Author Topic: 64 bit version  (Read 13571 times)

Offline temporalis

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1
64 bit version
« on: March 02, 2008, 08:19:43 am »
Would it be possible to get a 64 bit version (to speed up decode)?

Thanks!

Offline noons

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 56
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #1 on: May 02, 2008, 04:09:40 am »
+1 on this. 64 version would make a major performance difference.

Offline RichardJ

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 70
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2008, 03:28:33 pm »
If this could be happening  ;D

Offline BigD

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2008, 12:33:55 am »
Running Vista64 I would love to see it.

... 64 version would make a major performance difference.
A 64 bit version requieres a bit less power as the 32bit emulation is no longer necessary. afaik thats all, but it would be nice anyway.

Offline noons

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 56
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2008, 04:50:19 pm »
Really the so called "emulation" will not impact how fast the program runs its virtually the same, but the actual decoding process should be a lot faster. Look at newsbin pro, the 64x version made a significant difference in decoding times.

Zeikzeil

  • Guest
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #5 on: May 09, 2008, 10:27:36 pm »
what noons said^^
would be nice though I doubt it's gonna happen anytime soon...

Offline duffman

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 32
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2008, 04:00:50 pm »
+1 I would like to see this too having just installed Vista x64 Ultimate.

Is it a big problem and programming hurdle to rewrite the software for a 64 bit OS?

Offline mc00

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #7 on: August 15, 2008, 04:19:11 am »
I agree...  1+


Offline ESM

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #8 on: August 15, 2008, 10:43:47 pm »
If it helps: my +1 can be added too ;)

Offline dacaid

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #9 on: August 16, 2008, 04:53:32 pm »

to speed up what?

Downloading? you know it wouldnt.
Par checking? i believe it's 3d party prog quickpar dll that is used, ask quickpar developpers
Unrarring? same as quickpar, ask for a 64bit winrar.

I might be wrong, but i believe that a 64bit version of altbinz wouldn't help.

Offline mysteryman

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 66
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #10 on: August 18, 2008, 09:44:13 pm »
If you check this post you will see that rdl does NOT use quickpar. If you take a closer look at the install dir... there are no dlls either. Whatever he uses to parcheck... its built in. Also the previous poster was saying that the decoding phase is what he thought would benefit.

Though, maybe I'm wrong... the decoding phase doesn't take very long at all. It might help if you are watching x264 on a pc that isn't quite ready. I had that problem when I was on my 4400+ ... it would play 720p but would start slowing down if I had any cpu spikes. I sometimes would pause nl (i used at the time) to prevent it from overpowering the player I was using.

for the winrar comment... I don't know if he's using winrar code... but its again not a dll. IF he was using winrar code, winrar does have 64bit versions see here. and 7zip has a full 64bit build (gui as well) here

[rant]
I have not switched to x64 due to extremely bad driver support from creative on the xfi... who should die a horrible death. However I will eventually drop another small fortune on a competitors card that actually works as advertized on vista 64. I do believe that the more programs with native 64bit builds the better EVEN THE ONES THAT YOU CANT NOTICE!

You may have noticed that recently a lot of OEMs have been shipping consumer pcs with vista x64 ... that tells you one thing... we're (the world) actually going to see the 64bit shift either this or next upgrade cycle. Microsoft was a bit ahead of the game (been a while since i said that) with xp 64... nobody bit; now they are.

At one time 16 bit applications were the norm, and I remember a lot of resistance to upgrade to 32bit... but my memory is pretty foggy back then. When win 9x was out they supported 16bit applications from w3.1 and dos... does that mean people preferred running them just cause in some cases you couldn't tell the difference? do people still use 16 bit applications today?

Anyway... I'm getting tired of people using the excuse "you wont notice the difference" for the reasoning not to produce 64bit applications. In many cases where this statement is truely correct the difference in compiling the application is a few lines and a few search/replaces. For the applications that WILL see significant benefit however it might be slightly more work... but the compiler flag does most the work in either case.
[/rant]

Offline Hecks

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2011
  • naughty cop
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #11 on: August 18, 2008, 09:59:23 pm »
If you check this post you will see that rdl does NOT use quickpar. If you take a closer look at the install dir... there are no dlls either. Whatever he uses to parcheck... its built in. Also the previous poster was saying that the decoding phase is what he thought would benefit.

For clarity's sake, the utilities in question may be found in the /misc folder, and they are:

par2.exe aka par2cmdline (source modified by Rdl, with multicore version for Contributors)

unrar.dll (from WinRAR)

Both are free & available from teh interwebs.

Offline mysteryman

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 66
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #12 on: August 18, 2008, 11:35:47 pm »
If you check this post you will see that rdl does NOT use quickpar. If you take a closer look at the install dir... there are no dlls either. Whatever he uses to parcheck... its built in. Also the previous poster was saying that the decoding phase is what he thought would benefit.

For clarity's sake, the utilities in question may be found in the /misc folder, and they are:

par2.exe aka par2cmdline (source modified by Rdl, with multicore version for Contributors)

unrar.dll (from WinRAR)

Both are free & available from teh interwebs.


Hecks, I was sure I was right, but checked again to be sure. Again, I saw no dlls. I downloaded a fresh copy of 0.28.1 and again, I see no dlls, or dependant exes. I know your a mod here, and you're very knowledgable about altbinz, and I'm new... so figuring there may be something I'm missing... I searched for "dll" in the changelog. I found this...

Quote
+ needed files(unrar.dll & par2.exe) are now stored inside alt.binz executable and will be deployed & setup if needed

That must be how I did not see them... however it is strange that it says "deployed and setup" yet I do not see them after execution... odd. So I apologize for the misunderstanding.

In any case, I'm fairly sure there is a 64bit 7zip dll... and as I linked, at minimum Winrar has a 64bit unrar.exe... they probably have a 64bit unrar.dll, but I did not look thoroughly enough. However, the original poster though it might help with the decoding phase (yenc merging), which is not handled by either of these dependencies, And my ending rant about not seeing a difference still stands... everything will be 64bit eventually, might as well start while its simply a neat feature than rush through cramming at the last second when 32bit is left in the dust in a few years.

Offline Hecks

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2011
  • naughty cop
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #13 on: August 19, 2008, 12:34:11 am »
"stored inside alt.binz executable" (from v 0.21.2 lol) just means they'll be unpacked and put into the /misc directory when the exe is run for the first time with PAR2 & Unrar options enabled.  Which is where you can replace the packed par2.exe with the multicore one, by over-writing it as per the instructions in the Contributors forum.

Using Vista? Look in your user directory (I assume that's where /misc goes for Vista folks).  Failing that, just Start->Search your drive for unrar.dll or par2.exe.  You don't have to believe me. ;)

As for the 64-bit debate, I have no comment.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2008, 12:38:14 am by Hecks »

Offline mysteryman

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 66
Re: 64 bit version
« Reply #14 on: August 19, 2008, 01:50:16 am »
That may be the case, because I am running vista, I probably should have checked the appdata and program data dirs... but I was on my way to work... guess I shoulda waited... no hard feelings :)

rdl: what are your thoughts on using the 64bit 7z.dll included in 7zip 64? also if you're not adverse to using an exe... (not preferred i'm sure) winrar does have an official unrar.exe that is 64bit compiled, just no dll yet. (see edit)

Of course this would also imply compiling both a 32/64 bit version. Most likely this could be done easily, by changing a couple lines and modifying the compile flags.

According to the quickpar forums, they have little/no interest in doing a 64bit build anytime soon... I might do more digging and find another par app that does have a 64bit version though


EDIT: DAMNIT! I need to take more time before I submit posts. while the download page for unrar.dll only says 32... there IS a x86_x64 directory inside this archive that includes Unrar64.dll! Don't need 7z.dll now I guess
« Last Edit: August 19, 2008, 01:55:27 am by mysteryman »