thank you all for the tests and the information. we will try to sort out the issue with 32-bit 3.x kernels and i'm asking "why you still want to use 32-bit kernel?" just to get the different points of view and opinions. my intention is not to convince anyone to use 64-bit kernel, but using 64-bit kernel has more advantages than just better compatibility with TBS drivers - as you can read in the article here:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... ntu_32_pae in the last years 64-bit kernels advanced and now they are in some benchmark 50% and even more faster than 32-bit kernel tested on the same CPU. in fact that article was pointed out to me by a customer who i asked the same question and after he did some reached he answered to me that it seems he basically is still using 32-bit kernel by an old habit and because years ago there was no significant difference in the performance between 32-bit and 64-bit kernel, which is longer true, because now 64-bit kernel gives better performance and to give some quotes of his words, because they really describe it very well:
Colin Stephen Wrote: I've stuck with 32-bit ... out of the habit of "only move to 64-bit when you have reason to".
A couple of years back the accepted wisdom was that you only needed to run 64-bit if you needed your processes to be able to map > 32-bit memory ... At that time there was no performance advantage ... That said, I've read some more recent studies and looks like the situation has changed:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... ntu_32_paewhich shows that on modern machines you're now getting more performance out of fully using 64-bit memory buses and processors.
so, if you're not tied by some very specific application like Meindert it's just much better to upgrade your system to use 64-bit kernel. also, Meindert, please note that latest drivers work in 32-bit 2.6.x kernels and thus if you use some specific application that requires 32-bit kernel then maybe you should consider staying on 2.6.x kernel. once again we will try to improve/sort out the issue, but i guess always what most people use will be more stable and bug-free.
@smv1210
smv1210 Wrote:- the 32-bit version of Ubuntu still has "recommended" status.
i don't want to go off topic and make this thread about 32-bit versus 64-bit kernel, but after i read the end of the article at phoronix.com i referred above the question it's recommended by whom is reasonable, because it seems in any case when use of 64-bit kernel is possible that's what is recommended to use for optimal performance:
phoronix.com Wrote:By far though exhibiting the best performance was the Ubuntu 64-bit kernel that often ended up being leaps and bounds better than the 32-bit kernel. Unless you have technical or business reasons for not migrating to 64-bit Linux with compatible hardware, there is no reason to stick around with a 32-bit kernel
anyway, let's hope we will sort out the 32-bit issue and once again it's only with 32-bit 3.x kernels, 32-bit 2.6.x kernels as well all 64-bit kernels should be fine.