Extension) allows 32-bit systems to use more than 4GB memory sizes - whether it is faster or slower than native 64bit addressing mode depends on CPU version and on the application - some of the apps can benefit from using 32 bit pointers, some other may expose lower performance (this depends on whether the app needs more than 4GB memory to work).
Regards.
Bill Gates: "(...) In my case, I went to the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and I fished out listings of their operating system." The_full_story and Nothing_have_changed
- If You have less or equal to 4GB RAM -> definitely i386 (*1)
Poor advice. 2 GB and more is 64-bit land. 32-bit support is getting worse, due to reduced user base. In addition, proprietary applications tend not to offer 32-bit versions any more. Plus, going over 1 GB with 32-bit already comes with penalty.
Linus is absolutely spot on with regards to PAE and it's limited role in terms of squeezing a bit more life out of old x86_32 server hardware. PAE was never about performance - when I still ran 32 bit, I would build my own kernels to avoid it (as I also avoided > 2GB in an x86_32). I wouldn't recommend it to my worst enemy if they had an amd64 capable CPU and over 1GB of RAM.
- If You have less or equal to 4GB RAM -> definitely i386 (*1)
Poor advice. 2 GB and more is 64-bit land. 32-bit support is getting worse, due to reduced user base. In addition, proprietary applications tend not to offer 32-bit versions any more. Plus, going over 1 GB with 32-bit already comes with penalty.
64-bit Linux kernel package takes ~300MB, 32bit takes ~160MB. 32-bit vmlinuz image takes ~4.5MB, and 64bit version takes ~6.5MB.
Having more registers in the CPU seems to be cool, unless You realize that switching the CPU context (copying a data structure which holds all the registers values) and re-programming the MMU is significantly slower on 64bit.
The truth is, that the x86 architecture is a dinosaur - it was never meant to be extended beyond 32bit.
F.e ARM natively supports FIQ (fast interrupt requests) - on x86 interrupt routines are killing the CPU, because they have to share the CPU registers with regular programs.
The x32 project have prooved, that by eliminating 64bit address computations on the outdated x86 architecture/CPUs, the performance can be increased even by 40%
Regards
Bill Gates: "(...) In my case, I went to the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and I fished out listings of their operating system." The_full_story and Nothing_have_changed
I have found no issue with i386, i686, PAE, etc, even above 4GB. It is slightly tidier in my opinion, and I moved former amd64 VM's to i386 pae a few years ago. I have a stack on a 700MB base that outperforms amd64, and has gotten BETTER as I go. It's simple, if all programs and functions are available in your choice - then it really doesn't matter. Either will run well and the i386 advantage is minimal yet real- and there isn't a i386 DeadBeef, so...
This difference is funner with windows, yes I run a 4GB vram, 48GB, dual socket XP32. yes, it's used...
of topic ?
have good news regarding this , we shouldn't expect 128 BIT cpu's even in the distant future .
Lift up your hearts and thank the Lord .
... my 6 old barrels which run to full satisfaction under Debian 11 Bullseye 64 BIT / Cinnamon nota bene , namely four i3's / one i5 and one i7 , five with 4 GB and one with 6 GB ram are still good for a few decades?
see you again ... on an international meeting of the association of pensioners maybe ?
posted 2021 A.D.
The original question was answered in the first 2 replies so everything after that is off-topic or just opinions.
four i3's / one i5 and one i7
Intel have been using that same nomenclature since 2009, so just saying i3, i5, i7, could be a first generation Clarkdale or the latest Tiger Lake. There are also significant differences within each range eg. between a Core i5-6400 and a i5-6600K.
I see the same thing posted often and it can complicate trying to answer help questions.
“ computer users can be divided into 2 categories:
Those who have lost data
...and those who have not lost data YET ”Remember toBACKUP!
Fossy wrote: ↑2021-10-13 11:42
... my 6 old barrels which run to full satisfaction under Debian 11 Bullseye 64 BIT / Cinnamon nota bene , namely four i3's / one i5 and one i7 , five with 4 GB and one with 6 GB ram are still good for a few decades?
O-O-OMG! yeahbut, my initial thought about your assortment of Intel was; what about the Y2K09< Intel CPU flaw(s) again signaling the end of the digital world and their obvious attempt to strongarm-migrate the binary herd onto the newest Intel? :J
first of all my apologies for the late reply , fishing is simply my favorite waste of time ...
Nevertheless, thank you for the provided info , although old hat ... Spectre , Meltdown & C° ... far from our bed problems ... at least not here .
what I did experience is that some laptops c.q. CPU ? BIOS ? sometimes give me a hard time when I want to uninstall Windows and replace it with a Linux operating system, strange ? could Microsoft have something to do with this ?