Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.hardware > #1067

Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS??

From Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS??
Followup-To comp.os.linux.hardware
Date 2012-02-28 00:06 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Strider
Message-ID <jih28u$slp$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <9r1v3cF1e1U9@mid.individual.net> <jigk6n$4kr$1@dont-email.me> <jigr5q$9ik$1@saria.nerim.net>

Followups directed to: comp.os.linux.hardware

Show all headers | View raw


On Monday 27 February 2012 22:04, Pascal Hambourg conveyed the following 
to comp.os.linux.hardware...

> Aragorn a écrit :
>
>> On Monday 27 February 2012 19:07, ray conveyed the following to
>> comp.os.linux.hardware...
>> 
>>> Would there be any particular advantage to running a 64 bit version
>>> of, say, Debian on a netbook which is limited to 2gb RAM but does
>>> have a 64 bit Atom processor?
> 
> [...]
>> Of course, a lot of that is cache, but that's exactly what makes your
>> system snappier.  There's far less room for cache on a 2 GB RAM
>> system.
>> 
>> By comparison, my 32-bit PCLinuxOS (with KDE 3.5.10) generally runs
>> with just over 1 GB of RAM in use, cache included.  There is of
>> course a difference in code complexity between KDE 3.5.10 and KDE
>> 4.6.5, but still, I mainly attribute the memory consumption surplus
>> here in Mageia to its 64-bit nature.
> 
> Any /serious/ facts backing this opinion ?

If by "serious facts" you mean hard statistical evidence, then I do not 
have that.  I do however have somewhat of an idea from what others who 
have both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of the same distribution installed 
have reported across the various newsgroups I'm subscribed to.

> Comparing different OSes and software and claiming that the difference
> is due to 32 vs 64-bit does not sound serious to me.

I wouldn't stretch that "different OSes and software" concept too much, 
though.  PCLinuxOS is a Mandriva derivative, and so is Mageia.  The only 
real difference at the operating system level is the package manager.  
Both systems have 2.6 kernels - 2.6.26 for PCLinuxOS, 2.6.38 for Mageia.

That said, I did say that the PCLinuxOS distribution uses KDE 3.5 and 
this Mageia here uses KDE 4.6.  Granted, there is a generational 
difference at play there, but it's still KDE, and the KDE developers did 
not exactly throw away _all_ of the code base of KDE 3 when they 
developed KDE 4.

Furthermore, the applications used at the time of the check were the 
same for both installations.  Essentially only one logged-in user, 
running KMail (e-mail client), KNode (news reader) and KVIrc (IRC 
client).  Cache may vary in size due to frequent opening and closing of 
Firefox sessions and other applications.

It's not like I'm comparing GNU/Linux with Solaris or FreeBSD, or even 
with BeOS, IBM OS/2 or Microsoft Windows.  It's the same operating 
system, just a little bit more modern in the event of the 64-bit system.  
The hardware is the same as well, as both distributions are installed 
side by side on this machine here.

When cache is taken out of the equation, then I would say that the 
difference in RAM consumption between the 32-bit PCLinuxOS and the 64-
bit Mageia sits somewhere in the 400 to 500 MB range.  This difference 
could be smaller if both were indeed only different "bitness" versions 
of the exact same distribution, but I estimate that the difference would 
still be in the magnitude of 200 to 300 MB, with the 64-bit system 
consuming the most of the two.

It is a fact: 64-bit systems use 64-bit integers and 64-bit pointers.  
Inevitably this leads to greater memory consumption on the part of the 
64-bit system.  It won't be anywhere near the Microsoft-touted claim 
that a 64-bit system consumes or needs twice as much RAM as a 32-bit 
system, but there /is/ a difference.  That is exactly why the x32 
platform was conceived.

-- 
= Aragorn =
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

Back to comp.os.linux.hardware | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? ray <ray@zianet.com> - 2012-02-27 18:07 +0000
  Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-27 20:05 +0100
    Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-27 20:39 +0100
    Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2012-02-27 22:04 +0100
      Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-28 00:06 +0100
        Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2012-02-29 20:49 +0100
      Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Dave <noone$$@llondel.org> - 2012-02-28 07:28 +0000
    Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2012-03-02 22:42 +0100
      Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-03-03 00:18 +0100
        Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-03-03 09:27 +0000
  Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? DenverD <DenverD@invalid.dk> - 2012-02-27 22:54 +0100
    Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric Valette <EricNo.SPAMvalette@free.fr> - 2012-02-27 23:46 +0100
  Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Stefan Patric <not@this.address.com> - 2012-02-28 02:32 +0000
    Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric VALETTE <ericNo.Spamvalette@free.fr> - 2012-02-28 10:04 +0100
      Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2012-02-28 11:30 -0600
        Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric Valette <EricNo.SPAMvalette@free.fr> - 2012-02-28 19:21 +0100
          Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2012-02-28 15:50 -0600
            Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric Valette <EricNo.SpamValette@free.fr> - 2012-02-29 22:11 +0100
        Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric Valette <EricNo.SPAMvalette@free.fr> - 2012-02-28 19:23 +0100
          Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2012-02-28 15:51 -0600
            Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric Valette <EricNo.SpamValette@free.fr> - 2012-02-29 22:45 +0100
      Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Stefan Patric <not@this.address.com> - 2012-02-28 20:32 +0000
        Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric Valette <EricNo.SpamValette@free.fr> - 2012-02-29 22:12 +0100
          Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Stefan Patric <not@this.address.com> - 2012-03-01 05:47 +0000
            Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric VALETTE <ericNo.Spamvalette@free.fr> - 2012-03-01 10:32 +0100
              Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2012-03-01 13:54 -0600
                Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric Valette <EricNo.SpamValette@free.fr> - 2012-03-02 23:18 +0100
                Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2012-03-05 15:08 -0600
                Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric Valette <EricNo.SpamValette@free.fr> - 2012-03-02 23:18 +0100
              Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Stefan Patric <not@this.address.com> - 2012-03-02 00:40 +0000
                Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Eric Valette <EricNo.SpamValette@free.fr> - 2012-03-02 23:37 +0100
                Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Stefan Patric <not@this.address.com> - 2012-03-03 18:04 +0000
                Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2012-03-05 15:16 -0600
  Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? ray <ray@zianet.com> - 2012-02-28 15:56 +0000
    Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Bob Tennent <BobT@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-02-28 16:52 +0000
      Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? ray <ray@zianet.com> - 2012-02-28 19:24 +0000
        Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2012-02-28 15:53 -0600
          Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? ray <ray@zianet.com> - 2012-02-28 22:15 +0000
            Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2012-02-28 17:12 -0600
              Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? ray <ray@zianet.com> - 2012-02-29 02:43 +0000
                Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2012-02-29 12:35 -0600
                Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Bob Tennent <BobT@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-02-29 19:51 +0000
        Re: Atom netbook - 32 or 64 bit OS?? Bob Tennent <BobT@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-02-28 22:36 +0000

csiph-web