64bit though nice isn't everything it isn't really the holy grail if you have a badly configured system you will still crash in 64bit the same as you do in 32bit just that 64bit will give you a little more leeway.  Heck its quite easy to configure XPX in such a way you will have a OOM.

 

But in reality i don't really care P3D in 32bit is for me pretty awesome 30fps stable can do long flights with scenery settings 1 notch below max and not crash i cant ask for anything nicer I don't have to tweak a single thing.   And its not the crash-fest that FSX used to be when I gave up in disgust and spent $200 for P3D v2.2.  So I will continue to support LM though each iteration of there simulation platform. 

Can I input a slightly different aspect here?:

Microsoft builds 64bit versions of its operating systems ( in addition to 32 bit versions ). Knowing MS that is a transition method. Look at your smartphone: if it is one of the later models, it has a 64bit OS! All the add-on manufacturers had to work with that. Even conservative Apple went 64bit!

Why did they do that? Because 64 bit versions have more possibilities memory-wise. That makes a lot of difference re. features that can be added woithout fear of OOM.

I experienced 16 bit DOS and Windows. All developers were kicking and screaming when discussion of 32bit versions started. Remember OS/2? That was too early for the application developers but Oh how right were the OS/2 developers!

So, I expect 64bit version P3D to come in 2015/early 2016 ( just to lean out of the window ). I believe that developers of today are aware of this challenge and have found ways to anticipate the change in their code.

Volker

I really dont understand any apprehension to moving forward. If you dont then how can you improve. 

We have been whining for years about managing OOM errors with sliders and keeping your ram clean as possible before start. Now 64 bit is a real possibility being researched, and we are not sure.   

 

Lets move on. Otherwise why didnt I stick with Sublogic ATP.  I like improvements where possible. And having a whole lot of extra room for memory beyond 4gb is great news. I dont see performance improvements, I see constraints leveled way up on the overhead VAS.  Sure it has limitations, and sure devs will make things even more detailed. So what. We will always have sliders to adjust as needed and necessary. So one day more of us will be running of what p3d or fsx max settings are now.  Fantastic.   You cant do that now , not just for performance sake, but if your in heavy areas, then forget about it.  Its an OOM waiting to happen. 

 

So Im all for it.  Will we get soaked for 64 bit upgrades for addons? most likely, but thats what a hobby is. Still your choice to meet the improvements or you wish to stay. Nobody forcing you. But the old adage from FSX that every one hates is still true deep down in us. We are still striving after getting it to look as real as possible and enjoy the best flying experience on a PC. 

 

 

Mine cost me £80 and runs my sim as smooth as silk with everything full on

 

Which Sim is that ?

It is not about not wanting to move forward. It is about not wanting to move backwards. If this version breaks compatibility with my many and costly addons, I for one am not Prepared for it. Pun intended.

PMDG in their 777 thread mention that they are evaluating what it would take for them if p3d was 64-bit. Maybe they know some stuff from LM and that's a clue that it may be coming?

I am actually more curious about what PMDG will have to do now with their 777.  The VAS usage issue in P3D is so delicate, you have to dance quite tightly to fly the heavies (see a thread elsewhere in this forum).  The FSX PMDG 777 in FSX is already stretching the VAS limit, I wonder what kind of trick PMDG will have us do to fly it in P3Dv2!

It is not about not wanting to move forward. It is about not wanting to move backwards. If this version breaks compatibility with my many and costly addons, I for one am not Prepared for it. Pun intended.

Simple solution then. Don't move from the 32bit programs...they aren't going anywhere.

 

Meanwhile, those of us who want to move on and "pay" for it can do so also.

Simple solution then. Don't move from the 32bit programs...they aren't going anywhere.

 

Meanwhile, those of us who want to move on and "pay" for it can do so also.

Right, but that the 2.x is not left unfinished (1.4 docet).

Just my 2 bits worth on reading what has been said so far.

1. PMDG is not the bee all & end all of simming. There are quite a few of us tat are not interested in PMDG.

2. The 64bit P3D!!  Now, I'm looking at this a little bit differently...

    We all know that P3D is a training tool, not for entertainment, much as the old Microsoft ESP was..

    Maybe, just maybe, LM will develop a 64bit version with this in mind, NOT for us mass market folk, but for the serious developers that are building training  devices?

Why I think this (maybe) is that we (our VA) has just got our hands on a Frasca Model 141 prcedural simulator, made in 1992 & we want to get this back up & running. It's flight model is a North American T6 Texan. On my web searches, I found a company that sells refurbished units, such as ours, with P3D as the sim engine, for $62 000.00.

 

So, maybe, behind the scenes, a 64bit version will be for the very pro specific model users?

-duplicate - deleted

When 64-bit is available, I'll bite the bullet and get it.  The add on issue won't be a lot of fun but there is indeed a price to pay for progress - Rick

Me too, when 64 bit arrives I will jump over immediately.

 

Now with 3 screens as one wide outside view in 5920x1080 pixels I have to tone down on detail , just because an OOM will appear.

And my pc is capable of handling the detail...

 

I don''t want to go back to 2, 3 cloud layers max , where I can have perhaps even 8.

 

What is the use of all the new features if we have to choose between them instead of having them all ( if the pc is capable of running that ) ?

Me too, when 64 bit arrives I will jump over immediately.

 

Now with 3 screens as one wide outside view in 5920x1080 pixels I have to tone down on detail , just because an OOM will appear.

And my pc is capable of handling the detail...

 

I don''t want to go back to 2, 3 cloud layers max , where I can have perhaps even 8.

 

What is the use of all the new features if we have to choose between them instead of having them all ( if the pc is capable of running that ) ?

Me too +1

I will not keep spending 200.00 every time a new version come out. Already have 400.00 invested. Right or Wrong, that my decision.

I agree, its impossible to play 'catchup'.