I used to run Fedora Core and the 64-bit version for that was pretty shaky, so I ended up running the 32-bit version. Right now I have the 32-bit version of SUSE 10 running on my machine and wondered how well the 64-bit version works. I'm mostly using it simply as a home desktop. Here are my specs:

AMD 64 3000+ (939)
EVGA NVIDIA 6600LE
Logitech USB optical mouse
HP Multimedia Keyboard
US Robotics 5610b modem

This is only an opinion.

I have used a 64bit AMD computer and found that regardless of which distribution you pick, there will always be some quirks in the distro. However, the Suse 64bit came with much much more things properly configured and setup in comparison the the Fedora 64bit. Things like the power management and browser plugins were just easier to manage.

If you have a 64 bit processor, you should use the 64 bit version.

Agree go for the 64 bit version

It is worth noting that the general take around several newsgroups I watch is that the 64 bit version of SuSE (and others as well) is not noticably faster on a 64 bit processor than the 32 bit version. So, as you make this choice, overall speed should not be a consideration.

of course it is not faster. Assuming that the only thing you do is web browsing and email. Disk intensive tasks (for example db), compiling, encryption, video editing will work better on 64-bit.

I have read an article at c´t (german computer newspaper).
They had tested an AMD Opteron based computer system both in 32 and 64 Bit mode.
In 64 Bit mode the calculating power rises by up to 70% (integer).
So: if you have a 64 bit processor, you should use a 64 bit operating system.

Interesting. I stand corrected. Thank you. Could I deduce from this that tasks such as ripping CDs to MP3 would work much faster? The MP3 encoding portion of this job is quite mathematically intensive I am assuming. Did the c't article mention other common tasks that would run notably faster on a 64 bit machine? Almost makes one want to go get such a machine!

The calculating power in 64 bit was 30-70% higher than in 32 bit mode. I really could not remember what programs they have used to test. (And in 64 bit mode the AMD Opteron was in average 20% faster than a comparable Intel processor). A note about c´t: in germany it is the most read computer news paper and almost a "bible".

In regards to ripping a CD to MP3's on a 64 bit system I can tell you that it's about 20 minutes for me to do it on my system.

SPECS:

AMD64 3000
1 Gig RAM
4200RPM 100G HDD (Fujitsu)

Definetly 64bit os

Dont let Fedora CRappy core 4 sway you.

Mandriva 64bit boots 3x as quickly as 32 on the same system(shown in sig)
SUSE is extremely fast also.


64bit linux
pros
+no redundant 386, 486,pentium 1 2 or 3 legacy bloat.
+designed primarily for AMD Athlon 64 so is perfect companion
+pretty much all drivers on 32bit are on 64bit (not like Windows)
+extremely fast

cons
+wine (windows emulators arent very good)
+32bit emulation works 50-80% of the time.

I am all for 64-bit, but lets not create myths

first of all FC, Mandriva and SuSE are hybrids: it means that these distros have both 64-bit libs and for compatibility pourpose 32-bit libs. Pure 64-bit OS will not handle 32-bit apps (e.g. OO.org, flash and so on)
secondly: where can I get 64-bit wireless drivers?
64-bit OS will not accept 32-bit drivers. Dont make mistake hybrid will not handle 32-bit drivers either.
boot time is not related to 32-bit or 64-bit. So don't expect faster boot only because this is 64-bit OS.

NO MYTHS created
+no redundant 386, 486,pentium 1 2 or 3 legacy bloat.
do you belive that VESA ISA, 486 pentium 3, 2 etc hardware is supported in 64bit editions of mandriva suse fedora?


the 64bit edition booted quicker and i justified it with my comparison with the extact same OS and exact same options selected and exact same hardware.

The kernel x86_64 included,is fairly different from the 32bit distro one
it doesnt include obsolete modules or obsolete builtin.

since a faster boot was an experience it is not a myth


I never claimed it was a full 64bit OS hense mentioning partial support for 32 apps.
SUSE comes with an abundance of wireless driversand tools and Mandriva 2006 is Officially Centrino Certified OS.

I dont have any wireless devies though.


i do have an obsolete and rare TV tuner (10 years old) that works fully in 64bit distros the same as 32bit.
like i Said most drivers that come with distros come with both 32 and 64.


only closed source drivers (dont come with Linux distros) dont work unless you find 64bit compatible.

32-bit software is supported to the same extent as in the native 32-bit OS

Heve you ever built 32-bit or 64-bit custom kernel? it is not "fairly" different. in fact memory config is the biggest difference.

this only suggests that your config was not optimal for 32-bit OS. That is all.
no you have limited requirements/experience.

32bit programs do work, but

the 50-80% come from some are written that they don't install on unrecognised Arch
x86_64 shows up as an unrecognised on some system.
And wont run or install.

others ive found insist on using the lib64 contents rather than lib 32

i just finished build a new kernel

i always used a custom kernel i started with mandriva 10 then slackware then gentoo back to mandriva 2006 and now SUSE x64 10.0.