On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Michael Mol <mike...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:52 PM, Mark Knecht <markkne...@gmail.com> wrote: <SNIP> >>> So what is recommended? There are as such no special use cases to go 64bit >>> for me. >>> >> >> Why 32? ... Flash, win32 codecs, probably Wine but not sure as it has >> been years... > > 64-bit WINE worked for me. Even for running 32-bit WoW. (Though I was > running a multilib profile. Uncertain if that had an impact.) > >> >> Why 64? ... Virtualization... >> >> Depends on what you want and/or need. > > IMO, it's worth the 'overhead' to run 64-bit, if only for the greater > number of GPRs and other architectural improvements. There's honestly > a lot of good stuff in x86-64 beyond the larger address space. The > increased address space also helps long-lived programs avoid address > space fragmentation. > > -- > :wq >
Agreed. I only boot 64-bit here, but different than all you heavy-lifters my machines are 98% stable, 2% ~amd64. That said I do have problems not only with Flash on my machine with 2 Nvidia cards but also with OpenGL. However none of that on any other 64-bit machines. As for the win32 codec stuff I use Windows VMs to watch any stuff I want to watch, and a fairly trim Gentoo 32-bit VM so that I can run Linux apps to convert certain Windows format files, etc. Cheers, Mark
