Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


32 bit 12.04 or 64 bit 12.04 or 32 bit 14.04 or 64 bit 14.04 for low end boxes?
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

32 bit 12.04 or 64 bit 12.04 or 32 bit 14.04 or 64 bit 14.04 for low end boxes?

I have a few low end boxes, mord of them are 256MB & 128MB RAM ones. So this is what I wondered always while configuring/reconfiguring the boxes. Does 64 bit really have any advantages over 32 bit in case of low end boxes? and which one is better for performance in low end boxes - 12.04 or 14.04?

Please don't recommend me any other distros, I have to use Ubuntu.

Which ubuntu you use for your low end?
  1. Which ubuntu you use for your low end?46 votes
    1. 32 bit 12.04
      10.87%
    2. 64 bit 12.04
      15.22%
    3. 32 bit 14.04
      39.13%
    4. 64 bit 14.04
      34.78%
«1

Comments

  • How about none of the above? Debian master race bitch

  • nitrosrt10nitrosrt10 Member
    edited July 2014

    @0xdragon said:
    How about none of the above? Debian master race bitch

    How about really helping instead of spamming my post? If you want to fire up Ubuntu vs Debian conversation then please do tell why it's better. I just can't take anyone's word for it lol.

  • nitrosrt10nitrosrt10 Member
    edited July 2014

    Thanks for the link, so now it's narrowed down to 12.04 or 14.04. Which one you think is better for a low end box & I am asking because I am desperate to know. I have to reconfigure my game server VPS's in a few days.

  • I've always gone with 64-bit and the latest version (although I prefer Debian to Ubuntu) but that link above is interesting.

    I still don't imagine it would make a huge difference though.

  • wojonswojons Member

    @0xdragon said:
    How about none of the above? Debian master race bitch

    I have to agree I think base bare install Debian is like 12mb of ram it something stupid small like that

  • msg7086msg7086 Member
    edited July 2014

    32 bit because it will never reach the 2GB memory limit.

    Debian because its rolling update repository (testing or even sid) gives you the latest version of softwares. Maybe not suitable for enterprise production use, but it's good for playing around.


    About choosing between 12.04 and 14.04, you should check whether its packages meet your requirement.

    Take PHP as example. Ubuntu 12.04 comes with PHP 5.3 and will never go to 5.4+. While, Ubuntu 14.04 comes with PHP 5.5.9 and probably will never go to 5.5.10+.

    Same as Nginx. 12.04 comes with 1.1.* while 14.04 comes with 1.4.*.

    You should decide yourself, whether you want a more solid (but legacy) version, or a later (but maybe unstable) version.

  • @0xdragon said:
    How about none of the above? Debian master race bitch

    This, but overall I use 64-bit OSes even on my low end boxes. Debian, Ubuntu, CentOS, etc.

  • @msg7086 said:
    32 bit because it will never reach the 2GB memory limit.

    Debian because its rolling update repository (testing or even sid) gives you the latest version of softwares. Maybe not suitable for enterprise production use, but it's good for playing around.

    Since ubuntu is debian based, there is no issue of any learning curve for me which is awesome.

    Is debian's repo as diverse as ubuntu's?

  • ChuckChuck Member

    Base bare install: Debian 7 uses around 13MB. CentOS 6.5 uses around 21MB.

  • @nitrosrt10 said:
    Is debian's repo as diverse as ubuntu's?

    Just edited the original post but you beat me ;)

    Debian has a stable branch which is considered to be production use. Current stable branch is Debian 7 = wheezy. Packages are frozen at current version.

    The testing branch is the candidate for the next release, i.e. current testing branch is Debian 8 = jessie. It's rolling update so you can always upgrade to newer version of packages.

    The sid branch includes the latest packages. I've heard that sid is the upstream for the coming Ubuntu release. It's more unstable and more aggressive.

    The experimental branch is rarely used.

    The most important part is, with Debian you can upgrade. It was a pain to upgrade Ubuntu to a newer release.

    And I personally prefer testing branch.

  • ATHKATHK Member

    @msg7086 said:
    pain to upgrade Ubuntu

    Really? The several times I've done it's worked with no pain at all...

  • The upgrade path is different between Ubuntu and Debian. Ubuntu has a special tool to do the upgrades while you can usually just replace the sources.list file with whatever you want to upgrade to on Debian - or at least that is how I've always done it.

  • @msg7086 Thanks a ton for helping me make a choice! 32 bit Debian stable it is. Will implement on a few VPS's to test first but you have me convinced :)

  • shovenoseshovenose Member, Host Rep

    centos

  • @nitrosrt10 said:
    msg7086 Thanks a ton for helping me make a choice! 32 bit Debian stable it is. Will implement on a few VPS's to test first but you have me convinced :)

    You are welcome. Please notice that some software or some situation requires a 64-bit OS. For example when you want to use Int64 in PHP, or when you want HHVM, etc. Otherwise, 32-bit is better for consuming less memory due to its smaller pointer size.

  • Go with 64 bit latest image. The argument against 64 bit is quite old. The benefits of 64 bit far out weight any disadvantages that it might have.

    Thanked by 1Dylan
  • SilvengaSilvenga Member
    edited July 2014

    vampireJ said: The argument against 64 bit is quite old.

    Pointers on 64-bit machines are twice as large in 32-bit machines. The argument is still valid. 64-bit can use up to twice the memory has 32 bit machine.

  • askanceaskance Member
    edited July 2014

    I'd always go with the latest release (unless you have a good reason not to) and 64bit. You could of course save a handful of megabytes by using 32bit applications, but if I was hosting something big i'd rather use the 64bit instruction set and a bigger instance with memory to spare than squeezing everything into the last few pages of memory on an overcommitted node.

    edit: spelling

  • RalliasRallias Member
    edited July 2014

    Silvenga said: Pointers on 64-bit machines are twice as large in 32-bit machines. The argument is still valid. 64-bit can use up to twice the memory has 32 bit machine.

    That's a hell of a pointer loop you have there.

    64 bit will get you MAYBE 5% more memory usage. It WILL get you improved performance at many tasks involving floating point values, encryption, hashing, other major algorithms, et cetera.

    Thanked by 20xdragon Dylan
  • @Silvenga said:
    Pointers on 64-bit machines are twice as large in 32-bit machines. The argument is still valid. 64-bit can use up to twice the memory has 32 bit machine.

    That's not how it works.

    Thanked by 10xdragon
  • A 32bit Linux OS uses less RAM than a comparable 64bit system.

    So I would use a 32bit OS on a machine that I don't plan on using more than 2-3GB of memory.

  • Microlinux said: That's not how it works.

    Pointers do take up twice the memory. You can't use 32-bit pointers to access 64-bit memory. There is just not enough bits.

    Take a look at the size of pointers in compile C program. Modern languages like Java and C# (?) are able to adapt (be at a cost in CPU cycles) to a degree.

    The speed benefits come mainly from using the new'ish 64-bit extensions and the larger CPU registers. More, faster memory, closer to the CPU allows for faster execution of some types of computations - but not all.

    Rallias said: 64 bit will get you MAYBE 5% more memory usage. It WILL get you improved performance at many tasks involving floating point values, encryption, hashing, other major algorithms, et cetera.

    64-bit programs CAN use up to twice the memory as a 32-bit machine. Not saying it will, but it can (would be interesting to create though).

    At this point in time, the most expensive thing on a computer is RAM. Memory usage is much more difficult to optimise than computational cycles. I run out of ram before I run out of CPU. On low end boxes we get a low end amount of RAM, but we still share a fairly modern CPU.

    I'm being extreme, but to see any benefits on low end boxes you need to be extreme. The benefits are minimal, as are the cons. Memory is used by everything, complex calculations - not so much. :P

  • Silvenga said: Pointers do take up twice the memory. You can't use 32-bit pointers to access 64-bit memory. There is just not enough bits.

    True, but in practice you're usually not greatly increasing memory usage. Certainly possible, though. Generally speaking, I'm more interested in practical reality than theoretical reality.

  • @Microlinux said:

    Not greatly, but still increasing. If the memory is the bottleneck while CPU cycles are quite spare, why should we optimize CPU performance first?

    If you are running out of CPU resource and still have bunch of memory left unused, then yes you should switch to 64 bit.

  • MicrolinuxMicrolinux Member
    edited July 2014

    msg7086 said: Not greatly, but still increasing. If the memory is the bottleneck while CPU cycles are quite spare, why should we optimize CPU performance first?

    If you are running out of CPU resource and still have bunch of memory left unused, then yes you should switch to 64 bit.

    I'm not saying you shouldn't take advantage of a 64-bit OS, by any means.

    My point is that doing so is not likely to increase memory usage enough to matter in most cases, unless you're already teetering on the edge. You can think of "could" scenarios all day, but none of them matter if they don't practically apply to your application.

  • jcalebjcaleb Member

    14.04 because of latest package.

    As for 32 vs 64 bit debate, why not install each and see how each differ for your own use case?

  • @jcaleb said:
    14.04 because of latest package.

    As for 32 vs 64 bit debate, why not install each and see how each differ for your own use case?

    /thread.

  • I switched from Debian 7 to UB 14.04 and use exclusively 64Bit (also on smaller servers, the loss is not much relevant)

  • xyzxyz Member
    edited July 2014

    I generally use 32-bit for VPSes with <=512MB RAM. In my experience, 64-bit applications typically take around 50% more RAM than the 32-bit equivalent, and CPU is usually not a bottleneck. And for some applications, 32-bit can actually be faster than 64-bit (more efficient cache usage, less memory bandwidth required etc).

    Though I do wish there was more support for the x32 ABI. Debian seems to have some experimental support, but still very early days (was only added to the Linux kernel not too long ago).

Sign In or Register to comment.