Question about Ubuntu x86 vs x64

I'm going to give linux a try (have tried fedora when it first came out) and I was wondering whether I should go with a x86 or a x64 version. I know that with Windows, x64 has issues due to lack of drivers and such and even with amd64, people still go with windows x86. Is this the same way with linux or should I just go ahead and get the x64 version of Ubuntu? Thanks.

i'm using ubuntu "dapper drake" x64 on my opteron and it works fine from what features i've used anyways. all i really do with it is fold. it detected everything and sound, video, networking all came up. not sure about disc burning though.

Well, I would say get both, and try x86-64 first. It'll cost you a little time if it doesn't work out quite alright, but not too much. Since you have the storage space, you might even install the 32-bit version alongside the 64-bit version, so that you can continue to use the functional one while you tinker to get 64 bits working.

Be advised, x86-64 does not have a Flash player that is compatible with it. There is limited success in using a debootstrap-chroot to step around this, but it didn't work for me. (I am currently using vmware to do my flash playing - w2k forever!)

I use it. I like it.

not everything works on Linux64 and flash player is not just the only problem, many people create a 32 bit chroot enviroment to get around this, not to mention the performance advantages of running 64bit so far appear to be minimal.
I personally used 64bit Breezy and Dapper and Dapper when it was in beta, however im now back on 32bit...
However its not costing anything, give it a try, it may suit you... personally speaking I found it not quite there as many things gave me a little more grief in 64 than I ever have in 32

I have a 64-bit desktop (Intel Xeons with EM64T) and a 64-bit headless server (AMD64). Both run Ubuntu. Using a 64-bit distro on the desktop is still a bit of a pain for the reasons already mentioned. It gets especially annoying when you're looking for software not available in repositories and all you can find are 32-bit binaries on the web, so I'd stick with a 32-bit distro on the desktop.

On my server, though, I've had absolutely no issues with 64-bit Ubuntu. Most of the applications that I need are already in the repositories and the software that isn't I compile myself. So if you're going to run a server without a GUI, go with 64-bit.

I had some issues with amd64 because of the mentioned problems. Plus, if you don't have the source you pretty much have to hope there is a 64 bit binary. Its just easier with 386.

I have been using Gentoo running full 64 bit for about a year or maybe a year and a half on my athlon64 box and for me it works great, there are very very few problems that i have as a result of running 64 bit and they were all known issues when I installed it.

one thing that also does not work on 64 bit is win32codecs (windows media codecs), this can be annoying at times but I am used to it.

All that having been said, I have almost no experience with 64 bit binary distros mostly because I had problems with every one I tried although this may be totally different now, it has been over a year since i have tried to install a binary 64 bit distro.

My personal opinion is go with plain x86, like you I'm also giving linux a try and I tried x64 first and it only helped to confuse me even further.

Avg said:

My personal opinion is go with plain x86, like you I'm also giving linux a try and I tried x64 first and it only helped to confuse me even further.

Click to expand...

If you absolutely cannot get source or find a 64-bit binary for an application you absolutely have to have (there are some...), then I'd say use a 386/686 variant.

But don't hesitate to try x86-64 either, as 'absolutely cannot' or 'absolutely have to have' tend to be fairly relative. (You'd be surprised how much more Real Work I got done without vmware+2k to watch my email every day...)