Take the 64-Bit Pledge!

[elpollodiablo]

I already run KSP on 64bit on Windows (via the "hack") and most mods work perfectly well, even if they do not support it. I don't expect that to change even if the 32bit version is more stable.

There is no way i'd play KSP anymore without all the visual enhancements, new planets and a few essential parts (like a life support mod).

 

 

[Pixel of Life]

I don't get this "64bit is unstable" thing. I've been using a heavily modded 64bit build for months now with no crashes at all. If anything, it seems to be more stable than the 32bit build because I no longer get OOM crashes. I'd install even more mods but I can't be bothered to upgrade my RAM yet. I'll definitely be doing that when 1.1 is released though.

[*Aqua*]

16 minutes ago, CaptainKorhonen said:

I don't get this "64bit is unstable" thing. I've been using a heavily modded 64bit build for months now with no crashes at all.

The majority of players had huge stability problems when there was an official 64 bit build. And these problems occur within Unity which means the KSP devs couldn't do something about them.

Consider yourself lucky for not having problems. You are one of only very few where 64 bit runs without crashing after a few minutes.

[Red Iron Crown]

18 minutes ago, CaptainKorhonen said:

I don't get this "64bit is unstable" thing. I've been using a heavily modded 64bit build for months now with no crashes at all. If anything, it seems to be more stable than the 32bit build because I no longer get OOM crashes. I'd install even more mods but I can't be bothered to upgrade my RAM yet. I'll definitely be doing that when 1.1 is released though.

IME it's not more crashes but instead other glitchiness, like building upgrades in career mode being weird, parts disappearing from the editor part list, LMB not working correctly after playing (even in other apps). 

[Nothalogh]

On 2/16/2016 at 6:15 PM, Kerbart said:

Will there even be a 32 bit version?

I hope not, 32 bit software needs a stake driven through its heart

[Jim DiGriz]

29 minutes ago, Nothalogh said:

I hope not, 32 bit software needs a stake driven through its heart

While I agree, they'll almost certainly ship both versions like they do in the linux builds in order to support the heathens still stuck on 32-bit hardware and operating systems.

I would hope that if Squad is really committing to 64-bit that the script that wraps invoking the binary will launch 32-bit only on 32-bit and launch 64-bit by default on 64-bit hardware.

Rendering the entire "pledge poll" concept a bit pointless...

[Nothalogh]

1 minute ago, Jim DiGriz said:

still stuck on 32-bit hardware and operating systems

Who are those people?

Pretty much everything short of a toaster ships with x64 processors and a 64 bit OS

[Jim DiGriz]

Just now, Nothalogh said:

Who are those people?

Pretty much everything short of a toaster ships with x64 processors and a 64 bit OS

Laptop users.  People on 64-bit old-windows that upgraded (Windows 10 still ships with 32-bit which you get by default if you upgrade from earlier 32-bit versions).

People who just don't understand and think 64-bit costs extra and think they don't need it so don't buy it?

I used to work with some system administrators who would build 32-bit virts in order to artificially constrain the memory size the software developers could use to 4GB -- I'm so glad I don't work with those idiots any more...

There's people out there who still believe voodoo about 32-bit being faster than 64-bit.

Anyway, it's most likely cheaper and easier to just ship a 32-bit build and write a small script to launch it when the O/S is only 32-bit, than to deal with the (admittedly small) fraction of users showing up whining about the game failing to launch on their 32-bit O/S and demanding their money back...

[Renegrade]

54 minutes ago, Jim DiGriz said:

There's people out there who still believe voodoo about 32-bit being faster than 64-bit.

Voodoo?  Like objective tests?  It kinda turns out that the obligatory doubling the size of certain types of data (such as, oh, pointers), and optionally doubling certain other types (such as 'int' -- which may or may not get bigger, depending on the platform) can have some, well, serious repercussions for data locality.  The difference used to be about 15%, but with newer versions of GCC, it's become about 30%...in favor of 32-bit code.

Of course, I don't think Squad will ever be able to completely rid KSP of memory leaks (some may even be Unity's fault - it would only take one mistake for a reference to be held somewhere on the Unity side when it should have been released, etc), so I can't say I'm sorry to hear that there will once again be an official amd64/x86-64 version of KSP.    Hopefully without the weird glitches this time.

As for operating systems, all I can say is my netbook is extremely glad for 32-bit OSes: the Atom processor it has is not amd64/x86-64 capable.  Granted, I'd never do any real work on that thing (it's terrible), but it is rather compact and handy for random light browsing.

[Jim DiGriz]

^^^ We found him @Nothalogh

[Blue_Eagle7]

I installed a Linux on dual boot just to use all GB of ram for ksp mods. When 64-bit win will be ready i'll give it a try (the GPU drivers and directx should help on windows) but continuing to play on linux won't be a problem at all. Except for some trouble during the installation of OS i never had problem with ksp 64-bit on it.