I broke your RAM cap.

[Sarge222]

if dependencies (libraries) are available for x64, fixing the code for 64-bit takes one guy a couple of weeks at most. It really isn't as complicated as some in this thread make it sound.
DX9 is not an issue.

This is all, of course, assuming the code isn't r******* throughout.

[dmk]

Because under 64-bit Windows, the game has access to up to 4GB, which is more than it actually needs.

I have seen my XR using 3.5GB at one point, so this "more than it needs" isn't quite correct. Of course, I dunno why it used that much, e.g. due to memory leaks, but nevertheless it DID use somewhat near 4GB peak at least once.

what's you video card?
how much memory, chipset, driver version?

[littleheadspin]

if dependencies (libraries) are available for x64, fixing the code for 64-bit takes one guy a couple of weeks at most. It really isn't as complicated as some in this thread make it sound.
DX9 is not an issue.

This is all, of course, assuming the code isn't r******* throughout.

The only thing I can add to this, is that I know creating a 64bit exe can create more bugs. Not just because of mistakes in the actual process. I have been following the Banished (game) dev blog and in it the guy talks about the process of migrating 32bit to 64bit and how bugs appeared which where never there in the 32 bit exe. It required him to rewrite some core systems.

[Sarge222]

Correct. Hence "couple of weeks to fix the code". My point is *if* we really need a 64-bit exec, egosoft can make the transition a bit later fairly cheaply.

[Bobucles]

Once again, that is incorrect. Under 64-bit Windows, which is specified under the system requirements, the game has access to up to 4GB, which is more than it actually needs.

But that's simply wrong. I'm not doing anything fancy.I'm flying around space, doing some trades, and grabbing a ship or two. I'm in the campaign and only have a single gate unlocked. These simple tasks have brought the game up to 3GB of use (plus a 1GB video card). I am not making fleets. I am not using mods. I'm using medium video settings. I am not expanding the size of my universe in any way.

So seriously. Honestly tell me if 1GB of spare memory space (which is purely imaginary and does not actually exist) is enough for extending the game. It's barely enough for playing the current game as is!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

All a 64 bit OS does it is it lets a system with more than 4GB give a 32 bit app up to 4GB. You can NOT access memory space beyond what 32 bits allow. 32BIT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY. Learn how memory addressing works. If a program can not access memory (video cards use address space because everything on a computer has uses address space) it can not use it. The end.

There is some magic that can allow a crippled program to access an extra layer of memory space. However it is extremely expensive and inefficient operation, akin to a memory dump, and no one in their right mind would use it for a time sensitive application.

I have seen my XR using 3.5GB at one point, so this "more than it needs" isn't quite correct. Of course, I dunno why it used that much, e.g. due to memory leaks, but nevertheless it DID use somewhat near 4GB peak at least once.

Sounds like you have a 512MB video card.

[Kolreth]

There is only one question you need to understand why this is only a 32 bit application. What sort of processor does the xbox 360 hold?

Exactly.

[bumpinthenight]

There is only one question you need to understand why this is only a 32 bit application. What sort of processor does the xbox 360 hold?

Exactly.

A 64bit one. Hush, the adults are talking.

[Sarge222]

A 64bit one. Hush, the adults are talking.

That's not true, but I'll roll with it because it's irrelevant.

[Kolreth]

Explains all the amazing 64bit exes for 360 ports on the PC.

You may want to look up the meaning of the word modified. As in modified powerpc architecture.

[bumpinthenight]

A 64bit one. Hush, the adults are talking.

That's not true, but I'll roll with it because it's irrelevant.

Man I read 'xenon' and translated as xeon and why would they put one of the older Pentium era ones into those consoles so it'd have to be a 64bit.

Kolreth: The Xenon still ain't a x86 (32bit) processor either.

Either way goes to show how much attention I put on the consoles, those ones were even more under powered then I thought. To keep up the idea of trying to suggest an X game was being ported to one is laughable, especially in a thread where we're talking about how Rebirth hits over 3GB of memory and the 360s have less then half of one available total.

[Defektiv]

Fraid that link just goes to one of your posts linking to an escapist article with the PR guy spinning up the state of the game, but all good I'd already initiated the refund yesterday after reading the instructions from that thread I'm just chiding Alan with that line, once I've got a refund I won't be lurking this forum for at least a few months, likely until I see the game go on sale for $20 and get curious to see if they ever managed to make it run well.

You're pushing for a refund so you can buy the game at a later date? If I was investigating your refund I'd tell you to stop wasting valuable support resources so you can use a coupon that doesn't exist yet.

[Spikeles]

Just a quick few more notes about my earlier post regarding D3D9 and shadow memory.

X:Rebirth uses D3D9. Which was designed for WinXP and it's ilk. This also means it doesn't take into account the new WDDM functions in Vista/7/8. IF Egosoft updated it to use D3D9Ex, then it would use the WDDM functions, and it would have different usage semantics (ie, no more MANAGED pool, everything is in DEFAULT).

So, lets see a graph (numbers on the left are in Bytes)
[ external image ]
That is the actual video memory assigned by X:Rebirth. During that time i entered some stations, flew around a bit, took some highways.

You can see the MANAGED and DEFAULT pool allocations. Unfortunately as most people have guesst, most of the video memory is in MANAGED, (which means it's shadowed to system ram).

Here is another graph, this time for ARMA2 (all settings on MAX)
[ external image ]

You will notice there is no MANAGED pool. This is because ARMA2 uses D3D9Ex.

More about D3D9Ex here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library ... 85%29.aspx


For those interested, these graphs were generated using Excel, from data captured using PIX which is in the DirectX9 SDK.

PIX: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/manders/archive ... ected=true

Some extra notes about the memory management in Rebirth.
Next time you startup X:Rebirth, run this program first http://technet.microsoft.com/en-au/sysi ... 96647.aspx and leave it running til X:Rebirth ends.

When X:Rebirth it exits you'll see some output in DebugView, and it'll be the 4-5 Heaps that X:Rebirth uses (its memory management system seems to be this http://www.juryrigsoftware.com/Elephant ).

So, the game might use up the full 4GB according to windows, but it may not *actually be* in use by the Game for objects, it's just sitting in a reserved heap waiting to be allocated.



edit: made images smaller thumbnails, some extra notes about X:Rebirth.

[bumpinthenight]

Fraid that link just goes to one of your posts linking to an escapist article with the PR guy spinning up the state of the game, but all good I'd already initiated the refund yesterday after reading the instructions from that thread I'm just chiding Alan with that line, once I've got a refund I won't be lurking this forum for at least a few months, likely until I see the game go on sale for $20 and get curious to see if they ever managed to make it run well.

You're pushing for a refund so you can buy the game at a later date? If I was investigating your refund I'd tell you to stop wasting valuable support resources so you can use a coupon that doesn't exist yet.

and I'd charge back because you sold me a game that is far from a release state, "valuable support resources" hahaha, not my problem. Judging by the state of how Egosoft is handling things and how stuck in the mud this engine is I'm really doubting there will be a repurchase but I won't close that door.

[bumpinthenight]

and back to the on topic...

Just a quick few more notes about my earlier post regarding D3D9 and shadow memory.

X:Rebirth uses D3D9. Which was designed for WinXP and it's ilk. This also means it doesn't take into account the new WDDM functions in Vista/7/8. IF Egosoft updated it to use D3D9Ex, then it would use the WDDM functions, and it would have different usage semantics (ie, no more MANAGED pool, everything is in DEFAULT).

So, lets see a graph (numbers on the left are in Bytes)
[ external image ]
That is the actual video memory assigned by X:Rebirth. During that time i entered some stations, flew around a bit, took some highways.

You can see the MANAGED and DEFAULT pool allocations. Unfortunately as most people have guesst, most of the video memory is in MANAGED, (which means it's shadowed to system ram).

Here is another graph, this time for ARMA2 (all settings on MAX)
[ external image ]

You will notice there is no MANAGED pool. This is because ARMA2 uses D3D9Ex.

More about D3D9Ex here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library ... 85%29.aspx


For those interested, these graphs were generated using Excel, from data captured using PIX which is in the DirectX9 SDK.

PIX: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/manders/archive ... ected=true

Some extra notes about the memory management in Rebirth.
Next time you startup X:Rebirth, run this program first http://technet.microsoft.com/en-au/sysi ... 96647.aspx and leave it running til X:Rebirth ends.

When X:Rebirth it exits you'll see some output in DebugView, and it'll be the 4-5 Heaps that X:Rebirth uses (its memory management system seems to be this http://www.juryrigsoftware.com/Elephant ).

So, the game might use up the full 4GB according to windows, but it may not *actually be* in use by the Game for objects, it's just sitting in a reserved heap waiting to be allocated.



edit: made images smaller thumbnails, some extra notes about X:Rebirth.

Your post has brought an unfortunate smile to my face, this really does show what I'd suspected of the X series games and of a few other titles in how the system ram usage & video ram usage were always linked and sharing the 4GB space, I want to thank you for this explanation of why the situation is the way it is as well. Also thank you for explaining what tools you used to capture this info, they are now book marks for sure!

It also sounds like Egosoft could actually fix the situation too, if they wanted. For people like me who see 2+GB of vram chewed up by the game even without many of the graphics settings jacked up this is kind of an important one.

[dzhedzho]

Once again, that is incorrect. Under 64-bit Windows, which is specified under the system requirements, the game has access to up to 4GB, which is more than it actually needs.

You sure about that? On my rig seems to use all 4, and still runs pretty badly, while everything else including the video card doesn't go over 70%

[danpaul88]

From what I recall, the memory value you should be looking at is the commit size, which includes allocated but unused pages. I don't believe this is shown by default in any of the various tools in Windows but you can turn it on in Task Manager. I'm pretty sure this is the value which is capped to 4GB for a 32 bit process.

In the same display, the "Mem Usage" column in Windows XP and Server 2003, or the "Working Set (Memory)" column in Windows Vista and later, shows each process's current working set. This is a count of physical memory (RAM) rather than virtual address space. It represents the subset of the process's virtual address space that is valid, meaning that it can be referenced without incurring a page fault.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commit_charge

[pirke123]

Once again, that is incorrect. Under 64-bit Windows, which is specified under the system requirements, the game has access to up to 4GB, which is more than it actually needs.

You sure about that? On my rig seems to use all 4, and still runs pretty badly, while everything else including the video card doesn't go over 70%

This game is CPU bound. I have a quadcore i5 running at 4,5ghz and no problems whatsoever. The first 580gtx gets used 95%, the second in sli gets used 20-40%.

[dzhedzho]

Once again, that is incorrect. Under 64-bit Windows, which is specified under the system requirements, the game has access to up to 4GB, which is more than it actually needs.

You sure about that? On my rig seems to use all 4, and still runs pretty badly, while everything else including the video card doesn't go over 70%

This game is CPU bound. I have a quadcore i5 running at 4,5ghz and no problems whatsoever. The first 580gtx gets used 95%, the second in sli gets used 20-40%.

Well my cpu runs on under 50/70 utilization, so I don't think that's my issue. There doesn't seem to have any cores running anywhere near hundred for more than a second or 2...

[Ruiner82]

Well my cpu runs on under 50/70 utilization, so I don't think that's my issue. There doesn't seem to have any cores running anywhere near hundred for more than a second or 2...

I can confirm this, my CPU (i7 3770) maxes out across all 4 cores at an average of 70% CPU usage, GPU (GTX670) maxes out at 80%. The game can be running at 20FPS under this type of load.

[Spaceweed]

Rebirth wanted more than 3GB (Plus 1GB unlisted for the vid card) and then it died. I sure wish there was some way for a game to use more than 4GB!

[ external image ]

Have a crash dump to boot: http://www.gamefront.com/files/23868943 ... h+dump.zip

A gaming PC now requires a 64 bit OS and 8gb of memory. Any less and you are asking for trouble /shrug.