[mythtv-users] 32 vs. 64 bit, any significant difference?

Brian Wood beww at beww.org
Wed Dec 16 23:16:40 UTC 2009

On Wednesday 16 December 2009 03:59:28 pm Dale Pontius wrote:
> Brian Wood wrote:
> > Building a new backend, and trying to decide whether to go 32 or 64 bit.
> > Obviously it's a 64-bit CPU (AMD FX-60).
> >
> > Only using 2GB of RAM, so that's not a factor.
> >
> > I know it's been asked before, but reviewing past posts I don't seem to
> > see any final conclusion.
> >
> > Normally I'd go with 64 bit, but I wonder of there are any reasons to go
> > 32 (Flash players, XBMC Boxee)?
> >
> > Thoughts?
> Outside of a few specific types of activities, like large, detailed
> simulations, (nuclear bombs, weather, modern games(!)) or something like
> CAD on chips, you don't really NEED a 64-bit CPU, and in fact there's a
> little bit of penalty for pushing some of the data around 64 bits at a
> time in those cases where 32 bits were enough.
> That said, there is a compelling reason for going 64-bit. (Put on the
> monkey suit.)  Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!
> The developers are generally on 64-bit now, at least in Linux, and the
> 32-bit stuff is now a back-port.  Going 64-bit puts you a step closer to
> the developers and the head.

Good point, hadn't thought of that.

I've been running 64-bit since my first 21164a (DEC Alpha) back in the 90s, 
when a ton of code was not 64-bit clean. At that time we didn't even have 
dynamically linked libraries for 64 bit machines.

I was just concerned about some things I have run into recently that had 
problems with 64-bit, like Flash, Boxee and a few other things not developed 
by the regular Linux and Myth developers. I've never had any problems 
running Myth on 64-bit, just wondered of some related apps might have 
troubles, or if there was any advantage to 32-bits these days.

More information about the mythtv-users mailing list