|
 |
| Author |
Message |
|
MadBoris
|
Posted: 01 Mar, 2007
|
|
| Forum Scout |
 |
 |
Joined: 15 Feb, 2007 Posts: 1458
|
otomato wrote: Then tried to play a saved & well advanced game... Then it crashed, when it reached the 1.5 bar!
Well that sounds like the issue. So when you hit the V key in the bat, you could see the >2Gb file header there correct?
Next, as was said above just type bcdedit to see the enumeration and you can double check your boot switches.
Finally, open a command prompt first to do all this, don't type it at the Run command.
Once those things are done it is pretty fool proof.
Lastly, make sure you have enough virtual memory(paging file) set aside when/if it becomes needed.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
otomato
|
Posted: 02 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 01 Mar, 2007 Posts: 6 Location: Paris
|
|
thanks guys for these answers...
i had to figure out how to run bcdedit properly and finally did, so i tried my huge saved game, and it passed the 1.5 bar...
So it worked...
(though Vista crashed at first reboot, then SC at first launch!)
Thanks a million.
Let's wait for a patch now!
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
gsusfrk
|
Posted: 02 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 21 Feb, 2007 Posts: 502
|
|
okay, guys the novice is back in the forums, so i did wat i was supposed to but when I started the batch file and pressed a, a fatal error came up about not being able to run SupCom.exe ?? huh? and thus I couldn't see the 2Gb> thingy... oh, i dunno if this helps or not, but I gotz XP home ed.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
MadBoris
|
Posted: 02 Mar, 2007
|
|
| Forum Scout |
 |
 |
Joined: 15 Feb, 2007 Posts: 1458
|
gsusfrk wrote: okay, guys the novice is back in the forums
Dude, I didn't want to see novices mess up their stuff, so I mentioned advanced users.  But if you still need to move ahead, re-read the directions. You likely didn't unzip it properly, maybe didn't copy the exe into the folder. Put the folder on your desktop where you should not have any permission issues. Also make sure the exe file is not marked read only.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
gsusfrk
|
Posted: 02 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 21 Feb, 2007 Posts: 502
|
hey noobs r kool lol
i got it workin but wat bout "BCDEDIT /set increaseuserva 2900" code... wat do i do bout that? iz that for XP?
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
GGMan
|
Posted: 02 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 02 Mar, 2007 Posts: 6
|
|
Many Thanks, worked like a treat. I hope you get a big thank you from THQ for there blunder.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
otomato
|
Posted: 03 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 01 Mar, 2007 Posts: 6 Location: Paris
|
|
hi
Has anyone tried to install the new patch with the fixed version of supremecommander.exe?
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
MadBoris
|
Posted: 03 Mar, 2007
|
|
| Forum Scout |
 |
 |
Joined: 15 Feb, 2007 Posts: 1458
|
otomato wrote: Has anyone tried to install the new patch with the fixed version of supremecommander.exe?
Anyone can test it. Worst case scenario is having to do a fresh reinstall if the patch doesn't take. But since this patch actually patches the exe itself, the patch process may choke on it. I hear the new patch still doesn't have the exe >2GB enabled, but I haven't verified that.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
otomato
|
Posted: 03 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 01 Mar, 2007 Posts: 6 Location: Paris
|
|
Ok, so, tested it...
And it didn't work.
So I patched my saved version of the original .exe file, and then i'll try to fix it again with your .bat!
it's supposed to work, isn't it?
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
MadBoris
|
Posted: 03 Mar, 2007
|
|
| Forum Scout |
 |
 |
Joined: 15 Feb, 2007 Posts: 1458
|
otomato wrote: Ok, so, tested it... And it didn't work. So I patched my saved version of the original .exe file, and then i'll try to fix it again with your .bat!
it's supposed to work, isn't it?
Thx, before you set the header on the new exe, first run V to view the new patched one to see if GPG actually officially added the header. That too would be good to know for sure.
Thanks ahead.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
otomato
|
Posted: 03 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 01 Mar, 2007 Posts: 6 Location: Paris
|
|
well, apparently not...
a shame...
the fix worked, now i'll try to play a little and tell you if it's safe!
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
wrecklass
|
Posted: 03 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 20 Feb, 2007 Posts: 173 Location: Denver,CO
|
otomato wrote: well, apparently not...
GPG's patch notes stated that they are aware of the memory issue, but chose to release the patch without a fix because of other issues they wanted to see go into the patch before the weekend. I suspect this means they'll do something about the issue in a later (next) patch.
I'm not sure if GPG will fix this anyway, as the entire fix requires a change to the OS as well as to their executable, so they may leave it up to us to do the fix ourselves. Though they could put in the Headers and just give instructions to fix the OS.
_________________
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
MadBoris
|
Posted: 03 Mar, 2007
|
|
| Forum Scout |
 |
 |
Joined: 15 Feb, 2007 Posts: 1458
|
wrecklass wrote: Though they could put in the Headers and just give instructions to fix the OS.
Give that man a prize.
They don't even have to give instructions just mention the header support is in, as I have said they likely don't want to put themselves in the position of telling/suggesting people to modify the OS. This way the advanced folks who know can do it.
They likely don't want us crashing when hitting the cieling/nor changing it ourselves forever. So it only leaves a simple solution/change on their end is all that is needed.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
Cataphract_40
|
Posted: 04 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 04 Mar, 2007 Posts: 65 Location: Chicago
|
Alright, I decided to register here so I could get some more specific help with my problem
Long story short, this fix didn't seem to do anything for me. I have a saved game where I'm in the very last UEF mission, defending the Black Sun against attack. It's about 70% charged, last I checked, and I've got a rather large fleet of gunships flying around and beating everything that comes at me.
The sad part is, about ten seconds after I saved, the game crashes. I don't know why...but I have a feeling it's this memory issue. c0000005 is the exception code, which I have done a little research on, and it seems to be memory-related. I did this fix, and nothing seems to work; I'm still crashing ten seconds after the save point. Help?
(I can give you more info if you need it!)
_________________
"To be a hero is about the shortest lived profession on Earth."
-Will Rogers
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
MadBoris
|
Posted: 04 Mar, 2007
|
|
| Forum Scout |
 |
 |
Joined: 15 Feb, 2007 Posts: 1458
|
|
Cataphract - firstly, i would suggest you make a seperate thread, many people won't come here to see your post, best bet to start a new one.
Try and provide more error detail there.
Also, make sure you submit the error report, if the error report window pops up. Off the top of my head this doesn't seem familiar.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
pipomolo
|
Posted: 05 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 16 Feb, 2007 Posts: 10
|
MadBoris wrote: Code: BCDEDIT /set increaseuserva 2900
One question: why do you set the limit to 2900 M, and not the maximum (or default in XP) of 3072 M ?
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
MadBoris
|
Posted: 05 Mar, 2007
|
|
| Forum Scout |
 |
 |
Joined: 15 Feb, 2007 Posts: 1458
|
pipomolo wrote: One question: why do you set the limit to 2900 M, and not the maximum (or default in XP) of 3072 M ?
Just for extra breathing room for the kernel. Of course you could allocate all 3GB but...
Many places use this number, which first comes from MS. So to be safe I stuck with it just in case. If you find you are crashing at 2900, then I guess you can raise it,  but I haven't done any testing on it.
On the other hand, if you never hit 2.9GB, then there is obviously no need to raise it.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
AnonymousOne
|
Posted: 05 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 04 Mar, 2007 Posts: 52
|
That file you posted is not on File Front any more
"Your download has failed. There were no available download servers. Click here to try your download again."
http://files.filefront.com/3GB_enabler2 ... .html/11/1
I have Longhorn (Vista Server) x64 AMD SupCom v3220 and really want your patch. 80km maps & 3AI are all I like
The better I get at the game means the faster I crash because of the build limit ... sigh.
You mentioned that x64 just need to run a bat file? Can you just post the text of that file so I can make it?
_________________ Cheers,
Anon
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
MadBoris
|
Posted: 05 Mar, 2007
|
|
| Forum Scout |
 |
 |
Joined: 15 Feb, 2007 Posts: 1458
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
pipomolo
|
Posted: 05 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 16 Feb, 2007 Posts: 10
|
MadBoris wrote: Just for extra breathing room for the kernel.
You are right, I just realised : if one has just 3GB of RAM, it can be a smart idea not to let a single process allocate all of it and have the others play in the swapfile, in this case, allowing 2.9GB is like reserving 100MB for others to live.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
andyr2005
|
Posted: 08 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 01 Mar, 2007 Posts: 27 Location: Gateshead, United Kingdom
|
|
Hi,
MadBoris, I have a few questions which I hope you will be able to answer since they are sort of about this topic.
1. On a normal Windows XP SP2 install, I would normally disable the Data Execution Provention feature of my 64 Bit CPU and the OS. But as stated by MS, this will also disable the Physical Address Extension abilities of such a CPU. However, the PAE can be manually re-enabled with the /PAE in the boot.ini. Now before trying your fix here, PAE was disabled, and was just wondering if you little hack is actually some sort of software emulation of what PAE actually does, and whether or not I sould re-enable this feature.
Thanks, Andrew Robinson.
_________________
BT Vision THD Manager
Note: Information I give is NOT officially from BT.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
AnonymousOne
|
Posted: 08 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 04 Mar, 2007 Posts: 52
|
This patch works great ! very easy to do. Thanks for the download support!
SupCom v3220
I went from crashing every time on 80x80 maps to crashing only about 30% of the time.
When I do crash it is not cause I hit the 2gig limit. The one time I did watch it with task manager I crashed SupCom when max mem reached was 1.6 gig. So something else is going on ... I have a clean install. (no mods/ no ai / etc) I have my unit cap set to 650 and crashes seem to happen around when I reach 620 or more units. I play 2 on 1 and AI unit count doesn't seem to matter.
Also a quick note for people. I checked my page file which was auto managed by windows and it showed it was using 2gig. Oddly enough the win recomendation was 3gig. I forced the starting page file size to 3gig expandable to 4gig.
Thanks again for your patch !
_________________ Cheers,
Anon
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
KakimotoRift-S15R
|
Posted: 08 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 08 Mar, 2007 Posts: 3
|
Yes, this is my problem too. But I want to wait for the patch instead. Don't want to risk it. 
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
MadBoris
|
Posted: 09 Mar, 2007
|
|
| Forum Scout |
 |
 |
Joined: 15 Feb, 2007 Posts: 1458
|
andyr2005 wrote: 1. On a normal Windows XP SP2 install, I would normally disable the Data Execution Provention feature of my 64 Bit CPU and the OS. But as stated by MS, this will also disable the Physical Address Extension abilities of such a CPU. However, the PAE can be manually re-enabled with the /PAE in the boot.ini. Now before trying your fix here, PAE was disabled, and was just wondering if you little hack is actually some sort of software emulation of what PAE actually does, and whether or not I sould re-enable this feature. For you on a 64 bit OS, all you have to do is add the header to the executable telling it is allowed to actually use >2GB (which hopefully GPG will officially do some day). No other changes should be necessary for a 64 bit OS, even with DEP off AFAIK. PAE would not need to be used because PAE is actually a x86 kernel extension (to mimic 64 bit addressable addresses) not a x64 extension so it really should not be needed since you are all native x64. Just let the exe know it can use more memory and all should be fine. You could always give it a test since there is no harm in trying, start an 80 x 80 map with 7 AI and hide in the ocean on the corner of the map and walk away and check your maximum memory usage in takmgr after an hour or so. Microsoft wrote: PAE is supported only on 32-bit versions of the Windows operating system. 64-bit versions of Windows do not support PAE.
Infact, in all of this I am not even suggesting people use the '/PAE' switch at all, even for the 32 bit OS's. Just a /3GB switch and /userva telling Windows how much application space to use, as the readme states.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
Regiment
|
Posted: 09 Mar, 2007
|
|
Joined: 16 Feb, 2007 Posts: 25 Location: Grantham, Lincs, UK
|
|
I get the crashes with 64bit vista and 2gb ram, will this cure it?
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
 |
 |
|