On Wed 26 Jan 2022 at 05:44:50 (-0500), Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote: > On 2022-01-25 19:35, David Wright wrote: > > On Tue 25 Jan 2022 at 01:37:29 (-0500), a wrote: > >> Thank David and Polyna-Maude! > >> > >> it's surprising that "The x64 binary are also somewhat larger than the > >> i386 binaries" > >> > >> i compare some packages of bullseye for both arch, they happen to be > >> contrary > >> > >> though difference is small and IMO has little impact on performance > >> > >> firefox-esr for i386: size= 58465416 > >> > >> firefox-esr for amd64: size= 55451188 > >> > >> gcc-10 for i386: size= 18097884 > >> > >> gcc-10 for amd64: size= 16990272 > > > > Well, we've gone from ISOs containing different inventories to sizes > > of packages. I still don't see how that affects performance. > > > > All I did was to type ls -l /usr/bin for the two architectures into > > two xterms in two viewports, and blink-compare them. Some binaries > > were larger and some were smaller. > > > > But let's try running them. I happen to have two freshly installed > > bullseyes, and neither has run the installed FF before. Their dotfiles > > in my home directories are close to identical, and their starting > > pages are blank. > > > > i386: > > > > VSZ RSZ %MEM PID STAT CMD > > 1200184 176396 34.9 1603 Sl+ firefox-esr > > 477488 50140 9.9 1880 Sl+ /usr/lib/firefox-esr/firefox-esr > > -contentproc -ch> > > 467760 34188 6.7 1821 Sl+ /usr/lib/firefox-esr/firefox-esr > > -contentproc -ch> > > 455296 27436 5.4 1958 Sl+ /usr/lib/firefox-esr/firefox-esr > > -contentproc -ch> > > > > amd64: > > > > VSZ RSZ %MEM PID STAT CMD > > 3082424 408156 2.5 2538 Sl+ firefox-esr > > 2446004 146664 0.9 2662 Sl+ /usr/lib/firefox-esr/firefox-esr > > -contentproc -> > > 2417628 117508 0.7 2694 Sl+ /usr/lib/firefox-esr/firefox-esr > > -contentproc -> > > 2403264 108072 0.6 2603 Sl+ /usr/lib/firefox-esr/firefox-esr > > -contentproc -> > > > > The difference is larger than I thought it would be. Others would > > have to interpret the actual numbers. The main difference that > > /I/ notice is the speed, but it would be an unfair comparison, > > pitching 1.5GHz/512MB with 1GB encrypted swap on 2004-era rust > > against a multi-core 2.7GHz/16GB with a 2017-era SSD (but no swap). > > Starting times come out at 3 minutes vs perhaps one second. > > > Did you ask your question in a real-world intention ? I mean based on > something you want to implement and may have resources limitation so > want to have the most for what you got ? > > Or was it only a question for "academic" purposes ? That you wanted some > answer and explanation without any context that you can give.
The charitable interpretation I placed on "a", aka "lou", is that they¹ have found a 32-bit-only wireless adapter, run a 32-bit system, and are generally unimpressed by its speed. If you remember, reading PDFs was slow, firmware-free adapters were hard to find, and firmware-inclusive installers were elusive, in the eyes of the OP. So, a less charitable interpretation might be in order. > If it's only for curiosity then there's plenty of books to read and > you'll find answers. Ah, PDFs. Catch 22 here. ¹ Forgive my grammar, RMS. Cheers, David.
