64-bit Discord



49 comentarios

  • Hamtaro

    If it helps to make my CPU usage lower. I am down for it.

  • Pimpsik

    Yeah pls...

    it takes so much meomory!

  • Kid Krule

    @willemavjc you understand right. Yes, it's technically possible for Discord to ship a 64 bit Windows client. However, I can't tell you why they don't. For instance, the MacOS version of Discord only ships as 64 bit (because latest versions of Electron for Mac only support 64 bit as per recommended / enforced by Apple which is dropping support for 32 bit apps altogether).


    A theory (worth what it's worth) is that they chose to only ship one "universal" Windows app for simplicity's sake: less builds, less tests, less potential problems thus saving time & money. Another one could be that they are relying on 3rd party libraries (additional software incapsulated within the app) that aren't compiled for 64 bit Windows. Finally, another reason, could be that they just think the app wouldn't benefit from being compiled against 64 bit systems and thus don't even bother (that's the less-likely theory for me).


    As you can see, I don't really have a clue as to why they don't offer 64 bit Windows clients but I do support this thread suggesting that they do in the future :)

  • Dynamical

    If nothing was stopping Discord from releasing a 64-bit version, I don't understand why they don't. Discord is a newly built app and is mainly designed for gamers. I doubt anyone these days actually run 32-bit operating systems, especially gamers.

  • Kid Krule

    Discord's desktop client isn't built on React Native. The iOS app is. And React Native for iOS only supports 64 bits. The desktop app runs in Electron which ships 64 bits versions.

    The more you know ...

  • Developer Alpha

    64 BITS

  • TheGrimSilence

    I concur

  • Dr3amNightmare

    It's not going to fix memory problems most likely, not unless React Native does some magic in converting to 64 bit. But what it does provide is a faster binary, and for MacOS users, the ability to actually use Discord when 10.15 comes out (That update is supposed to say goodbye to 64 bit for good). The time is fast approaching and if Disc doesn't act soon, they could lose some users to incompatibility

  • willemavjc

    @Kid Krule So if I understand you right, the regular Windows desktop version proposed for downloading on the Discord website is 32 bits but could be 64 bits because it could be based on Electron 64 bits versions. But why do they not use Electron 64 bits versions then?

    (From my Task Manager, I can see several 32 bits processes so I assume the Electron version shipped is 32 bits.)

  • ebermoabs1001

    yes pls my cpu is going to be happy



  • Big Flubba

    I can completely agree to this and I will back this up tremendously. Discord calls (voice only with noise suppression and additional enhancements turned off) will cause my CPU of hover around the 10-15% mark. My laptop idles at 5% btw. My current CPU for my laptop is a Intel i7-4600M. To summarise it my CPU only has 2 cores 4 threads and is 64 bit. I am aware that is not sufficient for modern day tasks but it is all that I have. I am a gamer and do play modern games even esport games on that laptop (for the GPU I have the integrated GPU on the CPU Intel HD Graphics 4600). In some titles I am bottlenecked CPU wise and in some cases I have purposely completely closed Discord and use the aweful in-game voice chat for the extra 10 FPS (trust me I need it a constant 25 FPS (on a good day) is bot enough to be competitive). I only have 8GB of ram in my laptop aswell. Even if 64 bit gets integrated into Discord with even little improvements overall, any increase in performance and less consumption of my resources is needed even if it is small.

  • pchc_lx

    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ G I V E   x 6 4 

  • Mana

    Microsoft probably no longer supports 32-bit versions of Windows, so why is this still 32-bit unless it's meant for those? People who really insist on using it on such old systems can still use the web app without problems, can't they?

    64-bit brings far more to the table than just greater memory access after all, despite it being the biggest counterargument (it's NOT the only thing it does). Notably codecs for compressing and decompressing video and audio work better, and look what Discord mostly does, voice calls! Seriously, I don't know how else you manage to use a constant 20% CPU on a voice call and 50-90% when streaming in horrifyingly low quality.

    And I seriously doubt you are going to have significant number of users who fail to know if they have 32 bit or 64 bit OS, especially among gamers.

  • georgewtf

    Better yet, make it not run on electron.js

  • OberHonscho

    I want a 64bit version of this APP... NOW!!! tell the PM to get off their asses and prioritize the story

  • j0KZ


  • UbiquitousSwedishFish

    It's been years now and I have no idea why this isn't a thing yet. Please discord devs, make it happen

  • BenZooFkw

    Yes give us an 64-bit Version ! PLEASE !!!

  • TechGuy

    Years later and still no 64 bit for windows? Come on y'all...

  • k0l0r3k99

    Don't forget about ARM64! It's a big problem for devices like Surface Pro X and MacBook M1. On SPX you can use Discord app with emulation, which uses about x10 more CPU & power. Emulation is very slow.

    PS. There aren't MacOS 32-bit. Windows doesn't have 32-bit version of Windows 11, there is only ARM64 and AMD64.

    ARM64 feature request: https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/360054793351-Discord-for-Windows-10-ARM64

  • aaronfranke

    The last two comments have no idea what they're talking about. There are downsides to 32-bit aside from being limited to 4 GB RAM.

    Going 64-bit makes it easier for non-x86 platforms to emulate Discord. If you want to run a 64-bit x86 app on a 64-bit ARM device, you need both 64-bit x86 and 64-bit ARM libraries. If you want to run a 32-bit x86 app, you need 32-bit x86 and 32-bit ARM libraries in addition to the host 64-bit ARM libraries. Some modern 64-bit ARM systems do not include the ability to run 32-bit ARM software on the hardware level, so that also needs emulating.

    If there are no 32-bit apps at all on the entire system, then you don't need 32-bit libraries installed. This would save lots of disk space. Consumer Windows versions currently don't have an option to exclude 32-bit userspace, but Linux distros can do this, and there is also Windows Nano Server. Mac already ships without 32-bit userspace libraries since version 10.15. iOS also has no 32-bit userspace, and it's the same story with newer Android devices. It's possible that Windows will eventually offer this option but it can't be done as long as apps like Discord continue to use legacy 32-bit support.

    For the host itself (not app support) you can't install 32-bit Windows 11 because it doesn't exist. You also can't install 32-bit builds of Windows 10 beyond 2020 because they stopped making installers for them, but existing installations can keep being updated.

    On Linux there are some situations where 32-bit is not an option. For example, graphics drivers targeted at professionals such as those for Nvidia Quadro cards are 64-bit only. Attempting to install a 32-bit package on such systems results in the package manager asking if you want to remove the graphics drivers. There are also some distros that are 64-bit only with no 32-bit userland, such as CentOS, and Ubuntu will be doing this too in the next decade.

    There's also the simple argument that you should target the native architecture for best performance. For the vast majority of Discord's customers on desktop this means x86_64 (aka 64-bit x86). Providing *only* builds targeting a non-native architecture is silly, even if x86_64 does a good job of running legacy 32-bit x86 apps.

    For more information check out this issue open in the Steam for Linux repo https://github.com/ValveSoftware/steam-for-linux/issues/3518

  • LucasSardant

    I understand your points @aaronfranke. However my comments were targeting the replies to this thread, saying that switching would solve bugs.

    I also never said that using x86 would not ease things, just that maybe, for the devs, it was too much of a hassle compared to the benefits it brought.

    I also said that porting to another architecture was not the point of this thread, including emulation. Thing is, other architecture have their own product line (macOs, Android) or can rely on the web based version. Thus, I said that I can understand devs position at the moment.

    Concerning the switch to 64bits on windows, which is the point of this thread, there is no advantage whatsoever. However, I like your point on the fact that if all software switched to 64bits, Microsoft could ditch 32bits support. That is a good point but in now way it sounds realistic at the moment, considering the amount of applications (maintained or not) that still run on 32bits.

    Finally, for the last argument, same it is a good one, but again, we should consider the context. Are all the libs used by discord available on 64bits?

    If all libs are available, that the refactoring / rewriting of discord itself to take advantage of 64 bits is not too complex, if they are willing to maintain 32 and 64 bits versions (32 for those who still need it) then yeah, switching would be good.

    But again, it will not directly solve bugs or increase performances, as most people here think.

    Cheers :)

  • TheGrimSilence

    Electron is only for Desktop applications. It's built on chromium and developed by GitHub. React Native is only for Android and iOS, while it's desktop counterpart is simply React DOM.

  • lord_doominicYT

    it took me a while to realize, my discord was 32 bit. me has 64 bit computer. this would be useful

  • Dynamical

    > Better yet, make it not run on electron.js

    If Discord can't be bothered making it 64-bit, I doubt they will even consider using a different API for their desktop apps, as now they will have 4 builds of Discord (I think), Web, Desktop, iOS and Android.

    Sure, they could use something like Avalonia, which in theory could combine the Desktop and Mobile apps into one, and be faster and more efficient than the current versions. But this will be a lot of work for them.

  • MattBDev

    I'm strongly in favor of this. The improvements in CPU usage and the small improvement of memory management would be awesome. Right now, discord is using 3% of my CPU in the background but I am sure it would be able to use even less if it were a 64-bit application. 

  • Audi81

    Hell yes! That should've happened years ago... 32-bit is soon to become a past relic and they're just holding it back.

    Also it'd help have it run on a certain legacy operating system 👀


  • PriZii

    If any one has discord 64 bit dm me pls

  • Clip 2

    Make both version a 32 bits and a 64 bits version. It's better start thinking on 64 bits version because many systems are abandoning 32 bits OS with that in mind, the last step to abandon 32 bits will possibly be not run 32 bits programs what will make discord unusable. 64 bits version helps a lot persons with PCs like that so please hear our voices and create a 64 bits version.

  • Racoocoo

    A 64-bit app needs to be released. Literally every development tool does it for them and by default. They just choose to go with 32-bit?? 

    Anyway, I saw someone say that React Native is only for iOS and Android. React Native Windows (and macOS) exists and is developed by Microsoft. Just wanted to put that out there.



Iniciar sesión para dejar un comentario.