View Full Version : Potential New 64-bit System. Please Comment.
Nov 23rd 2008, 02:07 PM
I will soon be purchasing a new 64-bit system and would very much appreciate like collective knowledge in our forum to weigh in on this. I'm especially eager to hear about any potential challenges you see with the hardware I intend to use.
Asus M3N78-EMH HDMI Motherboard
AMD Athlon 64 FX-74 (Quad 3Ghz CPU)
2 each, 1066 Mhz DDR2 RAM, 1GB (2GB total RAM)
Samsung 32GB SSD SATA HD
WD Caviar Blue 250GB SATA HD
Lite-On IHAS220-06 Lightscribe SATA
Nov 23rd 2008, 02:17 PM
That hardware should be fine. The onboard Nvidia 8200 should be fine, AFAIK, with the Nvidia proprietary driver. Are you going to use the onboard sound on that motherboard -- do you know what it is? You should check that and make sure there's a driver on the ALSA project site. The specs that I found don't say what the chip is.
Nov 23rd 2008, 02:39 PM
Yes, I intended to use the onboard sound and video. I wasn't able to find anything (pro or con) on the ALSA site concerning my selected mobo. Perhaps it's too new.
There are approximately 25000 apps in the repositories. Of those, how many are 64 bit I wonder? Would I be asking for problems by installing a 32-bit Kubuntu version on the aforementioned system? I think it's possible the 64-bit kernels need to "season" some more as 64-bit apps catch up.
Nov 24th 2008, 02:45 AM
There are approximately 25000 apps in the repositories. Of those, how many are 64 bit I wonder? There are 24804 in the "official" Hardy 64 bit repositories (counting Medibuntu).
Would I be asking for problems by installing a 32-bit Kubuntu version on the aforementioned system?I haven't tried that in a while, so I can't really say, but I don't think it would be either problematic or necessary. I do know, however, that trying to run 32bit packages with 64 bit libraries is a BAD IDEA.
I think it's possible the 64-bit kernels need to "season" some more as 64-bit apps catch up.I have been running a fully 64 bit system for about 18 months. I have had far fewer problems over that period than I did in one week of running Intrepid.
That said, unless you do serious numerical processing, or something similar, you probably won't see any major gain from going with a 64 processor. I'd save some money and get a 32 bit system.
Nov 24th 2008, 02:48 AM
...That said, unless you do serious numerical processing, or something similar, you probably won't see any major gain from going with a 64 processor. I'd save some money and get a 32 bit system.
They are *all 64-bit now, correct?
*Intel and AMD current offerings. AMD would be 64-bit going back 4-5 years, and intel with Core Duo (or was it Core 2???)
Let us know how that SSD works for you... even if just your gut feelings on performance...
Have you given any serious consideration to i7??? I realize it is a bit steep now, and two sockets excites no one, but the early benchmarks have been promising... or is this not a build (i.e. you are buying the system pre-built)?
Nov 26th 2008, 07:29 PM
This is not a pre-built system; I intend to build it myself.
Yes, I agree running 32-bit apps with a 64-bit library would be a bad idea. I'd probably run straight 32-bit system (apps and library) on 64-bit-capable hardware if I needed to.
Yes, buying a 32-bit system now would not be an upgrade as all the offerings are 64-bit.
>24000 apps in the repository, but I was under the impression that a lot of those apps (>70%) are actually 32-bit tested to run on a 64-bit system and not native 64-bit apps themselves. Is this true or have I been misinformed?
Yeah, I am curious about the SSD myself. The only reason I'm going to try it was the price reductions taking place. SATA over EIDE alone will provide a noticeable speed increase (I've been told 5-10%) and the SDD itself another 16-20%. It would be amazing to have a kubuntu system up and running in about 15 seconds ! That may be wishful thinking, but I'll let you all know.
I just found the following rather disturbing Ubuntu thread concerning the mobo I want to use:
Well, that's why I post this kind of stuff -- to shake out the problems and learn from other peoples' challenges before experiencing them myself.
Nov 27th 2008, 12:16 AM
i have run both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of (k)ubuntu
on my machine:
Athlon 64fx 3800+ in Asus K8Vse-Delux mobo
1.5GB DDR ram
AGP:16mb Geforce 2 mx v.card(broke my good ones :()
IDE0/0: 80GB HD
IDE1/0: 20x dvd-rw
IDE3/0: 160GB HD
SATA1: 320GB HD
SATA2: 750GB HD
PCI0: Ati TV wonder
soundmax onboard sound
marvell yukon onboard network
as for running 32bit apps on a 64 bit system. i never had to all the apps i needed were in the repos for kubuntu.
Nov 27th 2008, 12:27 AM
I think most or all of the 25,000+ packages are compiled for 64-bit, not written natively to use the 64-bit bus.
So, I guess one could wait for the day that the announcement comes out that the application of your heart's desire has finally been written for the 64-bit bus, and THEN install a 64-bit OS to run the app.
Or, one could simply install a 64-bit OS on your 64-bit hardware and start using it, today.
I went with Option #2. ;D
p.s. One of the cooler things I've observed in the last 2 years is two instances of Gnome Wave Cleaner running in separate windows, each sucking up to 100% of a 3+ GHz CPU core while doing its DSP thing on an audio track from an analog recording. But that's as much a dual-core CPU phenomenon as a 64-bit phenomenon. ;D
Dec 6th 2008, 09:34 PM
I recently built a system, Asus M2A-VM HDMI, Athlon X2 2500, 2 G memory. No problems with the system but I wouldn't recommend using AMD64 distro. Seems stupid when you can hardly buy 32 bit anymore but the 64 bit software has problems.
dibl comments on seeing two processes using 100% CPU each, yeah it's cool but watch Opera pluginwrap using half a dozen instances using all 200% CPU for a couple of minutes is not, Nor is KDESU using 100% of a core when it shouldn't be running. That assumes that KDE System guard works its self.
I haven't used the HDMI features yet because haven't got a suitable monitor. Not sure on that mobo but on mine the two monitors can only be used with either both digital (DVI-D or HDMI) or one digital and one VGA, if you want to use the HDMI part then the VGA does not work.
Dec 6th 2008, 09:54 PM
My rule is, NEVER argue online, and I'm sticking with it.
However, for the benefit of anyone considering installing the 64-bit version: Please understand that, to my observation, a full 90% of the issues blamed on "64-bit" *buntu are totally unrelated to the architecture. On any given day, I can check out the Ubuntu 64-bit Forum here:
and on a page that shows 20 posts, it's unusual to see 3 of them that are actually related to the 64-bit architecture. It's that way again today, as I post this ....
Dec 17th 2008, 08:56 PM
Wow! Great comments all ! I'm getting quite an education here and I truly appreciate that very much. Dibl, I understand your point... I think. When using something so new like the 64-bit arch, it's natural to blame that when things go wrong, but when the same problem occurs on a 32-bit system it's much less likely that the user would blame the arch. Do I understand your point?
The bottom line is this: the 64-bit OS and apps are just as stable as their 32-bit counterparts, but get blames for problems much more often because they're so new.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.