What difference does the 64-bit DX11 *launcher* make?

[SentineI]

Recently-ish FDev silently released a 64-bit DX11 version of the launcher, which is mysteriously *5* times the size of the normal launcher (125MB vs 25MB!).

Can someone please enlighten me what difference it makes to the game? Is it faster? Better looking? Are there more in-game gfx options? i.e. Why does it exist at all?

 

[SentineI]

Given the lack of replies, it seems that everyone is as clueless as me. Come on FDev, why should I bother installing a 5x larger launcher?

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

It's identical, except for the size.

After 1.5.0.3, both 32 and 64bit work the same. I usually just run 64bit on my home PC though. No idea why, I just feel like I should.

On my laptop I use 32bit cos 64bit causes sound stuttering during combat. Probably because my laptop doesn't even reach the minimum requirements to play ED. Lol

I'm scared to buy horizons in case my laptop can't even boot it up. Then I won't be able play ED at work anymore lol

 

[SentineI]

It's identical, except for the size.

I find it hard to believe that something marked as "DX11" makes no difference at all. Also, 64-bit executable should not be more than double the size of the existing 32-bit launcher, so again why is it so much larger than that?

 

[_Dastardly_]

I find it hard to believe that something marked as "DX11" makes no difference at all. Also, 64-bit executable should not be more than double the size of the existing 32-bit launcher, so again why is it so much larger than that?

A search on this forum shows that the dx11 installer includes the Dx11 installer instead of the older Dx installer(s).

 

[fruitbat]

I seem to recall it was to do with the shaders for the planets in Horizons. 64 bit meant they could do it, 32 not.

Technically I have no idea why, and I might be remembering wrong.

 

[Gameson]

Recently-ish FDev silently released a 64-bit DX11 version of the launcher, which is mysteriously *5* times the size of the normal launcher (125MB vs 25MB!).

The clue is in the filename. One installer also contains an installer for DX11 (a requirement for Horizons) while the other does not.

Seems pretty clear to me.

 

[SentineI]

the dx11 installer includes the Dx11 installer instead of the older Dx installer(s).

The clue is in the filename. One installer also contains an installer for DX11 (a requirement for Horizons) while the other does not.

Thanks. It was not obvious to me at all that "DX11" meant it included the DX11 installer.

Still not sure why it's required, since I have Windows 7, and am playing Horizons just fine using the original 32-bit launcher (that did not include DX11 installer).

 

[Gameson]

Still not sure why it's required.

It's completely 100% standard these days for game installers to include installers for any underlying APIs (DirectX, Visual C, etc) that are not guaranteed installed on the supported OS. This is because those installers also contains the recommended method of detecting whether a supported version of that API is already installed. If your app needs DX11, it's not a good idea to try and write your own code to detect if DX11, or any other DX version that is DX11 compatible, is installed - instead you just execute the DX11 installer and if it exits without an error, then you're good to go.

Everyone does it. Do you have a Steam account, ever noticed how when you launch a steam game for the first time it runs a bunch of installers, even for things you already have installed? it's the exact same thing going on.

Minimum OS requirements for ED (non-horizons) is Win7SP1, which will always have DX10 installed, so there was no need for a DX installer, but DX11 isn't a guaranteed install on Win7 (it is on Win8) and Horizons needs DX11, so that's why it's now included but wasn't before.