On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, Post, Mark K wrote: > I would have to think that unless a particular guest needs 64-bit, that it > would be better overall to run with 31-bits. I would have to think that > there would be at least a slight performance hit to run a 64-bit system, > even if it was "small."
Is that all there is? Are there beneficial new instructions available in 64-bit mode? Are there improved optimisations? Reportedly the Opteron (64-bit) is much quicker than the Xeons (32-bit). I know it ain't necessarily so that this has implications for the mainframe, but it might. > > Mark Post > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lucius, Leland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 6:33 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Probly a stoopid ?, but what's "better"...31-bit or 64-bit? > > > One of the first things we told when we setup our guests under VM is to give > the guest only as much memory as it needs which is usually quite small. If > that's so then not even a 31-bit address space will be needed. > > So, why not run 31-bit Linux guests? Does it matter one way or the other? > Are there performance differences? > > I know, probably really stupid questions. Just popped into a sleepy brain > after a big meal... > > Leland > -- Cheers John. Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb Copyright John Summerfield. Reproduction prohibited.
