I want to move to 64 bit kubuntu 9.04.....it should not be a problem...(have used before for some time with ubuntu)...
Now my questions are....
Do they (ubuntu) release packeges for 64 bit also at the same time when they do it for 32 bit (mainly KDE packages)?
and
How is the intel graphics performance (3d stuff on 64 bit)...?

FWIW: I had 64 bits MEPIS with KDE4 for a while, and returned to 32 bits.

In order to get KDE4 on MEPIS you need to activate the testing and sid repos. KDE4 gets installed OK, but the xorg in stable has a serious scrolling issue (ie it is choppy), which I could not resolve by tweaking xorg.conf. So I installed xorg from sid (vs 1.6), but the 64 bits version has a serious memory leak.

Yesterday I moved back to 32 bits and performed the same procedure. Xorg behaves fine here.

Other than that, you need a number of ia32 libs in order to get 32 bits apps (like e.g. Skype) to work in 64 bits.

Functionally, everything that works in 32 bit also works in 64 bit. But I did not notice any speed gain. I even believe the 32 bits version to be snappier.

So, my conclusion is that 64 bits is only useful if you do heavy stuff like video encoding or if you need to be able to use more than 4 GB of RAM for specific processes. For normal desktop use, it seems to me there is no advantage and there still are some minor disadvantages left.

XiniX wrote:FWIW: I had 64 bits MEPIS with KDE4 for a while, and returned to 32 bits.

In order to get KDE4 on MEPIS you need to activate the testing and sid repos. KDE4 gets installed OK, but the xorg in stable has a serious scrolling issue (ie it is choppy), which I could not resolve by tweaking xorg.conf. So I installed xorg from sid (vs 1.6), but the 64 bits version has a serious memory leak.

Yesterday I moved back to 32 bits and performed the same procedure. Xorg behaves fine here.

Other than that, you need a number of ia32 libs in order to get 32 bits apps (like e.g. Skype) to work in 64 bits.

Functionally, everything that works in 32 bit also works in 64 bit. But I did not notice any speed gain. I even believe the 32 bits version to be snappier.

So, my conclusion is that 64 bits is only useful if you do heavy stuff like video encoding or if you need to be able to use more than 4 GB of RAM for specific processes. For normal desktop use, it seems to me there is no advantage and there still are some minor disadvantages left.

I got the point....there may not be any speed advantage...
but I still wanna give it a try again.....
can somebody tell....
how is the intel graphics working in Kubuntu 9.04 (64 bit)....
3d and video performance.....
is it usable????

See this: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... hape&num=1

XiniX wrote:See this: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... hape&num=1

Thanks XiniX...for the quick reply...
I know there are many things (architectural changes) going on with intel graphics....
but, as I'm using Kubuntu 9.04 (32 bit)....i.e. intel graphics for 32 bit..
and it's quite usable for me (although, slower than previous release)....
I was wandering, whether 64 bit version of intel graphics is usable (if not better).....
I'm not going to play any gl based games on it...
some composite and smooth video playback will do good for me....

Thanks again..!!!

I have 64bit Arch and having no problem with it. While I can't say if there is really any difference between 64 and 32bit, at least speed wise it just feels better to use a OS "made" for your CPU.
One thing that's bugging me a bit is that 64bit packages are less up-to-date than 32; eg. I'm still on KDE4.2.2...

Primoz wrote:I have 64bit Arch and having no problem with it. While I can't say if there is really any difference between 64 and 32bit, at least speed wise it just feels better to use a OS "made" for your CPU.
One thing that's bugging me a bit is that 64bit packages are less up-to-date than 32; eg. I'm still on KDE4.2.2...

"One thing that's bugging me a bit is that 64bit packages are less up-to-date than 32"
exacty what I was expecting...
hope situation is better with 'buntus....
anyways guys.....if graphics isn't a problem...I am good to go.....

Hello,

I am using Kubuntu 64bit version for some time and until now I haven't noticed that the 64bit packages are less up to date. But I am not using the system for some exceptionally things.

What I think is worth to mention is that:

I have a Multifunction-Center to print/fax/copy/scan and before the appropriate packages was available in the ubuntu repositories it was IMHO tricky to get the drivers working on a 64bit system. I've had to make some links manually etc. which I've done but nevertheless I haven't get it running. But now it isn't a problem anymore because the packages are available. So maybe you could have similar problem whith some of your hardware.

rajputrajat wrote:"One thing that's bugging me a bit is that 64bit packages are less up-to-date than 32"
exacty what I was expecting...
hope situation is better with 'buntus....
anyways guys.....if graphics isn't a problem...I am good to go.....

Just to make it a bit more clear : the only thing that's not up-to-date is KDE (which is from KDEmod) this is more than distro specific, it's
"sub-distro" specific .
Other packages are more or less available at the same time as i686...

I'm using openSUSE 11.1 64 bits without problems.
I remember an article in phoronix (can't find the link now) comparing 32 bits and 64 bits in the same machine, and the differences were important in many areas, like audio/video encoding, numerical calculus, etcetera.
If you only use internet and word processing there is no real advantage, but if you perform "heavy tasks" 64 bits is better.

The problem with 32 bits is that some distros still compiling for i386, instead of i686, which is the best option. For that reason I prefer 64 bits or a 32 bits/i686, like Arch.

I haven't used 64-bit (K)Ubuntu for quite a while (last time was when Gutsy was the main version), so my information on that distro is probably outdated. Still, at that time it worked just fine on my hardware. The only problem I had was that when I needed to install something that was not a part of the repos it was quite a hassle to get the correct 32-bit dependencies installed. Hopefully that's changed by now.

Still, even if it hasn't: you should be fine if the software you need or want is available through the repos. And things have improved on the 64-bit front since then. The worst culprits at that time was flash and java, and those are available in 64-bit versions now. Even the other proprietary bits of my system are available in 64-bits now (with the exception of Adobe AIR).

I'm not saying my experience is universal, but I do think running 64-bit now is a lot more feasable than just a year or two ago. And FWIW, my setup feels faster, even if not by much, using 64-bit compared to 32-bits.