KSP's newest version is worse on my new PC than 1.0.5 was on my old one!

[SlabGizor117]

So, I finally tried to use the latest version and it's working terrible on my PC.  Worse than 1.0.5 was on an old Windows Vista computer.  I have two problems:

First, low framerate and more frequent crashes than previous versions.

Second, bad resolution.  I went through all the different resolutions on my game and it looked crystal clear in the main menu.  But then when I went to the KSC and the SPH(I like planes more :D)  it looked like crap.  Not that I could tell very well, it crashed about 3 seconds after I went in the SPH.

I have a Windows 10 Optiplex 790 32-bit 4gig RAM PC with a Nvidia Geforce 640 graphics card.  I don't know if that helps anybody, but I do know that it shouldn't be running KSP that badly because it did much better and crashed less frequently when I had like, 10 mods on KSP.

I hesitated to update to 1.1 at first because I heard it performed so terribly.  Is 1.1.2 still that bad??

[Rocket In My Pocket]

1 hour ago, SlabGizor117 said:

So, I finally tried to use the latest version and it's working terrible on my PC.  Worse than 1.0.5 was on an old Windows Vista computer.  I have two problems:

First, low framerate and more frequent crashes than previous versions.

Second, bad resolution.  I went through all the different resolutions on my game and it looked crystal clear in the main menu.  But then when I went to the KSC and the SPH(I like planes more :D)  it looked like crap.  Not that I could tell very well, it crashed about 3 seconds after I went in the SPH.

I have a Windows 10 Optiplex 790 32-bit 4gig RAM PC with a Nvidia Geforce 640 graphics card.  I don't know if that helps anybody, but I do know that it shouldn't be running KSP that badly because it did much better and crashed less frequently when I had like, 10 mods on KSP.

I hesitated to update to 1.1 at first because I heard it performed so terribly.  Is 1.1.2 still that bad??

Are you running KSP in 32 bit or 64 bit? If your computer is 32, you should definitely be using 32.

4Gb of RAM is kind of low, you may be experiencing crashes due to hitting your RAM cap. Good news is, RAM is pretty cheap and your computer prolly has several RAM expansion slots. (Unless it's a laptop?)

Your Processor is basically an I5 which should be fine, and the graphics card seems up to snuff for KSP as well. Have you updated your drivers and such recently?

 

[SlabGizor117]

1 hour ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

Are you running KSP in 32 bit or 64 bit? If your computer is 32, you should definitely be using 32.

4Gb of RAM is kind of low, you may be experiencing crashes due to hitting your RAM cap. Good news is, RAM is pretty cheap and your computer prolly has several RAM expansion slots. (Unless it's a laptop?)

Your Processor is basically an I5 which should be fine, and the graphics card seems up to snuff for KSP as well. Have you updated your drivers and such recently?

 

I didn't know it was possible to run KSP in 64 bit if I was using a 32 bit PC.  How can I make sure I am using 32 bit?

I believe that for 32 bit PCs 4gb is the max RAM.  I know it's not a RAM issue though, because my old PC which also had 4gb ran KSP better than this new one does now.

I should look into updating my drivers though.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Just now, SlabGizor117 said:

I didn't know it was possible to run KSP in 64 bit if I was using a 32 bit PC.  How can I make sure I am using 32 bit?

I'm not sure if it is or not to be honest? I would think it would just crash if you tried.

But to answer your question, In your KSPfolder there should be two different .exe files.

One will be KSP.exe which is the 32 bit version. The other is KSP_x64.exe which is the 64 bit version.

 

[SlabGizor117]

22 hours ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

I'm not sure if it is or not to be honest? I would think it would just crash if you tried.

But to answer your question, In your KSPfolder there should be two different .exe files.

One will be KSP.exe which is the 32 bit version. The other is KSP_x64.exe which is the 64 bit version.

 

Yeah, I'm using the 32 bit one then.

 

EDIT:  Actually, there's only one KSP.exe, and then the launcher.  Sooo, wat do?

Edited July 21, 2016 by SlabGizor117

[Kerbal101]

You are not using "32-bit PC", you are using 32-bit OS.

The "32-bit PC" would mean, you have a 32-bit only hardware - CPU that does not understand and uncapable of amd64 (x86_64) mode, like Pentium 4 or Amd K7.

A 32-bit OS can only run 32-bit software, as well as 16-bit (nobody runs those though) and it can run on 32bit hardware and 64bit hardware, because on Intel/AMD all the 64 CPUs support the older 32-bit instruction set.

 

The following configurations are possible:

1. 64bit hardware runs 64bit OS, that runs 64bit application (KSP)
2. 64bit hardware runs 64bit OS, that runs 32bit application (KSP)
3. 64bit hardware runs 32bit OS, that runs 32bit application (KSP)
4. 32bit hardware runs 32bit OS, that runs 32bit application (KSP)

A 64-bit OS (kernel) can run both 32bit software and 64bit software, because it contains two subsets of libraries (32bit libs for 32bit applications, 64bit libs for 64bit applications) which all connect to same 64bit kernel, that runs on same 64bit hardware (so called multi-lib).

Given fact its very improbable you use 32bit hardware (4.), the (3.) case is very bad one because Intel's 32-bit CPU mode limits the total address space to 4 gigabytes, half of which is occupied by hardware ports and operating system's kernel. Even if you use 64bit hardware, which "emulates" and runs legacy 32bit OS, hardware will also give said 4GB limit. That leaves only 2GB of memory available to 32bit software when run within 32bit OS. Regardless how much memory you have installed.

Furthermore, Windows is pretty "fat" operating system with W7 already requiring at least 1,5 GB of RAM to function. If pushed within 32-bit address space limit of 4GB combined OS+application, it will try to swap out chunks like crazy - and very often crash. This is why a lot of windows games do not support 32bit host windows kernel since after XP, it simply leaves too little space.

There is a trick mode (PAE), present since Pentium II, to extend the total process memory to 64GB using a segment-offset technique, thus the kernel+all applications will not be locked inside common (shared) 4GB window, but OS kernel must support it (32bit PAE-enabled kernel) - and even then individual applications will still be limited to 3GB-4GB of memory.

 

So the only reasonable thing when using Windows+KSP combo is to use 64bit host OS kernel (windows/linux/whatever 64bit version) and then run 32bit application or (better) 64bit native application. Running 32bit application on 64bit OS is possible, but the 32bit application will still suffer from 4GB max process window (as said above) and going anywhere up will cause access violation, "general protection fault" or "out of memory", regardless how much memory you have installed.

So 64bit native application on 64 bit OS using 64bit hardware is the way to go, only then installed memory is completely accessible to software. This wasn't a problem few decade ago, because applications and OS measured in kilobytes and megabytes rather than gigabytes.

TL;DR

Running KSP on 32bit W10 will cause a lot of swap action with hard disk IO massively slowing down everything, until KSP runs out of address space and crashes with either out of memory or access violation. Get 64bit hardware, install 64-bit OS, run preferably 64bit applications.

Edited July 21, 2016 by Kerbal101

[SlabGizor117]

Ok, so I don't have 64 bit hardware or a 64 bit OS.  I bought this PC 2 months ago.  You know why I didn't get 64 bit?  Because I don't have the money.  How do I get KSP to work on this PC?  Is it possible with what I have, or is it not?

Not everyone here has money for a good PC.  I shouldn't need anything better than what I had before in the first place!  How is it physically possible for the PC I have now - a BETTER PC, to run KSP WORSE than what I had before, when there was so much "under the hood" work done to the game to make it "perform better"??  

Edited July 21, 2016 by SlabGizor117

[Kerbal101]

4 minutes ago, SlabGizor117 said:

Ok, so I don't have 64 bit hardware or a 64 bit OS.  I bought this PC 2 months ago.  You know why I didn't get 64 bit?  Because I don't have the money.  How do I get KSP to work on this PC?  Is it possible with what I have, or is it not?

Not everyone here has money for a good PC.  I shouldn't need anything better than what I had before in the first place!  How is it physically possible for the PC I have now - a BETTER PC, to run KSP WORSE than what I had before, when there was so much "under the hood" work done to the game to make it "perform better"??  

32bit x86 hardware was stopped being produced around year 2005(?). Anything Intel Core2 or AMD K8 is 64bit hardware.

What you probably have is 32bit OS, which you should really change to 64bit if its W10. I think with Windows, you can find out whether you run 32bit or 64bit in Control Panel (Windows key + Break key).

KSP is delivered with TWO binaries: 32bit and 64bit, host OS bit is detected and right binary is automatically run when you start KSP.

 

Bottomline is: KSP 1.1+ uses more RAM, yes. But W10 also uses more RAM than previous windows. 32bit W10 will accept only 32bit KSP, which will have really really hard time in 4GB address limit.

This is not about money at all and not about money spent on "PC", its about technological limitations. W10 memory appetite is quite big, so getting 32bit W10 as host OS really not good.

 

Personally I run SolydK, which costed me $0 and its a 64bit OS. But if you are not ready for changing/learning OS, the best way around would be getting 64bit W10 (if you are running 32bit W10 currently). I have no idea, if MS key actually gives you license for both 32 and 64bit variants, perhaps it does.

[SlabGizor117]

12 minutes ago, Kerbal101 said:

32bit x86 hardware was stopped being produced around year 2005(?). Anything Intel Core2 or AMD K8 is 64bit hardware.

What you probably have is 32bit OS, which you should really change to 64bit if its W10. I think with Windows, you can find out whether you run 32bit or 64bit in Control Panel (Windows key + Break key).

KSP is delivered with TWO binaries: 32bit and 64bit, host OS bit is detected and right binary is automatically run when you start KSP.

 

Bottomline is: KSP 1.1+ uses more RAM, yes. But W10 also uses more RAM than previous windows. 32bit W10 will accept only 32bit KSP, which will have really really hard time in 4GB address limit.

This is not about money at all and not about money spent on "PC", its about technological limitations. W10 memory appetite is quite big, so getting 32bit W10 as host OS really not good.

 

Personally I run SolydK, which costed me $0 and its a 64bit OS. But if you are not ready for changing/learning OS, the best way around would be getting 64bit W10 (if you are running 32bit W10 currently). I have no idea, if MS key actually gives you license for both 32 and 64bit variants, perhaps it does.

So how can I get W10 for 64 bit if I have a 32 bit processor?

[Kerbal101]

17 minutes ago, SlabGizor117 said:

So how can I get W10 for 64 bit if I have a 32 bit processor?

Your processor/hardware is 64bit.

 

You had a 32bit Windows 7 previously. Don't ask why Dell did this.
This is why you can only upgrade to 32bit W10, this is MS policy. Don't ask why. 32bit OS architecture is decades outdated.

 

However, I just researched internets a bit with "windows 10 32 bit 64 bit upgrade" and found out that there is following legal path which is available by MS until July 2016:

Step 1. W7 32bit -> (upgrade) -> W10 32bit   You probably has done it already.

Step 2. W10 32bit -> (complete reinstall via Media Creation Tool)-> W10 64 bit. This is a full reinstall (but automatic) so backup your own data.

 

Its important to move via W10 upgrade from W7,  not directly, because the W10 32bit will update the internal key in your PC which should also be valid with W10 64bit. If unsure, perhaps call Dell or better MS.

Hope this helps, I moved to linux since decades and barely keep an eye on windows.

 

 

 

Edit:

Well, here is everything nicely laid out:

http://www.windowscentral.com/how-upgrade-32-bit-64-bit-version-windows-10

Just read and follow the guide.

Edited July 22, 2016 by Kerbal101

[SlabGizor117]

Ahh, didn't realize that.  I was told when I bought it that it had a 32 bit processor.

[Kerbal101]

12 hours ago, SlabGizor117 said:

Ahh, didn't realize that.  I was told when I bought it that it had a 32 bit processor.

Well, its a fact that stock 1.1.3 KSP uses around 1-1,5 GiB of memory. Its also fact that Win10 32bit uses 1.2-1.5 GiB of memory and also reserves around 1 GiB for device I/O. For this reason, 32bit Windows as host OS is really bad choice.

1.5+1.5=3 GiB.
And 3 GiB is the maximum total address window (because 1GB is needed for devices) plus 2 GiB is maximum total memory for one process/application.
If you have other programs running like webbrowser (0.4-1.5 GiB for Firefox depending on load) you will get a memory related crash if total memory use gets past 3 GiB.
If any single program gets past 2 GiB it will also crash.

You can easily track this yourself by opening process manager when running KSP, looking at total memory use by system and memory use of KSP itself.

This is all about address window memory limit in CPU when in 32bit mode, not hardware memory (RAM, real memory) bank.
Maximum numerical value expressed in 32-bit variable,  unsigned long int / ULONG_MAX , is : 4,294,967,295 (232-1) bytes = 4 GibiBytes.
Its a total maximum memory use of all programs and operating system together when CPU runs OS in pure 32bit mode and its between hardware and OS, software has no influence on this limit.
 

[SlabGizor117]

7 hours ago, Kerbal101 said:

Well, its a fact that stock 1.1.3 KSP uses around 1-1,5 GiB of memory. Its also fact that Win10 32bit uses 1.2-1.5 GiB of memory and also reserves around 1 GiB for device I/O. For this reason, 32bit Windows as host OS is really bad choice.

1.5+1.5=3 GiB.
And 3 GiB is the maximum total address window (because 1GB is needed for devices) plus 2 GiB is maximum total memory for one process/application.
If you have other programs running like webbrowser (0.4-1.5 GiB for Firefox depending on load) you will get a memory related crash if total memory use gets past 3 GiB.
If any single program gets past 2 GiB it will also crash.

You can easily track this yourself by opening process manager when running KSP, looking at total memory use by system and memory use of KSP itself.

This is all about address window memory limit in CPU when in 32bit mode, not hardware memory (RAM, real memory) bank.
Maximum numerical value expressed in 32-bit variable,  unsigned long int / ULONG_MAX , is : 4,294,967,295 (232-1) bytes = 4 GibiBytes.
Its a total maximum memory use of all programs and operating system together when CPU runs OS in pure 32bit mode and its between hardware and OS, software has no influence on this limit.
 

Ok, lots of stuff I don't understand, but I'll check out the RAM usage when I load it up next time.  So what should I look into?  Getting W10 64 bit and more RAM?
 

[SlabGizor117]

Ok, update: I looked into it a little more and by some miracle Kerbal Space Program seems to be crashing much less and I'm actually not reaching RAM limit.

 

Ok, just kidding, I lied because as I was typing that Kerbal Space Program crashed.  But it doesn't see, to be related to RAM..

 

EDIT: It was in fact a RAM crash, I'm gonna look into getting 64bit W10.  Thanks for the help!

Edited July 23, 2016 by SlabGizor117