The Future of amd64 spins

pidsley
Hermit
Posts: 2539
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:31 pm

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by pidsley » Sun Aug 18, 2013 11:53 pm

When I hear people bitching about memory, they are using iceweasel or chromium with 20+ tabs open. No one has yet been able to explain to me why they need so many tabs open at once.

As I mentioned, the only time I get near max memory used is building Firefox on Gentoo. I have had an update fail because it ran out of memory (with 4G in the machine). Usually re-running the build and building only Firefox works, but lately I have just held Firefox back and not rebuilt it.

Right now I am on an Atom board, 32-bit sid netinstall, iceape with two tabs open, two urxvt with weechat-curses in one, and using 170M. Seems like a lot, but I haven't optimized this machine so it's still running a crapload of unnecessary daemons.

User avatar
gurtid
Uninstaller
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:53 am

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by gurtid » Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:06 am

currently running trollinger 64bit. 685M with 6 tabs and deadbeef playing music in the background. Never noticed more than 1.4G on a linux install

[edit] browser is google-chrome
The Beaver Destroys Forests

User avatar
dkeg
Configurator
Posts: 3782
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 9:23 pm
Location: Mid-Atlantic Grill

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by dkeg » Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:24 am

the main reason I'll have a lot of tabs open is b/c I leave them there for reference so I don't forget about them. It's like 'oh that's cool, let me open in another tab, I'll check it out later', then it just keeps growing. but still, iceape handles many tabs very well, and even lately, iceweasel, as with say 8-10 tabs open, still approx 10% of 4G. With iceape, def had 15 + tabs, but still only maybe 8-9%. I've had close to 10 with dwb, that stays around 6-7%.

of course, i'm not bitching about it. :D

on 32 bit bloat, with multiple items running including roaster, moc, tmux, etc, < 190M (5%)

Work hard; Complain less

User avatar
DebianJoe
Frame Buffer
Posts: 1915
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 5:41 am
Location: emacs.d

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by DebianJoe » Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:47 am

Okay, so I thought I'd figure out what some users must be doing:
Image
Cream+Xemacs+MC+running a dist-upgrade+moc+a scrot in urxvt+a game programmed in python+links2+xclock+screenfetch+htop....and I barely broke 400MB on a system that's been running the last 8 days straight.
|>>BBQ Roaster, Alpha Branch<< | >> clinky << | >> X11 must die << |
Thanks BASIC

User avatar
gurtid
Uninstaller
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:53 am

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by gurtid » Mon Aug 19, 2013 1:03 am

lol dj.

Fair to say I very rarely notice it over 1G.
The Beaver Destroys Forests

machinebacon
Baconator
Posts: 10253
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 11:03 am
Location: Pfälzerwald
Contact:

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by machinebacon » Mon Aug 19, 2013 2:18 am

Gurtid,
64bit is not dropped, the only thing is that they won't come in newest kernel/build tools versions, that means: the regularly upgraded three spins will include the"old" build tools and no bleeding edge kernels. i will write a detailed manual on the matter for those who want to roastyourown a 64bit release. It all makes sense, then :)
..gnutella..

User avatar
gurtid
Uninstaller
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:53 am

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by gurtid » Mon Aug 19, 2013 2:31 am

Yes mb. All good and thanks.

[edit] typo
The Beaver Destroys Forests

User avatar
vic
Godot
Posts: 2109
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 10:11 am
Location: /bin

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by vic » Mon Aug 19, 2013 10:03 am

Thanks for the answer machinebacon, yes it answered my question:) Think I will download some old favourite iso (got to check first if I already have it) to keep as
insurance in case of... (well really it is just a matter of time before I do something stupid:)) And I miss Elitist...
Sorry guys, no signature for a while, too busy with life. :|

hinto
Forums Hottie
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 4:28 pm

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by hinto » Mon Aug 19, 2013 1:42 pm

The reason I use 64 bit Linux is that I write 64 bit apps.
-Hinto
"A human being should be able to... butcher a hog..." -Robert Heinlein

User avatar
Sector11
Sperminator
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:15 am

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by Sector11 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:12 pm

DebianJoe wrote:Okay, so I thought I'd figure out what some users must be doing:
Image
Cream+Xemacs+MC+running a dist-upgrade+moc+a scrot in urxvt+a game programmed in python+links2+xclock+screenfetch+htop....and I barely broke 400MB on a system that's been running the last 8 days straight.
WOW!! 400mb after 8 days!!

- also cream! {lightbulb} I used that, I like it. Gotta grab that again.

I have to admit (being the resident noob) I'm not sure of the real difference between 32|64 in terms of 'usability' I know I ran a 32bit Linux version on my first 64bit processor and now use 64 bit... well because I have a 64 bit CPU.

Let me search for my answers as to why you guys are saying this is good ... I'm tend to remember it longer that way. If I have trouble I'll be back.

BTW: in support of the 20 vs 21 century technology:
From the #! forums
The post reads:
More "conspiracy" stuff, now the German government is saying that Window$ has a built-in backdoor...

LEAKED: German Government Warns Key Entities Not To Use Windows 8 – Links The NSA

The source article:

Part 1
Government warns of Windows 8

Page 2/2: The NSA supports the new standard
I am THE resident noob, hands down no discussion. ... and
I wear my soap on a rope.

User avatar
Sector11
Sperminator
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:15 am

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by Sector11 » Fri Aug 23, 2013 8:04 pm

OK, I used 64 because ... I have a 64bit AMD Athlon x3.

I did some searching and found a few things that really hit home.

64bit
- graphics/scientific/mathematical/number crunching is best

If not from what I see the difference is minimal and even a PAE kernel 'may' in some cases be slower in the 32bit world. The difference from what I found probably would not be noticeable to a person - machine yes ... me no.

However 64bit seems to do disk accessing faster than 32bit... probably not noticeable either.

Other than that it would seem to this noob that I probably would not notice the difference for a 'home computer' dabbling in some graphic 'noob editing'

But for CLI guys - no doubt 32bit would perform just as well.

Of course this means when I change mu HDD and get an extra couple of partitions for testing I'll pop a 32bit spin on one just to see.

I'm running:

Code: Select all

Kernel: 3.9-1-amd64 x86_64 (64 bit, gcc: 4.7.3)
CPU: Triple core AMD Athlon II X3 450 (-MCP-) cache: 1536 KB bmips: 19286.2 
Clock Speeds: 1: 3214.376 MHz 2: 3214.376 MHz 3: 3214.376 MHz
6GB RAM -- never seen it reach 900mb used
Check it out ---> http://postimg.org/image/44uxl0lqh/ (8 conkys running)
main uses:
Browser / GIMP / email / videos-movies / a little inkscape and want to try blender
and a whole bunch of conky.

I'm guessing I wouldn't even notice a performance difference. Would that be correct? maybe an opinion, but I'd like to hear it.

Here's what I found while 'researching'
=========================
Most info I can find is seriously outdated except for one MINT-13 test and Ubuntu 13.04
------------------------------
Outdated ... interesting read.
http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/linux- ... linux.html
------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64
------------------------------
As has been noted before, it won't make much difference.
Pros for 64:
Programs may run a bit faster.
Can use all 4 GB RAM without any special kernel.
Allows running virtual machines with 64-bit guest OS. Newer VM versions may allow this on 32-bit hosts as well, though.

Pros for 32:
Less hassle using 32-bit applications and packages, although running 32-bit applications should work in 64-bit environment too.
Allows development linking to 32-bit (usually proprietary) libraries.
------------------------------
Unless you're running heavy math/science/multimedia software, you won't really gain much from going 64-bit. I'd stick with 32-bit if I were you.
------------------------------
I'd install a 64-bit version and potentially something like VirtualBox so I can run a 32-bit version in parallel in case I'd need some software that is only available in 32-bit.

You won't be able to make use of more than 4 GB of memory using a 32-bit kernel without jumping through some hoops like PAE which is IMHO better avoided.
------------------------------
Ubuntu - but current
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... 1304&num=4
------------------------------
This is current and suggests that a 32bit system has a slight edge.
http://www.123unix.com/2013/32-bit-vs-6 ... x-desktop/

------------------------------
One thing I saw in those: "Unless you're running heavy math/science/multimedia software, you won't really gain much from going 64-bit." I've heard that quite often, even though the OS/apps are not using a 64bit processor to it full potential. Hmmmm would it run cooler?

------------------------------
Now this seems to be one of the best answers yet:

Why is it better to use a 64bit OS?
Who told you that is is better? Both has advantages and disadvantages. It all depends on what you use your computer for. – Marco Jul 19 '12 at 12:14
------------------------------
2009 benchmark tests (Ubuntu)
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... ntu_32_pae


I'm getting into "graphics" a 'bit' so in that respect ... 64 seems better but if you are a CLI guy (LinuxBBQ seems to favour that more) 32 bit makes sense. --> It all depends on what you use your computer for. – Marco Jul 19 '12 at 12:14
I am THE resident noob, hands down no discussion. ... and
I wear my soap on a rope.

User avatar
DebianJoe
Frame Buffer
Posts: 1915
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 5:41 am
Location: emacs.d

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by DebianJoe » Fri Aug 23, 2013 8:21 pm

When you say that 64 bit doesn't require a special kernel to use all 4GB of RAM, I think that you neglect the fact that an amd64 kernel isn't really less special than an i686 PAE one. They're both specialized.

You are correct, though, in that it's about how it's being used (I actually read that huge wall o' text.) If the question is centered around "Is 64 bits faster in benchmarks?" Yes it is. Does it matter as much as reducing loading 2000 lines of LUA and Python to an application written in C that uses 120 SLOC....nope. You can't touch that kind of difference in performance. An M1 Abrams has around 1500 HP, whereas a Formula One racer comes in a bit under 1000. Which is faster?
|>>BBQ Roaster, Alpha Branch<< | >> clinky << | >> X11 must die << |
Thanks BASIC

User avatar
wuxmedia
Grasshopper
Posts: 6445
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:32 am
Location: Back in Blighty
Contact:

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by wuxmedia » Fri Aug 23, 2013 8:23 pm

^^ bottom line, last note, says it all 8)
thanks for your research Sector11.

indeed Joe.
"Seek, and Ye shall find"
"Github | Chooons | Site"

User avatar
Sector11
Sperminator
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:15 am

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by Sector11 » Fri Aug 23, 2013 9:20 pm

@ DebianJoe
An M1 Abrams has around 1500 HP, whereas a Formula One racer comes in a bit under 1000. Which is faster?
The round coming out of the 105 mm L52 M68 rifled cannon (M1) that destroyed the F1 hahahahahaha

And that isn't a fair comparison at all. An M1 weighs a couple of pounds more than an F1 and the gear box is different!

OK, fun over ... good point: it's about how it's being used - but that wasn't really my comment, but what I read.

Since a home computer running a 64bit processor with 6GB RAM has never used over 900MB (I did see 8xxMB once I think, tis why I say 900MB) I would say a 32bit OS would do just fine. And I will test it.

Besides:
1. - Benchmark tests are like numbers in the hands of accountants, they can show whatever you want them to show.
2. - You leave school, a course (a period of formal learning) and first words out of your bosses mouth are something like this, "Forget everything they taught you, now we'll show you how it works in the real world."

@ wuxmedia You're welcome, learning by osmosis is a slow process - I need to help it a bit. :D I enjoyed the research ... picked up some insights. So much of what I read here at BBQ is way over my head but in time some of it will filter through the sieve.

One doesn't learn to play a better chess game by playing someone at a lower level but by playing someone better than you, and that's a slow process too.
I am THE resident noob, hands down no discussion. ... and
I wear my soap on a rope.

machinebacon
Baconator
Posts: 10253
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 11:03 am
Location: Pfälzerwald
Contact:

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by machinebacon » Sat Aug 24, 2013 4:59 am

IMO the disk access time for input/output plays a more significant role in 'notable speed differences' than the architecture, so: if you want to increase the writing/reading speed of your disk, there's always something to optimize. wrt to the architiecture: it's more about which apps are 64bit-only, so if you have those 64-bit apps you really really need, you will use a 64bit kernel. Virtualization? Pick 64bit. And if you plan to use WINE or Skype, of course pick 32bit. Personally, I always pick the 32bit variant, even though I have a 'longmode' CPU.
..gnutella..

User avatar
Sector11
Sperminator
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:15 am

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by Sector11 » Sat Aug 24, 2013 5:19 am

Food for thought, thank you.

Virtualization - never tried it, but have been thinking about it to run different Distros vs installing them. I've been told it's slow and memory hungry. Well, I have 5GB of memory I've never used.

WINE? No not needed, I have no need of any Win apps at all, and I do not use Skype.

I've been dual booting for a long time, the second is always a backup system, recently over written with BBQ #! spin to test ... since coming here I thought about creating two new partitions so I have my regular spare backup OS and a place to play with other. That's when virtualization came into play ... I'm in the "flip a coin" stage to decide Virtual or adding 2 physical partitions.
I am THE resident noob, hands down no discussion. ... and
I wear my soap on a rope.

machinebacon
Baconator
Posts: 10253
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 11:03 am
Location: Pfälzerwald
Contact:

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by machinebacon » Sat Aug 24, 2013 5:56 am

If you're afraid of wiping your drive: virtualize.
I'd recommend, just for kicks, to have a virtualized (or real iron) no-X environment or something very very sparse, to get a feel for dependencies. But that's of course outside of the original scope of this thread :D
..gnutella..

User avatar
DebianJoe
Frame Buffer
Posts: 1915
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 5:41 am
Location: emacs.d

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by DebianJoe » Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:03 pm

machinebacon wrote:But that's of course outside of the original scope of this thread :D
Well then....let's have this discussion: in a different topic. ;)
|>>BBQ Roaster, Alpha Branch<< | >> clinky << | >> X11 must die << |
Thanks BASIC

User avatar
dkeg
Configurator
Posts: 3782
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 9:23 pm
Location: Mid-Atlantic Grill

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by dkeg » Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:31 pm

yep, all been said. Agree with the setiment here. If you need 64bit for specific reason, software wise, media, etc, that's the best to use, but I think generally for most folks 32bit is fine, and pae if you have 64bit architecture. Also comes into play is people just think 64bit is better because its a bigger number than 32 :D

Work hard; Complain less

User avatar
Sector11
Sperminator
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:15 am

Re: The Future of amd64 spins

Unread post by Sector11 » Sat Aug 24, 2013 2:15 pm

OFFTOPIC :
@ the baconator - Not afraid of wiping my drive at all. I've done it may times I have my backups. And you read my mind on the "virt-no-X" ... that, believe it of not came to me in a dream last night. And I read it here this AM! It's either get outta my head or the osmosis factor it taking over. :D

@ DJ - Well done I'm over there right after breakfast - thanks.

@ dkeg - I'll go one step farther, if you need a different OS for a specific reason then that's fine too. Which is totally contrary to my feelings when W2K did it's last BSOD on me that lead me to Linux.
I am THE resident noob, hands down no discussion. ... and
I wear my soap on a rope.

Post Reply