Posts: 1,483
Joined: Aug 2010
Are there, besides 4Gb+ memory, any other reasons to use 64-bit (if your hardware supports it)? I know CPU and GPU should perform a little faster and it is the platform of the future.
The extra memory potentially eliminates or reduces time spent loading and switching between processes, a condition that can lead to “thrashing” when all the processor’s efforts are spent merely loading and switching between threads.
Related to XBMC-usage, I think it is important that the software is made especially with 64 bits in mind. I don't know how this is for XBMC and all upstream components..
Hopefully, someone can elaborate?
Posts: 1,756
Joined: Feb 2006
2011-07-14, 00:58
(This post was last modified: 2011-07-14, 01:01 by X3lectric.)
er no.
read this carefully and dont jump to conclusions.
As for xbmc its comiled for both however because its less used it also has a greater deal of bugs. since no one reports them.
Posts: 1,483
Joined: Aug 2010
2011-07-14, 01:07
(This post was last modified: 2011-07-14, 13:17 by Robotica.)
X3lectric Wrote:er no.
read this carefully and dont jump to conclusions.
I know that (and others) article.
But as I see SOC's dominating HTPC and i.e. AMD Zacate would definitely benefit from dual channel RAM, since memory is shared. I do believe 4 GB RAM will benefit HTPC-usage once those SOC's start supporting dual channel RAM. Even more, since RAM is dirt cheap it will be a quick win for some extra performance.
But I am especially interested in how XBMC and upstream dependencies will (are) benefit from 64-bit.
X3lectric Wrote:As for xbmc its comiled for both however because its less used it also has a greater deal of bugs. since no one reports them.
I don't understand this.....
Posts: 1,483
Joined: Aug 2010
darkscout Wrote:Because it's BS. He's trying to state the case that 64bit is full of bugs because no one uses it so no one reports it.
I've been running 64-bit for a while now. Both 10.1 and latest git and haven't run into ANY problems that weren't OS or bit independent.
Exactly my thoughts....
Posts: 1,756
Joined: Feb 2006
@ robotica
if you wanted a excuse to buy 4gb of ram and install 64 bit OS, do you need validation and approval form other people, specially since you read all about 32bit vs 64 bit?
What I meant wasnt directly that XBMC has more bugs, but OS wise you will probably find more issues, even if not bugs. Edit And while on this XBMC depends a great deal on the OS for many things since its not agnostic.
Then I presume this is crap as well, but not everything is any 64bit OS is actually 64 bit, is it? (that was a question)
Posts: 2,145
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation:
12
I run Debian Sid amd_64 on my Celeron with 1GB of RAM just because I wanted my server (AMD Quad Core 16GB of RAM) and it to run the same OS (so I could just DistCC among other things like apt-cacher).
NO PROBLEMS WHAT SO EVER. None. Zip. Zero Nada.
Once again you come to the rescue by being useless and making crap up. Aside from your "How to compile from git" thread which numerous other people had mad instructions for you've been more of a hindrance than a help in 90% of the threads you jack.
And yes, 64 bit is 64 bit for Linux. It doesnt install the 32 bit libraries unless you ask it to.
Code:
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON `xbmc_%`.* TO 'xbmc'@'%';
IF you have a mysql problem, find one of the 4 dozen threads already open.
Posts: 1,483
Joined: Aug 2010
2011-07-14, 20:18
(This post was last modified: 2011-07-14, 20:35 by Robotica.)
Ontopic:
Is XBMC optimized for 64-bit? Or doesn't it fully leverage 64-bit potential? Are there more agruments then RAM in favor of 64-bit?
What I know is that computers can run faster on 64 bit due to extra ram and thus more caching, prefetching and less time spent loading and switching between processes.
I know FFMPEG started multithreaded development and once stable, XBMC will probably also use that. Maybe their are other dependencies that would benefit from multithreaded?
And are their other parts in XBMC that can benefit? All library stuff (fanart, thumbs, etc) are already cached. Can that be increased with more mem for better performance?
Posts: 7,256
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
121
As far as I know XBMC isn't optimised for 64 bit, and it isn't clear why x64 should be any faster than x86.
JR
Posts: 7,650
Joined: Jun 2011
Reputation:
287
there are usage patterns (e.g. floating point math, databases, video encoding etc) that can clearly benefit from 64bit, but mostly applications need to be optimized for it.
Xbmc is probably not optimized for 64bit. The result is that it most probably will not run faster/better then on 32bit, but neither will it run slower. It just does not make any difference for the user.
I'm running natty x64, because I want to and because I use the htpc also for other things besides xbmc.
Posts: 1,483
Joined: Aug 2010
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit_computing some insights
Posts: 1,483
Joined: Aug 2010
As far as I understand, Kodi needs a lot of work on Windows to support x86. This is possible in the near future but Kodi won't be x64-only anytime soon. There still are quite a few ARM v7 supported devices.
Posts: 19,982
Joined: May 2009
Reputation:
451
nickr
Retired Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 19,982
Why this thread is being revived is anyone's guess.
Kodi works perfectly on 64bit. All my media players are running 64 bit code.
If I have helped you or increased your knowledge, click the 'thumbs up' button to give thanks :) (People with less than 20 posts won't see the "thumbs up" button.)
Posts: 6,252
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
115
da-anda
Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 6,252
not Kodi on Win is the problem but many of the libs we rely on are not available as 64bit version for Windows. Also, I never ever had any performance issues with x86 on Win on my dead slow single core Sempron HTPC, so I really don't see a real need for a 64bit version on Win (most windows boxes idle anyways with Kodi running).
