[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ale] 64-bit vs 32-bit?
- Subject: [ale] 64-bit vs 32-bit?
- From: ecashin at noserose.net (Ed Cashin)
- Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 09:19:30 -0400
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <1082218957-1301572026-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-718149090-@bda808.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> <[email protected]>
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 10:10 PM, Robert <rs at ale.spam.futz.org> wrote:
>>The only plus that I have seen it that I can run >4GB RAM. Since I use my
>>machine for editing and mastering audio I find that to be valuable.
>
> I do photo processing. When I had 4gb of ram, I often had to quit my RAW
> conversion software to free up memory to run the GIMP. I recently upgraded to
> 8gb, and am still running a 32 bit kernel. Now both apps can use up to 3.5gb
> of ram each and I can leave them both running. Yay!
>
> So, in response to the original poster: I think that unless you *know* you need
> more than 4gb of ram for a single app/process, you should be fine with a 32 bit
> kernel, even if you have more than 4gb of ram.
Is your kernel using PAE? On the way to the full 64-bit technology,
there were a lot of stepping-stone technologies, and maybe you're
being helped by one. Just curious.
--
? Ed Cashin <ecashin at noserose.net>
? http://noserose.net/e/
? http://www.coraid.com/