Jump to content

µTorrent 3.0 64-bit experimental 25570


Firon

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 606
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Seems like 64bit is really the underdog of dev, when I think it should be the main focus.

Same goes for 3.1 or win8 (which btw I'm not actually using but is pretty stable for a pre-beta - at least on par with some uT builds ;) - and which was working with 2.2.1).

Meanwhile, devs insist on uT+, which not many people seemed interested in (btw, thanks for the invite, but no, sorry).

Wish your priorities were sorted differently :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's been reported by different people - it has to do with the file sorting. Sort by '1st part' or 'Parts' (the graph) - others will give you that problem (although not always).

Thanks, I came here looking for a fix for that problem. Sorting the files by "First Piece" does allow individual files to be selected/right-clicked on. This was especially problematic on torrents with a lot of different, med-sized files + small piece size. On torrents with only a couple files + maybe 2 pieces for the whole torrent you can sort by whatever and not get the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand an End-User's who has a 64bit operating system desire to have 64bit applications.

But since there are no "serious" to fix or improve the 64bit version (no updates since August), then perhaps you should remove it from availability. I mean from time to time,the 64Bit GUI reports I am getting petabyte speeds on down loads.- I only wish that it was true. ETA times show 3 (counting down to 0) seconds with 99% still needed to download.

With all the promlems i(introduced?) with the 64bit GUI, one wonders whether there are problems with the down loaded files. (Although I have yet to see any problem with down loaded files.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I can understand an End-User's who has a 64bit operating system desire to have 64bit applications.

But since there are no "serious" to fix or improve the 64bit version (no updates since August), then perhaps you should remove it from availability. I mean from time to time,the 64Bit GUI reports I am getting petabyte speeds on down loads.- I only wish that it was true. ETA times show 3 (counting down to 0) seconds with 99% still needed to download.

With all the promlems i(introduced?) with the 64bit GUI, one wonders whether there are problems with the down loaded files. (Although I have yet to see any problem with down loaded files.)

Yes, the 64-bit build has been very low on our list recently. I'm hoping we can give it some more time next year, in 2012. I'll talk to Firon & Jordy about whether we should remove it from availability for now, or just to leave it as an Alpha until we get back to it.

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the 64-bit build has been very low on our list recently. I'm hoping we can give it some more time next year, in 2012. I'll talk to Firon & Jordy about whether we should remove it from availability for now, or just to leave it as an Alpha until we get back to it.

Thanks.

This is highly disappointing. uTorrent 64 works great and with files becoming larger, I feel we need this more than ever. I wish you guys would treat uTorrent 64 as important as the 32 bit version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that the only benefit that having a 64-bit process gives is the ability to not crash with a disk cache size above about 1500MB.
Wasn't that kinda the point of x64 version? I thought people were asking for uTorrent x64 mainly to have huge caches.
And if your disk cache is using that much you have other problems to worry about.
Can you expand on that? What do you mean?

For example, when I'm seeding a ~1GB torrent, I just turn off 'Remove old blocks from the cache' and override cache size to 1GB+ so the whole torrent constantly stays in memory. (Windows caching of disk reads and writes I have disabled.)

It works well for 1 - 1.3GB torrents but not for 2GB+ ones for obvious reasons. Because I have a fast internet connection, after a day of seeding I could have close to a few hundred gigabytes of the same files unnecessary read.

Earlier Firon posted that you better leave caching to OS. Why is that? Because I haven't had a good experience with Windows caching. When my upload suddenly jumps from 2-3 to 8 MB/s and torrents that I'm seeding are larger than my RAM, Windows just consumes all of it and then ridiculous swapping starts. I even have trouble minimizing/restoring windows. But at least when uTorrent's max cache size is limited it protects me from insane swapping even at the cost of slower upload.

So can you as a developer explain what's wrong with big disk cache sizes? Maybe I'm doing something terribly wrong, I'd like to know what and why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The performance gain from a large cache with torrenting is negligible at best.

With NCQ alone (on supporting drives) the performance is usually high enough that unless you're transferring significantly faster than your cache size you won't actually see the cache get big.

When the typical user has a cache that large, they're trying to deal with an excessive number of torrents (even people with 100mbit symmetric connections).

If you're trying to save your drive, having it used little enough that it spins down is worse for it than running it ragged. It's the reason I turned off the intellipark function on my 4 WD greens in my fileserver (it would head-park after 8s of idle by default).

The ONLY reason to have any amount of increased disk cache is performance. With platter drives, there really is no such thing as "unnecessary read" because you're keeping your drive from spinning down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why everyone is screaming for Win8 support. Win8 has only been released publicly for software writers to start writing apps for it. This means: end users have no business in it other then that you may have a look and see if you like what you see. There's still plenty that's going to change, so why would a programmer already serve clients on it?

Your options are: don't run uTorrent under Windows 8 if it doesn't work or run it under a supported OS. Stop wining, after a few months Windows 8 will kick you out anyway, because it will expire around the official launch date. At that time you're allowed to ask for a uTorrent that works under Win8. Savvy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...