Primogeniture developed so that estates would not be divided indefinitely. If each child received an equal share, and then each of their children an equal share, eventually the shares would become too small to live off of.
But this situation would obviously apply to those with land and wealth. Similar reasoning wouldn't apply to those with little.
So among common folk, was male preference primogeniture still practiced? With the first born male inheriting all of whatever property their was?
The premise of your question is wrong, at least for England.
Primogeniture wasn't something that people chose to do; it was an automatic legal process that applied to anyone who owned land. Before the middle of the 16th century, a landowner had no right to determine what happened to his land when he died; it went to his eldest son by operation of law.
Wills did exist, but they could only be used to bequeath personal property.
This is sort of a general point, but you can read more about it in the chapter of Blackstone's Commentaries on "Alienation by Devise".