Is Ubuntu 32-bit only for systems with "less than 2GB RAM"?

Question

On the downloads page, you have the following two options:

• 64-bit
• 32-bit (for machines with less than 2GB RAM)

Assuming you have a 32-bit machine with the maximum 4GB of RAM, will Ubuntu will work on that?

Solution 1

By default, any 32-bit OS cannot index more than 4Gb of RAM and Ubuntu is not exclusion.

But Ubuntu has 2 different kernels: standard and patched(Physical Address Extension - PAE). Now Ubuntu 32-bit used this patched kernel by default and so it can manage up to 64Gb of RAM.

And Ubuntu websites says 32-bit (for machines with less than 2GB RAM) because of RAM usage. 64-bit software use a more RAM than 32-bit.

Clean Ubuntu 32-bit installation (Unity) use about 600Mb of memory, 64-bit installation takes about 100Mb more. And for modern software 2Gb of RAM is not so much and it can easily be used(say 10 tabs in Chrome can use a lot of RAM).

That's why Ubuntu website recommends use 32-bit for computers with less than 2Gb of RAM. But that doesn't mean you cannot install Ubuntu 64-bit on such computer configuration.

Solution 2

Yes, the 32-bit version works on both 64 and 32 machines whatever RAM amount they have.

Solution 3

Since I'm running 13.10 at the moment (it was installed with an upgrade, not via Live CD), I can testify that it does work on a system with 4GB of RAM.

I would assume the wording is just a way to help out "beginners" in computing, something like _"If you have less than 2GB of RAM, chances are, this is the option you want." However, if a beginner knows how much RAM they have, chances are they know if it's a 32 or 64 bit system.

Comments

[IQAndreas]

@ejno I thought that limit capped at 2.99 GB or something like that. At least, that was the amount of available RAM displayed when I was using XP.

[IQAndreas]

@ejno That is news to me! (All these years...) I tried digging further, and the graphics card details are: Intel® 965GM x86/MMX/SSE2; is the x86 part there going to be a problem?

[IQAndreas]

@ejno It shows up as 3.9 GiB in About this Computer despite the cap you mentioned in the question's comments.

[IQAndreas]

That wasn't the question I asked.

[Pedro Victori]

I should have added: "whatever the amount of RAM is". This is, your're right, it is just a way to help basic users to decide which version is the right one for them.

[IQAndreas]

Then by all means, add it. :) All answers on StackOverflow have a little edit button, allowing you to refine and improve your answer, and once you have enough reputation, even allowing you to suggest improvements to other people's answers!

[Deepak Verma]

I just want to say that, despite the accurate information in this post, it makes very little sense to me as a whole. But then, the issue also makes little sense. What if you have a 32-bit system with more than 2GB - do you have to use a 64-bit version? If you have a 64-bit processor with less than 2GB, why do you need to use the 32-bit version when the 64-bit version is probably better? Your answer needs more research, IMHO.