Jump to content

How much would 64-bit actually matter?

tstehler1

By tstehler1
in KSP1 Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Blaster

Blaster

Posted
Posted

PC's in general (desktops, laptops, super tablets, workstations) are transitioning to 64-bit as the default, since 32-bit systems are limited to 4GB RAM, and anything that isn't bottom-barrel or a smartphone is coming out with 6-16GB RAM stock. It would be best to make the transition to 64-bit sooner rather than later, as upgrading from 32-bit OS to 64-bit OS requires a fresh install. If you have Windows 7 or Windows 8, you can do a fresh install with the 64-bit version and use your existing product key, as it doesn't differentiate like previous versions of Windows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andersenman

Andersenman

Posted
Posted
It would be best to make the transition to 64-bit sooner rather than later [...]

As a story from a user's perspective, I might at some point, but right now I simply have by far not enough pressure to do so. All games I play run perfectly fine on my system, a 32-bit XPS 630i with XP. I would find it a waste to abandon the quite satisfactory platform I currently have. Money, space and demand are simply not there to do the jump. (Of course, I would welcome any advice on my case, feel free to send a PM or the like.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seret

Seret

Posted
Posted
Money, space and demand are simply not there to do the jump.

Well, if you're running XP then you'll have to upgrade when support runs out for it in April 2014. Since you're reinstalling anyway, use the 64-bit version. No reason not to really, it doesn't cost any extra and will be faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andersenman

Andersenman

Posted
Posted
Well, if you're running XP then you'll have to upgrade when support runs out for it in April 2014.
Do I? It's not like it'll stop working suddenly. (Yes, I'm aware any holes found afterwards will remain unpatched.)
Since you're reinstalling anyway, use the 64-bit version.
Of what?
[...] will be faster.
I don't think I understand. You make it sound like a new OS will speed up things without updated HW. Could you clarify, please?

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seret

Seret

Posted
Posted
Do I? It's not like it'll stop working suddenly. (Yes, I'm aware any holes found afterwards will remain unpatched.)

Which is a big problem. XP has poor security anyway. Once it stops receiving patches for new vulnerabilities it's really just a matter of time before somebody exploits an unpatched vuln on your machine and signs you up for their botnet. Now maybe, you're casual about having your machine hijacked like that, but you should probably take steps to avoid it if only for everybody else's sake. There are enough zombie machines on the net already.

If you want to keep using it after April, disconnect it from the internet. Then you can keep using it until it fossilises, if you like.

Of what?

Whatever OS you're upgrading to. If you want to stick with Windows your options are Win7 and Win8.

I don't think I understand. You make it sound like a new OS will speed up things without updated HW. Could you clarify, please?

I just mean that the 64-bit version of whatever OS you migrate to will be quicker than the 32-bit version. Not heaps, but there is a measurable difference on some types of task.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keldor

Keldor

Posted
Posted (edited)

Just moving to double precision would not improve physics, performance notwithstanding. The size of the time step dwarfs the precision limit even in single precision, meaning that the simulation error comes from too few iterations, rather than anything to do with precision. Remember, single precision is accurate to parts in a million (and double precision is accurate to parts in a trillion).

As an aside, floating point works in scientific notation internally (base 2 of course), so 0.000000167892 and 183642000000.0 would both have the same number of accurate digits (about 6-7).

Anyhow, 64-bit simply lets you address memory beyond 4GB, so the main benefit would be the ability to use more mods and/or higher resolution textures across the board.

Edited by Keldor
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Demon_82

Demon_82

Posted
Posted
Again: 64-bit OS (say Win7) on unchanged 32-bit hardware?

Every single desktop computer built I've seen in the last seven years are 64 bits capable by hardware, even if it did come with Windows XP installed. If it's older, you may think about getting a new computer at all, it should be pretty aged by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seret

Seret

Posted
Posted
Again: 64-bit OS (say Win7) on unchanged 32-bit hardware?

Yep. If it's a Dell XPS 630i like you say then it's a got a Core 2 Quad chip? That's very much 64-bit hardware. You can run a 64-bit OS on it. They should never have installed a 32-bit OS in the first place IMO, but I understand support for 64-bit XP was a bit ropey in days gone by.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jwenting

jwenting

Posted
Posted

people'd complain about their ships lagging still, and just as quickly. They'd simply in 10 seconds after release have got used to building 5.000 part ships and think that's normal, and that it's bad that they can't build 10.000 ships without lag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Suko

Suko

Posted
Posted

It would be nice to have a 64-bit version so we could get rid of some lag and memory lack issues.

I find it frustating when you're computer should be perfectly able to make something run smoothly and you have to deal with this sort of problems.

Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, they're already working on that, and I assume this is something they will get ready before the game gets more and more expanded, otherwise they may be limited by that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...
Shalashalska

Shalashalska

Posted
Posted (edited)
You people are way too narrowly focused on RAM.

Benefits for x64:

1 - More RAM usage (as stated before)

2 - Making optimal use of multiple cores

x64 would allow your system to run the physics thread across multiple cores instead of only one. Think for a second: timewarp during acceleration, huge part counts without slowdown, more accurate physics calculations, defeating the kraken for good.

x64 would not make a difference for physics. It would not innately multi-thread physics. And it would not effect kraken at all. In fact, even if we were to run a 64 bit version of ksp on a computer a million times as powerful as the best computer ever made, there would still be kraken attacks. Because squad is fluffybunnied and is using plain double precision floating points when they really need to be using quads. ~90% of all kraken attacks are related to floating point errors. When you have numbers in the quadrillions, floats start to lose precision and start to drop a few decimal points. If they switched to quads, then performance would go down somewhat, but physics could be vastly simplified to compensate for that, and kraken attacks would be almost nonexistent. Floating point errors are the same reason why weird things happen in minecraft near the world border, and also cause most of the spontaneous explodification in KSP.

Edited by Specialist290
;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
r4pt0r

r4pt0r

Posted
Posted
Necro much?

just report it man. and as i see it, with our recent revelations on running ksp in 64bit, this thread is completely relevent, and could continue if people post relevent things. now, would someone explain floating point errors to me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bothersome

Bothersome

Posted
Posted

The problem with floating point is the mantissa vs the remainder. When you need to represent a larger value number, then the remainder is sacrificed. A little at first and then more as your number grows to a larger value.

What should have been done is use a 64bit integer value. Assign 1 bit to the sign, and 63 bits to the millimeter positioning of things in the universe. That would give enough accuracy to represent its position and still allow a large universe to play in. You wouldn't have kraken problems even on the extremes. It would work the same anywhere you were. 64bit integers can be processed really fast on 64bit hardware when compiled using 64bit code. So there wouldn't be much in cost of processing doing it this way either.

Hind sight is 20/20.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MR4Y

MR4Y

Posted
Posted

The things that would make a difference in KSP:

-Multi-threaded

-64 bit

-Loading on demand.

-Disk streaming.

-Better memory management and garbage collection.

-Better collision calculations.

-Lazy loading.

And other things like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bloodbunny

Bloodbunny

Posted
Posted
How the hell did you even get that working? I've done the 64bit but a lot of mods still cause it to crash.

Most mods work just fine with 64 bit.. one odd tip floating around regarding apparently random access violation errors is to add another mod.. no one is sure why it works, but it does usually. I didn't use any sorcery to make that setup run, I just added the mods as directed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...