Jump to content

µTorrent 3.0 64-bit experimental 25570


Firon

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 606
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

build 25422 seems to be using prio_first_last_piece, even if it's disabled - torrents with just vids collections and no folders are getting all the first and last pieces for all vids dl'ed before any other; other torrents with mixed vids/others and folders don't. I have prioritize partial pieces on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2011-06-25 02:58:18

Hello. I just installed uTorrent 3.0 build 25406 on Windows 7 Home Prem x64, and it automatically starts fullscreen at boot both with or without /MINIMIZED in the registry. /HIDE also won't work at all. Creating a desktop shortcut with /MINIMIZED also no effect at all. Wtf?

UPD. Native x64 build worked fine. Solved.

Hello again. I updated uTorrent x64 to 3.0 build 25422 and AGAIN it won't start with Windows minimized. What could be done?

UPD. Clear install needed. Update causes that bug. Solved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've added a few torrents (now 20 total) to existing and it became download with 10kB/s insted of 3MB/s

I tryed to close it an it hang.

I killed utorrent.exe, then rerun. All the new torrents in list have status Checking 0.0% except last added, it download speed was ok until I added a new torrent.

Then I removed last added torrent. Now all the new torrents have status Checking 0.0%.

If I stop torrent with Checking 0.0% status and then start anyone of them utorrent hangs and become to load 1 core of my processor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've finally made a 64-bit release of µTorrent 3.0 that is stable enough for public testing. Please check it out! It may be considerably buggier than the 32-bit release, but please report all bugs specific to the 64-bit release in this thread.

It is strongly recommended to backup all your settings when testing this out, as downgrading may not work correctly or at all.

I don't understand something. All of µTorrent's settings are in the registry, so much so that in the µTorrent directory all you see is one file. Are you saying the 64bit version stores the settings somewhere else (in another part of the registry) such that the setting must re-entered manually?. Another thing -- what advantages does it offer us 64bit users compared to the current stable 32bit version? Very often I've upgraded software from the existing [working] 32bit versions to 64 without noticing any difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've finally made a 64-bit release of µTorrent 3.0 that is stable enough for public testing. Please check it out! It may be considerably buggier than the 32-bit release' date=' but please report all bugs specific to the 64-bit release in this thread.

It is strongly recommended to [b']backup all your settings when testing this out, as downgrading may not work correctly or at all.

I don't understand something. All of µTorrent's settings are in the registry, so much so that in the µTorrent directory all you see is one file. Are you saying the 64bit version stores the settings somewhere else (in another part of the registry) such that the setting must re-entered manually?. Another thing -- what advantages does it offer us 64bit users compared to the current stable 32bit version? Very often I've upgraded software from the existing [working] 32bit versions to 64 without noticing any difference.

I really hope someone will respond globally to ages old question related to ANY software with two xxbit versions. Some geeks chose to strike out ahead of the pack with larger (twice the size) bit software and "upgrade software from the existing [working] 32bit versions to 64 without noticing any difference."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand something. All of µTorrent's settings are in the registry, so much so that in the µTorrent directory all you see is one file. Are you saying the 64bit version stores the settings somewhere else (in another part of the registry) such that the setting must re-entered manually?. Another thing -- what advantages does it offer us 64bit users compared to the current stable 32bit version? Very often I've upgraded software from the existing [working] 32bit versions to 64 without noticing any difference.

The settings aren't actually stored in the registry. We suggest backing up because the 64-bit build is experimental and may damage your settings file. So far it hasn't been the case, but it's worth proceeding with caution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope someone will respond globally to ages old question related to ANY software with two xxbit versions. Some geeks chose to strike out ahead of the pack with larger (twice the size) bit software and "upgrade software from the existing [working] 32bit versions to 64 without noticing any difference."

If you were asking for a reason for doing so there are many. You will get drastic different answers from different people. I'll state some basics here, for you, and my reason for upgrading (and then downgrading) to UTx64 and let you go from there on your own.

OS independent

x64 software runs natively on x64 operating systems.

For windows; x64 allows for addressing more than 4Gigs of ram, more than 2Tb single volume hard drives.

The downside is Windows Vista and 7 drops x16 (16-bit) support on x64. While this may not be of interest to you; keep in mind that 6 of the top 10 most used installers are still 16-bit. That means that if you have x64 Windows you may not be able to install 32-bit programs, since they use 16-bit installers.

There are also small, but potentially noticeable differences between Intel's x86-64 and AMD's AMD64. Most specifically is AMD supports forced direct access to CPU cores; and Intel directly abides by mandatory signed code rules. If you want security and a little bubble for your system, Intel is the way to go. If you tend to tinker and take stuff apart (or test betas, alphas, and pre-alpha DV code) stick to AMD.

The quickest answer to this question is that x64 software give you better stability, speed, and results on x64 OSs. Despite this, you may or may not notice any change personally.

Most generically; you should always chose to use STABLE x64 software on x64 hardware for best performance and results.

My developing and coding interests, and frequent testing of beta and alpha programs aside, for uTorrent I went x64 for two reasons more than anything else:

First it's x64 (see note above)

Second to allow greater memory access, allowing me to run the program full tilt without any regard for RAM or drive space. See image of Taskman below:

4e53d892.th.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

With x64 it would wonder into the 6gig range from time to time. No issue in system stability. However it is still Alpha-level buggy. So for now I'll wait till they work some of the kinks out; like the inability for selections in the program to STAY selected. Even I'm not fast enough to keep up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Can you please tell me the advantages to using a 64bit version of Utorrent?

The big advantages I can see are memory allocation and system stability. I regularly download Linux distros and updates via BT using uTorrent and some of those have hundreds, or thousands of files. The big change I noticed was not in the downloading, but in the moving of completed files to new locations; and the ability to continue to trickle-seed many, many dozens of files in the background without effecting overall system stability.

A second thing to note; with the more features that uT is adding such as this new (still somewhat confusing) streaming stuff and auto-playback plugins, plus preview extensions, uT will require more and more memory. In time, you could noticeably affect system stability with that alone.

I'm not aware of many 2.x Tb plus files out there, yet, but that could be a bonus to some as well.

The big thing for many x64 fans is to simply dump x32 and run native applications. Not because programs like uTx32 on their own are an issue, but there are levels of underlying compatibility that can cause instability.

The Wikipedia pages on x86-64 and AMD64 have links to "text books" that are freely avalible that cover such issues in details. Their under the further information boxes in the side of the two articles near the bottom quarter of the pages. There are also links from the various windows pages on WP. Give them a look if you're looking for a reason to switch. If you are looking for an excuse to stay put for now....

I'd suggest that unless you are comfortable with breaking stuff and really torturing a program to find bugs and errors; stick with the x32 version till someone finds out what some of the major complaint flaws are. There aren't many release pages in this forum that have over 15 pages AND most of it is bug reports and issues. For now, wait till they figure out what they did wrong; and how to fix it.

Oh, as for FireFox. Mozilla has a system in place for it right now.

Mozilla appears to have two channels that have x64 releases. The first is the general pre-alpha (they call alpha Aurora) releases termed Nightly. They're here:

http://nightly.mozilla.org/

These are what testers would call branch developments. They are developed independently and without much oversight. They tend to work OK more often than not, but any bugs that do pop up are often major, and are not covered by any policy. You're SOL if something goes wrong.

The second is the evaluation Versions. These are not directly released to the public. and take some work to dig into the right spots of the sights. There are also outdated versions that are x64 ports.

And we'll end this line right there since this is not about FireFox. I sent you a Fox mail from the send email option with more info about FF.

Send email to liestc:

Subject FireFox

Hope that helps and feel free to respond directly through email if you want more help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...