I have a 2nd generation core i3 processor (2.30 GHz). It was preloaded with 64-bit Windows 7. It ran smoothly with 2 GB RAM. Will Ubuntu 64-bit be the same or does it require 4 GB or more?
marked as duplicate by con-f-use, Uri Herrera, Mik, Ringtail, Amith KK Oct 26 '12 at 6:26
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
It should run well, although a 32-bit version would run even better!
Instead of relying on our opinions, you can test Ubuntu using a LiveCD. Nevertheless, here's the official word:
All I can say is do your research, and await other replies, as I'm a Ubuntu rookie.
Ubuntu does not perform well (speed-wise) with the very low minimum specifications they say will work (i.e., less than 1 GB RAM). I tried 11.10 and 12.04 with 1.5 GB and 2.0 GB RAM.
I last attempted 12.04 with a Core 2 Duo processor and 2 GB RAM, and was very disappointed by very slow multitasking and file moving. 32-bit was better than 64-bit. The experience was like the initial disappointment with a new Vista system.
I would suggest yes, go for 4GB RAM, as I'm upgrading to 4 GB or maybe 6 GB. Advice I have had from other Linux forums, would support this.
Ubuntu 12.04 is resource hungry, and I am trying out Lubuntu as an option, they say much faster, but less of an overall multimedia sytem than Ubuntu 12.04 LTS.
If you are like me the performance Issues are important. (My PC rage issue.)
I like fast file moving/copying, and I like to multitask ( Vista performs better at this in my experience in my Ubuntu trials).
So good luck.
It should be fine My computer is a 3gb ram and 2.0GHz amd Athlon and my Ubuntu 12.04 runs better that windows 7, and also I use many visual effects on Ubuntu and windows effects are all off. And I have never used more than 1.8gb of ram and that time I was testing and my computer froze because the CPU was fully used. PS: my laptop is 4 years old
12.04 running beautifully here on a [September 2011 built] Dell Vostro 1015 with a single core, 2.3GHz Celeron CPU and 4GB RAM. The machine was supplied with Windows 7 Home Premium and that was slower to boot, less effective at rendering Beeb iplayer material in HD and generally less fluent in its operation.
Using the alternative (upgrade) ISO, I'm now installing 12.04 as an upgrade to 10.04LTS on an older  Latitude with 1GB RAM and a 1.2GHz Pentium, it ran surprisingly well when trialled from a live CD so I'm expecting it too will be perfectly adequate, though the Latitude's 64MB graphics chip might struggle with the iPlayer, we'll see....
I'm running a Dell laptop with dual core Intel Pentium processor with 2GB of RAM using onboard Intel HD graphics and 12.04 runs fast. Perhaps not as smooth as Windows 7, but not far behind.
I think that a lot has to do with drivers when it comes to speed in Linux. I found Ubuntu 12.04 to be incredibly slow on an older dual core Athlon with 3GB of RAM and ATI GPU.
protected by Community♦ Sep 16 '12 at 20:07
This question is protected to prevent "thanks!", "me too!", or spam answers by new users. To answer it, you must have earned at least 10 reputation on this site.