It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ubuntu 32bit and speed

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 03:32 AM
link   
I'm a beginner on Ubuntu and would appreciate some tips. Although I'm getting there I find my computer to be slow with 1.5g of ram and a 32 bit system.
It's a choice I made and will stick to my guns even with the frustrations of my learning curve.

Bye bye Windows




posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 03:45 AM
link   
a reply to: ICycle2

Obivously you want the latest version:

www.ubuntu.com...

Update everything before customizing with your own applications:

www.cyberciti.biz...

There's a lot of easy to follow threads



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 03:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: ICycle2
I'm a beginner on Ubuntu and would appreciate some tips. Although I'm getting there I find my computer to be slow with 1.5g of ram and a 32 bit system.
It's a choice I made and will stick to my guns even with the frustrations of my learning curve.

Bye bye Windows


Since about a year and a half ago I've been using Lubuntu on a laptop, i use this as a my college machine and so far it has been great


Memory usage after first login is about 400 mb, loading Android Studio and building some of my test apps takes it up to about 1.4 gb, i have 8 gb of memory so it is awesome. Using visual studio code and chrome takes it up to about 1.5 gb or so, 2 gb when loading and running big apps

As for the Ubuntu official release i can't say but when i tried it the first time it was already using up to 1.5 gb on startup, with no apps open :/

Just saying but if you don't mind becoming a bit more technical you may get better performance out of Lubuntu, if you don't mind having to learn a bit more about how to customize the UI

If you only use it for normal browsing, editors and music, then i believe you would be better with a smaller version of Ubuntu, such as Lubuntu, it takes a lot less memory and it may help get the best out of your machine

When you said you're sticking with your guns, do you mean the machine or the operating system? Both?

Adding a bit more memory can't hurt...

edit on 14-4-2019 by Malisa because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 03:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Zcustosmorum

Thanx



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 03:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Malisa

Thanx again, luckily I'm not afraid to learn and did start out on dos which should help a bit entering the command line and black screen



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 04:07 AM
link   
I would spend a few $$ to get 2 2GB sticks of ram and you'll notice a BIG difference. I'm guessing your laptop is pushing 15 years old with that config and it could use a little more resources for today's OS's.

Also check out Kubuntu or Lubuntu, Lubuntu will be the fastest on that system because it needs less resources to run and I think even K requires less than the current standard Ubuntu OS.



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 04:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: ICycle2
I'm a beginner on Ubuntu and would appreciate some tips. Although I'm getting there I find my computer to be slow with 1.5g of ram and a 32 bit system.
It's a choice I made and will stick to my guns even with the frustrations of my learning curve.

Bye bye Windows

See if you can cut down the video shared ram to 256 instead of 512 . That would raise your RAM size to 1.75 or so
Make sure your swap size is about 4-6 gb
Add memory if possible
Sounds as if you are getting "thrashing"

edit on 4/14/19 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 04:20 AM
link   
a reply to: ICycle2

You are possibly using the most first-time Linux user-friendly distro there is. You might need to install a driver or two still but Ubuntu does have a certain level of hardware autodetection in it if I remember rightly, unlike some other distros. I was a windows sys-admin for 15 years. At home I used Linux. (Except to play the odd game, dual boot.)


You won't regret it, imho, but it will take a little time to get to know how it works, kinda. The shell is a most wondrous thing.
edit on 14/4/19 by LightSpeedDriver because: Typo



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 04:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ICycle2
I'm a beginner on Ubuntu and would appreciate some tips. Although I'm getting there I find my computer to be slow with 1.5g of ram and a 32 bit system.
It's a choice I made and will stick to my guns even with the frustrations of my learning curve.

Bye bye Windows

See if you can cut down the video shared ram to 256 instead of 512 . That would raise your RAM size to 1.75 or so
Make sure your swap size is about 4-6 gb
Add memory if possible
Sounds as if you are getting "thrashing"


Most certainly, starting with 1.5 gb and already using 1.2 or so just to get to the desktop? But even upgrading ram to 4 gb with a 32 bit machine only allows for 3 gb of usable ram anyways. I think he should move to a 64 bit machine, even an old one.

For some of my experiments i got an old 1.8 ghz tower with 4 gb ram and 500gb drive and it was very cool to play with, it was able to load most modern software even if it was old af


And it cost about 50 dollars as is!



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 04:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ICycle2
I'm a beginner on Ubuntu and would appreciate some tips. Although I'm getting there I find my computer to be slow with 1.5g of ram and a 32 bit system.
It's a choice I made and will stick to my guns even with the frustrations of my learning curve.

Bye bye Windows

See if you can cut down the video shared ram to 256 instead of 512 . That would raise your RAM size to 1.75 or so
Make sure your swap size is about 4-6 gb
Add memory if possible
Sounds as if you are getting "thrashing"


Most certainly, starting with 1.5 gb and already using 1.2 or so just to get to the desktop? But even upgrading ram to 4 gb with a 32 bit machine only allows for 3 gb of usable ram anyways. I think he should move to a 64 bit machine, even an old one.

For some of my experiments i got an old 1.8 ghz tower with 4 gb ram and 500gb drive and it was very cool to play with, it was able to load most modern software even if it was old af


And it cost about 50 dollars as is!



I'm wondering if a 4gb system might be able to use 512mb for video (assigned in BIOS) and leave 3.5GB for the OS. I'm not sure where the 32bit allocation comes into play as the system will detect the full 4GB at POST, so I'm guessing it might be possible to have the 3.5GB remaining for the OS to play with. Any idea on this?



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 04:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Malisa
When I started with Linux , there was even less to work with
3.5" FDD and overnight to compile a kernel
Forget PCI PnP
Especially modems



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 04:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ICycle2
I'm a beginner on Ubuntu and would appreciate some tips. Although I'm getting there I find my computer to be slow with 1.5g of ram and a 32 bit system.
It's a choice I made and will stick to my guns even with the frustrations of my learning curve.

Bye bye Windows

See if you can cut down the video shared ram to 256 instead of 512 . That would raise your RAM size to 1.75 or so
Make sure your swap size is about 4-6 gb
Add memory if possible
Sounds as if you are getting "thrashing"


Most certainly, starting with 1.5 gb and already using 1.2 or so just to get to the desktop? But even upgrading ram to 4 gb with a 32 bit machine only allows for 3 gb of usable ram anyways. I think he should move to a 64 bit machine, even an old one.

For some of my experiments i got an old 1.8 ghz tower with 4 gb ram and 500gb drive and it was very cool to play with, it was able to load most modern software even if it was old af


And it cost about 50 dollars as is!



I'm wondering if a 4gb system might be able to use 512mb for video (assigned in BIOS) and leave 3.5GB for the OS. I'm not sure where the 32bit allocation comes into play as the system will detect the full 4GB at POST, so I'm guessing it might be possible to have the 3.5GB remaining for the OS to play with. Any idea on this?


Even if the bios can detect the 4gb, it won't be usable in most older machines, because of the "3gb barrier"

en.wikipedia.org...

I never had a machine like that but i know it is something that happens in older machines, even if Linux can handle more than 4gb it won't be able to access it because the motherboard causes the limitation, so Linux can only see 3gb.

I'm not sure if the shared video memory has to be taken from the 3gb block or it is taken from that inaccessible gb



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 05:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Malisa

Not exactly correct . 4 Gb is dependent on the CPU and whether or not it can use PAE extensions
With PAE extensions enabled , an OS can use up to 64Gb ( in some cases)


edit on 4/14/19 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 05:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Malisa

Not exactly correct . 4 Gb is dependent on the CPU and whether or not it can use PAE extensions
With PAE extensions enabled , an OS can use up to 64Gb ( in some cases)



As i understood when i read about it, even with the PAE extensions Linux would still not be able to see the remaining 1gb due to the other hardware limitations ? Isn't that the 3gb barrier anyway?

I know there were 32 bit machines that could allow full 4gb access, but i don't think the older ones do, or cheap desktop machines anyways

But what i could i possibly know lol, i never had one of those i just read about it so yeah i may be wrong

I may be geeky, but i'm not that much of a geek

edit on 14-4-2019 by Malisa because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 05:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Malisa

Not exactly correct . 4 Gb is dependent on the CPU and whether or not it can use PAE extensions
With PAE extensions enabled , an OS can use up to 64Gb ( in some cases)



As i understood when i read about it, even with the PAE extensions Linux would still not be able to see the remaining 1gb due to the other hardware limitations ? Isn't that the 3gb barrier anyway?

I know there were 32 bit machines that could allow full 4gb access, but i don't think the older ones do, or cheap desktop machines anyways

But what i could i possibly know lol, i never had one of those i just read about it so yeah i may be wrong

I may be geeky, but i'm not that much of a geek

Certain CPUs do not have full Physical Address Extension capability
For the rest , it is not a hardware limit , it is an OS limit
Now , applications are a bit of a different matter. (although , there are patchers out there for a lot of 32bit applications)
Here , I will provide a link
I would use the MS , but since this topic is about Ubuntu...
LinuxLookup

Now for my disclaimer : If you have < 20 years in the business , be very , very cautious

Remember , I stated "not exactly correct" and "in some cases"

edit on 4/14/19 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/14/19 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 05:24 AM
link   
To all contributors of this thread

I'm now very positive.

Thanx ATS'ers



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 05:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Malisa

Not exactly correct . 4 Gb is dependent on the CPU and whether or not it can use PAE extensions
With PAE extensions enabled , an OS can use up to 64Gb ( in some cases)



As i understood when i read about it, even with the PAE extensions Linux would still not be able to see the remaining 1gb due to the other hardware limitations ? Isn't that the 3gb barrier anyway?

I know there were 32 bit machines that could allow full 4gb access, but i don't think the older ones do, or cheap desktop machines anyways

But what i could i possibly know lol, i never had one of those i just read about it so yeah i may be wrong

I may be geeky, but i'm not that much of a geek

Certain CPUs do not have full Physical Address Extension capability
For the rest , it is not a hardware limit , it is an OS limit
Now , applications are a bit of a different matter. (although , there are patchers out there for a lot of 32bit applications)
Here , I will provide a link
I would use the MS , but since this topic is about Ubuntu...
LinuxLookup

Now for my disclaimer : If you have < 20 years in the business , be very , very cautious

Remember , I stated "not exactly correct" and "in some cases"


Thanks for the link, i will definitely read it

I have exactly 0 years of work experience... :/ ... LMFAO

I'm sorry just joking but really i'm on my last year of college so i have not worked yet on my area, hopefully next year i will get an actual job. For now i just pick this kind of stuff out of liking computers and such, this 32 bit stuff definitely was not part of any class lol



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 05:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Malisa
Perhaps you took it the wrong way
Anyone with 20 years or so experience in the computer/OS field would automagically know how to recover their OS if something went horribly wrong.
I have been around computers for nigh on half a century
My job REQUIRES me to be up on all the new stuff
It is fun though

Even at my advanced age

edit on 4/14/19 by Gothmog because: oops



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 07:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Malisa

Not exactly correct . 4 Gb is dependent on the CPU and whether or not it can use PAE extensions
With PAE extensions enabled , an OS can use up to 64Gb ( in some cases)



As i understood when i read about it, even with the PAE extensions Linux would still not be able to see the remaining 1gb due to the other hardware limitations ? Isn't that the 3gb barrier anyway?

I know there were 32 bit machines that could allow full 4gb access, but i don't think the older ones do, or cheap desktop machines anyways

But what i could i possibly know lol, i never had one of those i just read about it so yeah i may be wrong

I may be geeky, but i'm not that much of a geek

Certain CPUs do not have full Physical Address Extension capability
For the rest , it is not a hardware limit , it is an OS limit
Now , applications are a bit of a different matter. (although , there are patchers out there for a lot of 32bit applications)
Here , I will provide a link
I would use the MS , but since this topic is about Ubuntu...
LinuxLookup

Now for my disclaimer : If you have < 20 years in the business , be very , very cautious

Remember , I stated "not exactly correct" and "in some cases"


So are you agreeing that the 3.5GB is allocated w/n the OS and the remainng 512 might be able to be allocated through bios as VRAM? I've never tried this b/c by the time I got to 4GB I had processors capable of 64bit. I'm wondering if the OP has a 64bit processor but is just using a 32bit OS version. Would be interesting to know what CPU he has.

I know windows will allocate 3.5GB on 32bit and IIRC Linux will do 3.6GB in most distro's.

I've never learned how exactly the ram addresses are allocated, if it is w/n BIOS or if it is passed off to the OS. If it is w/n the BIOS, I suspect the OS might be able to see the 3.5GB as a seperate "device" from the 512MB of VRAM - much like partitioning a hard drive. I'm curious what you think might be the case.
edit on 4 14 2019 by DigginFoTroof because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Malisa

Oh man... Android studio. On windows if you install sdk 27 and 28 it takes like 23gb hdd space. I was blown away by its footprint.
edit on 14-4-2019 by drewlander because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join