Jump to content

KSP 64bits on Windows (this time, it's not a request)

Lilleman

By Lilleman
in KSP1 Discussion

 Share

How does the 64-bits version of KSP work for you?  

5 members have voted

  1. 1. How does the 64-bits version of KSP work for you?

    • It worked with no or minor glitches/bugs with DirectX
      157
    • It worked with no or minor glitches/bugs with OpenGL
      24
    • None, it crashed/caused major game breaking/is unplayable.
      62

Recommended Posts

Victus

Victus

Posted
Posted
It's nothing special: RSS + Hi-res Earth texture and normal map (textures can be found in RSS thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/55145-0-22-WIP-Alpha-Real-Solar-System-(Kerbin-Earth-rescale) )

And Texture Replacer with skybox to make space look like...well... space.

That'll be why I haven't seen it as RSS is too scary for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belkon

Belkon

Posted
Posted

I get a crash saying this :/


Unity Player [version: Unity 4.3.3f1_c8ca9b6b9936]

KSP.exe caused an Access Violation (0xc0000005)
  in module KSP.exe at 0033:4040c91c.

Error occurred at 2014-06-15_113106.
F:\Steam\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program\KSP.exe, run by Alexander Stec.
76% memory in use.
8130 MB physical memory [1928 MB free].
16257 MB paging file [8718 MB free].
8388608 MB user address space [8385340 MB free].
Read from location ffffffff caused an access violation.

Context:
RDI:    0x641b46b0  RSI: 0x00000003  RAX:   0x00000001
RBX:    0x0d078f70  RCX: 0x00000003  RDX:   0x0000000c
RIP:    0x4040c91c  RBP: 0x00000024  SegCs: 0x00000033
EFlags: 0x00010202  RSP: 0x002feca0  SegSs: 0x0000002b
R8:    0x00000006  R9: 0x6419c718  R10:   0x00000099
R11:    0x002fec60  R12: 0x00000008  R13:   0x00000001
R14:    0x641b4770  R15: 0xb54e91a8

Bytes at CS:EIP:
0f 54 8c 24 88 01 00 00 44 0f 54 9c 24 88 01 00 Module 1
C:\Windows\system32\xinput1_3.dll
Image Base: 0x00400000  Image Size: 0x0001e000
File Size:  107368      File Time:  2007-04-04_195422
Version:
   Company:    Microsoft Corporation
   Product:    Microsoft® DirectX for Windows®
   FileDesc:   Microsoft Common Controller API
   FileVer:    9.18.944.0
   ProdVer:    9.18.944.0

Module 2
C:\Windows\system32\ksuser.dll
Image Base: 0x71750000  Image Size: 0x00006000
File Size:  5120        File Time:  2009-07-13_194114
Version:
   Company:    Microsoft Corporation
   Product:    Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
   FileDesc:   User CSA Library
   FileVer:    6.1.7600.16385
   ProdVer:    6.1.7600.16385

Module 3
C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Windows Live\WLIDNSP.DLL
Image Base: 0x72580000  Image Size: 0x0002e000
File Size:  168304      File Time:  2009-08-18_124802
Version:
   Company:    Microsoft Corporation
   Product:    Microsoft® Windows Live ID
   FileDesc:   Microsoft® Windows Live ID Namespace Provider
   FileVer:    6.500.3165.0
   ProdVer:    6.500.3165.0

Module 4
C:\Windows\system32\sfc.dll
Image Base: 0x73cf0000  Image Size: 0x00003000
File Size:  3072        File Time:  2009-07-13_193308
Version:
   Company:    Microsoft Corporation
   Product:    Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
   FileDesc:   Windows File Protection
   FileVer:    6.1.7600.16385
   ProdVer:    6.1.7600.16385

Module 5
C:\Windows\system32\kernel32.dll
Image Base: 0x76fb0000  Image Size: 0x0011f000
File Size:  1163264     File Time:  2014-03-04_034402
Version:
   Company:    Microsoft Corporation
   Product:    Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
   FileDesc:   Windows NT BASE API Client DLL
   FileVer:    6.1.7601.18409
   ProdVer:    6.1.7601.18409

Module 6
C:\Windows\system32\USER32.dll
Image Base: 0x770d0000  Image Size: 0x000fa000
File Size:  1008128     File Time:  2010-11-20_212410
Version:
   Company:    Microsoft Corporation
   Product:    Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
   FileDesc:   Multi-User Windows USER API Client DLL
   FileVer:    6.1.7601.17514
   ProdVer:    6.1.7601.17514

Module 7
C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
Image Base: 0x771d0000  Image Size: 0x001a9000
File Size:  1732032     File Time:  2013-08-28_201636
Version:
   Company:    Microsoft Corporation
   Product:    Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
   FileDesc:   NT Layer DLL
   FileVer:    6.1.7601.18247
   ProdVer:    6.1.7601.18247

Module 8
C:\Windows\system32\psapi.dll
Image Base: 0x773a0000  Image Size: 0x00007000
File Size:  9216        File Time:  2009-07-13_194154
Version:
   Company:    Microsoft Corporation
   Product:    Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
   FileDesc:   Process Status Helper
   FileVer:    6.1.7600.16385
   ProdVer:    6.1.7600.16385


== [end of error.log] ==

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaMichel

DaMichel

Posted
Posted
This is one of the reasons Squad aren't distributing a 64-bit executable with the game yet.

Oh come on. You (not you personally but squad) have to put some pressure on the unity people to have this fixed and also the long overdue update of physx done. For how long have 64 bit OSes existed now, 5 years, 10 years? Since KSP is quite a successful project you might even have an effect on them :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Victus

Victus

Posted
Posted
Oh come on. You (not you personally but squad) have to put some pressure on the unity people to have this fixed and also the long overdue update of physx done. For how long have 64 bit OSes existed now, 5 years, 10 years? Since KSP is quite a successful project you might even have an effect on them :P

I actually think it's a bit ridiculous we have to deal with a 32bit game in 2014.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoMrBond

NoMrBond

Posted
Posted
Oh come on. You (not you personally but squad) have to put some pressure on the unity people to have this fixed and also the long overdue update of physx done. For how long have 64 bit OSes existed now, 5 years, 10 years? Since KSP is quite a successful project you might even have an effect on them :P

I don't think any amount of pressure would make Unity 5 arrive any earlier, assuming of course Unity Technologies want to get Unity-5 out the door and in peoples hands equally as much as people want it in their hands.

If they move to unity 4.5 or 5 and stop using dx9 I think things would be ok however they seem to be showing no real interest in progressing to a x64 windows solution

That is a harsh assumption, which if it were true, Squad wouldn't be able to tell us that the x64 builds they have tried to make were not suitably stable for release because they never would have made them. Not having an x64 build doesn't mean Squad doesn't want to deliver one, why assume they're withholding the x64 release to spite you, when they probably just don't want complaints from ~1/3rd of their user base when it doesn't work? What are the numbers, 500k copies of KSP? macs+linux is what, ~10% so imagine 1/3rd of the rest (going by the survey) of 450,000 KSP users complaining that KSP doesn't work because of the x64 update, you want to man the phones for 150,000 complaints? Users are going to want to tick the x64/64-bit option in the launcher and have it work, and they're going to complain when it doesn't.

There would be complaints from people with 32-bit OS installs that the x64 option doesn't work for them, it would happen.

Assuming there is no interest in migrating to dx11 over dx9 ignores the cost/benefit in migrating to, or additionally supporting dx11 with a split code base, maybe it wouldn't provide enough benefit to enough users, what if its high development time coupled with excluding benefit of that dev time from anyone without dx11 capable hardware. Maybe there is dev time budgeted for implementing dx11 support after KSP is feature complete during the Beta stage?

Maybe there will be a clear answer, but I suspect not because if Squad promises to deliver x64 or dx11 and it ends up being either impossible or cost prohibitive with the KSP codebase there would be a finger pointing quote-riot, so 'we would like to' is the best we can hope for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JordanL

JordanL

Posted
Posted
I don't think any amount of pressure would make Unity 5 arrive any earlier, assuming of course Unity Technologies want to get Unity-5 out the door and in peoples hands equally as much as people want it in their hands.

That is a harsh assumption, which if it were true, Squad wouldn't be able to tell us that the x64 builds they have tried to make were not suitably stable for release because they never would have made them. Not having an x64 build doesn't mean Squad doesn't want to deliver one, why assume they're withholding the x64 release to spite you, when they probably just don't want complaints from ~1/3rd of their user base when it doesn't work? What are the numbers, 500k copies of KSP? macs+linux is what, ~10% so imagine 1/3rd of the rest (going by the survey) of 450,000 KSP users complaining that KSP doesn't work because of the x64 update, you want to man the phones for 150,000 complaints? Users are going to want to tick the x64/64-bit option in the launcher and have it work, and they're going to complain when it doesn't.

There would be complaints from people with 32-bit OS installs that the x64 option doesn't work for them, it would happen.

Assuming there is no interest in migrating to dx11 over dx9 ignores the cost/benefit in migrating to, or additionally supporting dx11 with a split code base, maybe it wouldn't provide enough benefit to enough users, what if its high development time coupled with excluding benefit of that dev time from anyone without dx11 capable hardware. Maybe there is dev time budgeted for implementing dx11 support after KSP is feature complete during the Beta stage?

Maybe there will be a clear answer, but I suspect not because if Squad promises to deliver x64 or dx11 and it ends up being either impossible or cost prohibitive with the KSP codebase there would be a finger pointing quote-riot, so 'we would like to' is the best we can hope for.

You know, I've contemplated running a VM with 12 GB of RAM dedicated to it just to run a stable 64-bit KSP. I have a Core i7 4770-k proc, 16GB of DDR3 1666 RAM and over 3 TB of HDD space, not to mention a GTX 760 GPU... so I really should be able to run the game in a VM without many issues.

What's KSP on Linux like? I have the steam version... any challenges with getting that on linux? Anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoMrBond

NoMrBond

Posted
Posted
You know, I've contemplated running a VM with 12 GB of RAM dedicated to it just to run a stable 64-bit KSP. I have a Core i7 4770-k proc, 16GB of DDR3 1666 RAM and over 3 TB of HDD space, not to mention a GTX 760 GPU... so I really should be able to run the game in a VM without many issues.

What's KSP on Linux like? I have the steam version... any challenges with getting that on linux? Anyone?

I was one of the lucky ones for whom the drop-in method for x64'ing my KSP install just straight up worked with minimal fussing (only required switching from borderless window mode to fullscreen), so I suggest trying that before setting up a Linux VM for the Linux 64-bit build.

If you do run a Linux VM, I'm assuming you can just install Steam for Linux and pull the Linux version of KSP that way?

Some mods have a few errors with capitalisation which doesn't bother the windows install, but throws errors under Linux, but they seem fairly few and far between now

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JordanL

JordanL

Posted
Posted
I was one of the lucky ones for whom the drop-in method for x64'ing my KSP install just straight up worked with minimal fussing (only required switching from borderless window mode to fullscreen), so I suggest trying that before setting up a Linux VM for the Linux 64-bit build.

If you do run a Linux VM, I'm assuming you can just install Steam for Linux and pull the Linux version of KSP that way?

Some mods have a few errors with capitalisation which doesn't bother the windows install, but throws errors under Linux, but they seem fairly few and far between now

Nope, all my ships dissintegrate when I use the 64-bit hack here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iueras

iueras

Posted
Posted (edited)

Works great for me. Loads fast, uses 5.6GB RAM with all the mods, including B9, EVE, KSPRC, KW, Kethane, Interstellar, KAS, TAC Fuel Balancer amd Life Support, and many more, all full resolution at 1920x1080. The only thing that seems to be glitchy is sometimes I can't revert after a crash (craft, not program). I have a feeling it is related to the Achievements mod by blizzy. Or possibly a sound issue as the outputlog.txt and the main log are full of null reference exceptions relating to audio files. Does the stock install have a lib_mpg123-0.dll in the KSP_Data/mono folder, or is that a leftover from the Soundtrack mod I removed long time ago on my 32 bit install?

EDIT: It was indeed a leftover. I removed it and haven't had a revert problem since. I CAN confirm that the AV-T1 does cause a crash for me as well. Everything else so far has worked fine.

Edited by iueras
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lilleman

Lilleman

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Thanks for confirming the AV-T1 glitch, iueras. Added this in the first post, as well as the decouplers glitch.

@JordanL: did you started a new game? Some people reports deformations of Asteroid's ground and Struts location when loading an old save file, you might want to test from a clean install and a new game (this is long, but I think it worth it).

About the release of an official 64-bits version by Squad: well let's face it, this is definitely not the quality we can accept as players for a game release, and most of problems seems to come directly from the 64-bits player.

The only reasonnable thing to do is to wait for Unity to update and to fix those. Once a stable version will be released, we then have to left some time to Squad to polishing it and run some test.

The changelog for Unity 4.5.1 seems to indicate that some bugs encoutered in 64-bits players have been solved, but there might as well be lots of bugs here too.

Even with big community of player like KSP, pressure is not a good way to have things done well.

Edited by Lilleman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alewx

Alewx

Posted
Posted

About the release of an official 64-bits version by Squad: well let's face it, this is definitely not the quality we can accept as players for a game release, and most of problems seems to come directly from the 64-bits player.

The only reasonnable thing to do is to wait for Unity to update and to fix those. Once a stable version will be released, we then have to left some time to Squad to polishing it and run some test.

Sorry but I disagree.

The game is Alpha/Beta and Early Access. I know that and I bought it in this state.

But for me having an unstable 64bit Version that crashes from time to time, and mostly based on the mods, is better than having a 32bit that is stable but only can take a single launch until it crashes or I have to restart.

As there is already mentioned an 64bit beta Steam download is not so problematic, as steam supports such an alternate download. For public testing, it should be enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rkman

rkman

Posted
Posted
Sorry but I disagree.

But for me having an unstable 64bit Version that crashes from time to time, and mostly based on the mods, is better

But you have that now.

Having it officially released by Squad won't make it any better, because fixing 64bit-specific bugs is currently not a priority for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
asmi

asmi

Posted
Posted
EDIT: only problem I've had so far is that when KSP is running, Chrome doesn't seem to want to work correctly. Which is odd, to say the least.

Try right-clicking somewhere in Chrome - after that it will work. Not sure why - maybe some bug with mouse handling in Unity x64.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BudgetHedgehog

BudgetHedgehog

Posted
Posted
Try right-clicking somewhere in Chrome - after that it will work. Not sure why - maybe some bug with mouse handling in Unity x64.

Ooh, it does work! Thank you!

Side note: Heh, I just copied over my entire Gamedata folder and we're now running at 4.1 gigs... and a heck of a lot cooler, both in temperature and in style :cool: My textures are glorious!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
asmi

asmi

Posted
Posted (edited)
Ooh, it does work! Thank you!

Side note: Heh, I just copied over my entire Gamedata folder and we're now running at 4.1 gigs... and a heck of a lot cooler, both in temperature and in style :cool:My textures are glorious!

THAT (bold part) is I think the most important benefit. KSP could really use a graphics pass to make it look more like year 2014 game, not year 2008. I have all hi-res textures installed in my 64 bit instance, and it looks just amazing (I've posted a screenshot here a couple of pages back), but doing this in stock would mean either seriously limiting myself on amount of modparts I can use, or restarting KSP after every launch - both options being not particularity attractive. Unfortunately the specifics of KSP combined with limitations of Unity makes it hard to achieve in 32bits (they could make it in stock, but then after adding only few mods the memory use will go above 32bit limit). But with 64bit I can do that, and more (I got 32Gb of RAM so I can afford to put as much mods as I please without any problems - provided that they would work).

Edited by asmi
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JordanL

JordanL

Posted
Posted
@JordanL: did you started a new game? Some people reports deformations of Asteroid's ground and Struts location when loading an old save file, you might want to test from a clean install and a new game (this is long, but I think it worth it).

I actually retested several things in my 32-bit install after I posted, and I think that my problem wasn't directly related to the 64-bit runtime. I'll be testing again when I get home.

Large part count ships make the transition to the VAB really... weird though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lilleman

Lilleman

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I made some change to the first post again, adding the mouse behavior glitches.

I need some confirmations for the second one though: Ingame, a right-click on a part may not be responsive at all, and I'm not very sure about the workaround (go to the menu then resume).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pokpok

Pokpok

Posted
Posted (edited)

@Lilleman: Right-click fiasco aside, this is AMAZING. A little work is required to make everything cooperate, but still... AMAZING. This is what KSP should look like!

Admittedly, Fusebox doesn't work well and DRE works but causes flight reversion failures. But I've managed to pull off many happy hours with 80 mods (force-opengl w/memory running around 2.9GB) including the Planetfactory Urania/Sentar projects (modified with some fancy Celestia textures), EVE, TextureReplacer, SP+, B9, KW(both of which part folders I pared down some), and many more heavy-hitting mods in a most beautiful, bleary-eyed wonder that is this 64-bit version; It's just beautiful.

I appreciate everyone's help, because there's no way I could've figured out this mess on my own. I only wish I could share my findings in their entirety, without causing distribution problems. What's the best way to share what I've hobbled together?

Oh my Squad... it's full of stars!

Edited by Pokpok
typos etc
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...