Search the Community

Hi I'm having a strange problem right now, so I'm building a base on the moon with modules and fps drops caught my attention. So when I'm looking any different direction that other vessels its fine (50-70fps) but when I'm looking at my base landers fps can drop to 15. Anybody have the same problem?

Long story short I get 40 - 60 fps in crafts above 150 parts. The stock Acapello craft is 60+ FPS. "Stock" FAR shuttle gets the same with a few more parts. Really happy with that since its better than it was last I played a few years ago on the same machine. Even with a 200+ part craft made from mainly heavily modded parts I still get about 25 fps which is what I was aiming for. The problem is when I add just a few more parts to my giant craft everything slows ways down to about 7-10 fps. My RAM seems to be bout gone. My CPU and GPU are maxed. Even the GPU ram (6gigs) is gone which really amazes me. I installed and uninstalled all the graphics mods and they didn't really seem to do much to my FPS. I turned all the textures and setting in KSP to minimum and it didn't do much. The weird part is the clock never even turns red which is new to me. I used to always play with a red clock. I had about 150 mods installed at one point but am now down to the bare minimum and it didn't really make a big impact on FPS. I just really want to get 20 fps in a 300 part craft while landed or in space. I want to be able to walk around and maybe even land a plane on it! Was also planning on doing the flying part 100% IVA with headtracking which makes sub 20 fps tough. Funny enough IVA doesn't hurt my FPS even with rpm + DE. Oh, and I want to record it RIP FPS! If I buy a better CPU will this problem get a lot better? I've been out of the loop for some years. I suspect a few of the parts I'm using (gondolas) are not optimized as well as possible so how hard would it be to just throw a flat mesh on them or something? PC specs: Here is with 283 parts. My old design had 308 but had very similar performance. Here is with the Gondola taken off. Its about 45 parts. Takes a big FPS when going fast in thick atmo but I don't do that with this craft except for fun anyway. Here I also took the innards out which was about 75 more parts. It was hard to fly with the balance so messed up but fps still wasn't too bad. A little inconsistent. Stock test with same everything for reference. 150 parts on this does a bit better than myship striped to120. The pictures I have been showing may leave you wondering where the part count is coming from so here are a few shots of what I got. It's supposed to be a self sustaining habitat so there are a lot of little bits. All the gondola hangers and airship hangers are full of fuel tanks. Lot of STX and SPX parts inside 2 hangers with scan sat stuff as well as stock robotics. I know its a lot lol its fitted for a full mission to eve with no support or refuel. Here is my mod list: Here are my settings: My mod list as reported by AVC:

In the main menu I get ~300fps (with a 300Hz screen), and in "Space Center" view, I get ~140fps. When in a craft on Kerbin surface/flying trough Kerbin atmosphere I get ~30fps, and when in Kerbin orbit, with camera pointed away from Kerbin I get ~65fps, and when looking at Kerbin I get ~50fps When near Mun, I get 100fps when looking away/85fps when looking at the Mun, so I'm thinking it has to do something with either Scatterer or AVP's atmosphere components Near Eve it's 60fps looking away/~43fps looking at. Thing is, I'd be more than happy with these FPS' if I didn't get 100+ yesterday Specs: Ryzen 9 6900HX RTX 3070 Ti Mobile 16GB 4800Mhz RAM (Visual) Mods: AVP with 8k textures DE_IVA Extension EVE Redux (as AVP dependency) Parallax Scatterer TUFX (default profile) Waterfall Settings: Terrain detail: High; Terrain Scatters True; (Terrain) Scatterer Density: 100% Render Quality: Fantastic; Texture Quality: Full Res; Aerodynamic FX Quality: Normal; Reflection Refresh mode: Every frame; Reflection Texture resolution: 2048; Terrain Shader Quality: High Resolution: 1920x1080; Anti-Aliasing: 8x; V-sync: Every second V-blank; Frame Limit: Default (Changing it doesn't do anything); Pixel Light count: 64; Shadows Cascades: 4 Mod settings: Scatterer: High; Kopernicus: All default Again, I'd be happy with these FPS' if yesterday they weren't some 70fps higher

So I'm very Laggy in KSP and I wanna fix it I heard a way on Youtube, and it said using unity 5.. when I checked it, I wasn't able to find a version for the on final approach which is KSP 1.12.3... any ideas? thoughts? links? discussions?

Creating maneuver node reduces FPS in map view, from 60 to 35-40. If I delete maneuver node FPS increases back to 60 again. GPU usage is around 9%. It must be CPU related but I don't understand why. Any idea to fix this?

I have stock KSP, just kerbal engineer and kos (and module manager and toolbar thingie mod). Even though, when i look the (or a planet) my KSP frame rate drops badly. I've never checked my fps on KSP, neither i know a way how to, but i would say it drops to 15 fps or less. Does somebody has a solution or anything that i have to set off on settings to fix this?

This a patch for BD FPS work in the lastest version of KSP. For those who dont know BD FPS is a very old mod that adds weapons to the game like m4, m16a4, etc... Disclaimer:use RCS when equipping a gun. Link:https://drive.google.com/open?id=1O1UFmrBjgbe-aqQyIjWSLGQ7q-fpz0tk

I get 2-3 fps and max 7 fps bruh why my specs are i5 4590 970 4gb and I have 24gb of ram (Ddr3) and can you give me a list of heavy mods to remove and mods are: https://imgur.com/a/GFk54nH yeah I maxxed out grafics and I get more fps first then much lower but like 10 percent gpu usage and 50 percent cpu usage yeah and visual mods are welcome but lowwww cpu usage whones thx

Hi, I recently have a problem with the game, (i don´t speak english very well, sorry) . The loading time is too long and it´s weird because i dont have any mods installed more than mech jeb, and when the game finishes the load, the main menu freezes for about 2-3 minutes. Also, when i switch between the buildings (VAB to Tracking Station, for example) the game takes too long to load. And it´s weird because i´m running at good fps (30-40) , and it only happens in the 1.7.x and 1.5.x (i haven´t tested yet in 1.6.x).

This is just a rant about KSP's memory and GPU/CPU usage. How good/bad do you think it is?Can it be improved? KSP isn't, by a long way, the most graphically taxing game out there. Compared to the kinds of graphics demands we see in other modern games - even on their lowest settings - the graphics demands in KSP are minimal by comparison, especially in vanilla. Which makes it so frustrating how this game can grind to a virtual halt just because you wanted to install one or two mods, or because you happened to have been playing for 5 hours straight. Even though my PC is at least 7 years old (2GB video RAM, 16GB of installed RAM, an i7 multicore processor) it still more than meets the game's current MINIMUM specifications as set by Squad. The fact an old bucket like mine can still run this game fairly well, even with many mods installed, says it all. But do I sound like an entitled little gamer when I say that if I have 7GB of RAM available (as shown in Task Manager) I expect the damn thing to be able to access it, and it can't. Even in 64-bit! Or perhaps this is still more of a Windows problem than a Unity problem? Or both? I just get the feeling that KSP could and should be able to run at least 60fps even with many mods installed, and it's frustrating that it doesn't. Depending on the scene I can get maybe 24-30fps (in v 1.6.0), but that depends heavily on how busy the scene is. While docking with a moderately sized station it can drop to 9-12fps (I thought 1.6.0 was suppose to improve multicore rendering for multiple ships, but I really can't see any difference); in maximum time warp I've seen it drop to 6fps and then shoot back up to 20 then back to 8. Indeed the framerate can be VERY inconsistent with frequent lag, and again I can't tell if it's my PC (toggling V-sync makes little difference, nor does setting a frame limit) , the mods, or the game engine. And please don't tell me to stick to vanilla; mods have defined this game just as they have defined SkyRim. Even Squad members themselves (Nova Silisco for example) contributed mods to this game. KSP just isn't appealing to me any more in vanilla, because I KNOW KSP can do so much better. The forums are always full of players suggesting or requesting new mods, especially visual enhancements, which says to me the community wants this game to be as good as it can be, and we really need to be asking if it is. Even after Unity5 and 64-bit mode were introduced. I'm not a programmer but I can't help feeling that despite the move to Unity5 and its undoubted improvements, KSP still isn't running at its full potential; and it feels as if it never will as long as it's still using Unity. Programmers, mod-makers feel free to disagree. My suggestion to Squad-Private Division: stop producing DLC and focus instead on continuing to improve how this game already uses available resources. No point in creating more 'stuff' for the game if in turn the game becomes so bloated and slow no-one can play it. No-one should need a StarCitizen-type setup to play this game satisfactorily, it ain't Star Citizen!

Hi, I've been wondering about my game's performance. The main things that are bothering me (in order) are the loading times between scenes, garbage collection stuttering, and low FPS at ground level. I know I have a lot of mods installed. I am wondering if this is a case of just being too greedy or if there is something else at play? If it is a limitation of the game at this time, then ok (although it is sad, because there are so many good mods ). The game uses up about 9GB of RAM on start up. I am using memgraph. I have SVE installed with Scatterer. I have my antivirus set to exclude my install path. I am running from an SSD. I get about 20-25 FPS at the launchpad with a reasonably detailed 3.75m ship. Stuttering gets worse the longer the game runs (memory leak?). I am running full shadow cascades, full pixel lights (turning these down makes little difference tbh), with full texture resolution and full terrain detail. I have 32GB of RAM i5 7600K @ 4.42ghz max nVidia GTX 1060 6GB Here is my log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/u7dkl4dszr1yw0p/KSP_perf.log?dl=0 Are there any other things that might be affecting performance and loading times?

Hello everyone! Recently I have experienced a problem with FPS in KSP. But it's quite unusual. Ihave launched a probe to Duna. Everything was going fine until the moment I started braking to get into a Duna orbit. My FPS from about 55-60 dropped down to 15! BUT, the FPS goes back to 60 when I timewarp (10x or more). I switched to another satellite orbiting Duna, but everything is ok with it. Any help would be appreciated, because it is a bit uncomfortable to play with such FPS.

I was wondering, does the KSP physics engine utilize the GPU processing capability and computational power? Or is it all CPU?

Hey. I'm having a massive FPS drop near space stations or planetary bases since KSP wants to calculate every single unit, making the game unplayable (docking at 10fps with only the first docking port unlocked was a nightmare!) I was thinking about some solutions, and 2 possible solutions came to mind, although the 1st is a more definitive one: Disable physics calculation for every single object. We simply don't need the game calculating everything in a base or station. So if I already have a base built or a station in orbit and stable for x seconds, the game should just stop calculating everything but the main parts (maybe this could be activated once we rename the ship and make it a station or a base, each having it's own parameters to disable physics calculation); Bring Max physics delta-time per frame back. Why is this not available in the console version of the game? We need more performance options in the game setting. For the ones that don't know what this is, it basically slows time down so the computer can better calculate the physics. For example, if the physics calculation is pretty heavy on the CPU and frames start to drop, the game will basically slow down time (so 1 second in game takes 10 seconds in real life). The problem with this is that it would take more time for things to happen, but the experience would be way smoother (no more trying to click on a tiny ship part at 10fps during emergencies with the cursor controlled by the analogue stick axis).

I am doing a manned mission to Duna and back. I have only one mod installed, which is Kerbal Alarm Clock. Here is my problem: when I am looking out into space from Duna orbit, FPS is excellent. When I look at Duna's surface, FPS crashes down to about 3 FPS. Here are my graphics settings: My "Max Physics Delta-Time per Frame" is 0.04; I have tried lowering it to 0.03 and even tried 0.12, and all attempts have resulted in no improvement. My computer specs: CPU: Intel i3-3120M (4 cores, 2.5 GHz) Integrated graphics (Intel HD 4000) 6 GB RAM OS: Xubuntu 18.04 (Linux) I have tried launching the 64 bit version of KSP, which resulted in the same amount of lag. I have also tried lowering the texture quality to 1/8. Moreover, I have tried disabling V-Sync and setting the pixel light count to 0. The game has been reinstalled, to no avail. Furthermore, I have noticed that CPU usage decreases when I look at Duna, which makes absolutely no sense at all, considering the extreme lag. Is there anything else I can do to get rid of this horrendous lag? It is difficult to land and takeoff with the lag. Thanks for any help!

Ksp v.1.3.1 every time when exiting minmus soi I take a huge fps hit is this a common issue? What mod could cause this? Switching vessel and then returning fixes it just a little annoying.

Hello Fellow Pilots, I have a little maybe known problem. I have annoying microlags every 10 seconds. a little freeze frame for maybe quarter a second. the length of the freeze extends with the progress in the game (more spacecrafts, satellites.. etc) I heard this is a RAM issue. But do you guys have other solutions for me? Its really anoying. Thanks alot H0FF1

1158/5000 Hello everyone ! At the moment I have a problem of FPS that I can not solve! I play with the version 1.3.1 in 64bits without mods, on laptop. I have a big drop of FPS with big ships (200 to 400 parts) which is normal, but there is more important than usual! I realized something: when I use the touchpad of my PC to zoom in / out (instead of the wheel of my mouse), instantly there is no problem! FPS go back up to 60, but only for a short time (15 seconds) before falling again ! I need to use the touchpad again for FPS to increase again Here is exactly what happens: (sorry for the quality) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqpMGqCUb3s the FPS are reduced because of the video capture system, in fact it turns around 16fps when it lag and it rises to more than 40 once I zoomed with the touchpad I tried to uninstall and re-download KSP, but that does not change anything Did you know what's going on? thank you (sorry for my bad english, I'm french)

So, my frame rates are less than 5 when I get high part counts, which is predictable. However, I have a decent rig that can handle most games on ultra to high. My settings are at about mid to low, give or take, as of yesterday, when I tried to see if that would help. With those lowered settings, I'm still under 5 fps and just found that my CPU and card aren't even passing 60%. This just in, I literally see my GPU ramping up to 97% while typing this, for some random reason, so I know that is CAN surpass 60%. So far, I've OC'd using MSI AB and gone into task manager and given KSP_x64.exe "high priority" as opposed the the "normal" it was on, both changing nothing. You can also see that my PC chills at like 30 degrees C, which is great. It's an MSI RX 580 OC 8gb and my video memory is sitting at 1500mb +/-. I can't deduce why this is happening? I get 60fps at the space center, but it's like my PC is too lazy to ramp up when KSP is more demanding. Any help is appreciated.

I played KSP quite a lot about 2-3 years ago but had to drop out due to RL. Since then I'm back with a brand new pc and bought the game on steam. Played stock for about a week but the lure of adding my old mod list was always there (I do love mods). Now I have installed a lot of the common mods (listed below) and things were fine for a few days but I kept adding more and more. Some of these mods are dev versions but I searched all through the forums and found fixes or workarounds posted to make them work with 1.3. At first the performance was acceptable. Without mods the game runs at max fps in all situations. With some mods (I tested with a clean environment for KSPRC, AVP, Kerbinside separately) the game runs around 45-60 fps. It's with all the mods added that the problem appears. The problem I'm having now is that in game it takes 5-10 minutes for any scene change, sometimes more (loading a save game, going from KSC to tracking center, tracking center to KSC, launching a craft etc). Also in game fps is around 15-20. Sometimes drops to about 5-10 for a second or so suddenly before going up. If someone can please look over the list and tell me if there is a mod that could cause the spikes and long load times I'll be really grateful. It has now gotten to the point that I prefer end tasking the game rather than quitting it normally as that takes so much time. My initial game loading time is high too but I'm used to that from the early days so that is not an issue. PS- I followed themaster401's suggestion as outlined here. It actually increased fps by a little but the loading time problem was there even before I did this. PPS - I run with forced DX11. My specs are Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-7500 CPU @ 3.40GHz 8192MB RAM (KSP takes about 5gb when running) Windows 10 Home 64-bit NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Output.log

Recently I found a strange bug - I've noticed that I have 30 less FPS with the same craft on a runway in career mode comparing to sandbox. I run heavy modded install, so I investigated mods could be involved in this (contract configurator, strategia, etc.) But even without mods influencing career directly performance drop was the same. Wasted several hours and found a culprit - it's building levels! Enabled cheat and maxed out space center - +30FPS gain.. Funny thing that it's happening with only runway (and does not depend on level of runway) in view and without other buildings. Screens: Also, reproduced in stock (less noticeable) : Update: I've found the building causing FPS drop 15-30 in situations on screenshots above. Also, space center view is also affected. Culprit is launch pad level 1 and level 2. Once upgraded to level 3, +15-30 FPS gain. Crazy stuff... Update: still don't believe my self, but it made my launches so much smoother... Because with rocket on launchpad difference is 35 FPS and 60-65 FPS

I need help because ksp is very slow. I made the setting minimum but I am still getting a lot of lag please help. PC specs: Operating System Windows 7 Professional 64-bit SP1 CPU Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3.00GHz 39 °C Wolfdale 45nm Technology RAM 8.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 531MHz (7-7-7-20) Motherboard Hewlett-Packard 3048h (XU1 PROCESSOR) Graphics E2242 (1920x1080@60Hz) Intel Q45/Q43 Express Chipset (HP) Intel Q45/Q43 Express Chipset (HP) Storage 232GB Seagate ST3250318AS ATA Device (SATA) 29 °C Optical Drives hp DVD A DH16ABLH ATA Device Audio High Definition Audio Device

So, I finally came back to playing KSP, gradually and carefully built my mod list... only to realize that the game is unplayable with my mod setup (nothing excessive, mind you - all fits under 2Gb). I have not "the latest and greatest" but still a pretty decent CPU, GTX780, 16G ram. EDIT: Removed "observations from prior versions" comment because I did proper testing with 1.1.3 and found that it was just false memory on my part - tendencies are the same in terms of slowness (except that 1.1.3 is ~25-30% slower overall). Now in 1.2.2 (identical behavior in 1.2.9, at least for those mods that work with it) I see huge performance hits. Example: a 300-part airplane on the runway: 1. Full stock: 50fps, down to 35 over ocean (btw, why such a drastic drop in fps, when there is little to render and nothing has changed in physics/parts?) 2. Scatterer: 48-35 fps 3. Scatterer + Kopernicus + SVT: 41-29 fps 4a. SVE + SVT (+EVE, Kopernicus, Scatterer)): 21-12 fps 4b. Same mods, but flying Aeris 3a: 60-44 fps (!!!) 5. KJR only: 31-12 fps (!!) So, these are heavy visual mods and one physics mod, so one would expect a performance hit (even though it was not nearly as noticeable in 1.1.3). BTW, at no point do I get 100% CPU core usage - at most it goes up to ~75%, with a couple more cores at ~25-30%. Graphics is definitely not the bottleneck either (see 1 and 4a/b above). So, what if we install a few essential and light-weight mods that should, in theory, have minimal impact on in-flight performance? 6a. MM, Toolbar, Better burn time, Better time warp, KAC, CCK, CRP, CTT, AGX, EasyVesselSwitch, EditorExtensions, KAS, KIS, MechJeb2, Docking alignment, Vanguard Parachutes, no KJR, same 300-parts airplane: 31-25fps (just a reminder - 50-35fps in pure stock). 6b. Same mods, but flying Aeris 3A: 60 fps (limit!!!). At some point I tended to blame the total memory footprint as being the culprit, but it does not seem to be the case - although total RAM consumption and part count (existing in game, not on vessel on in the scene) does have some effect, it is nothing compared to number of mod DLLs installed. Conclusion: what (tf) is going on here? Why mods that should not work on per-part basis (visual enhancements, utility non-physics mods) slow the game down proportionally to the size of the craft? And even if, for some bizarre reason, they are called on each part, why the execution is so slow for what is essentially just a few lines of code (from my long-past days of hands-on programming, this feels like every call to third-party procedures is wrapped in several layers or extreme debug exception handling - btw, no exceptions reported in the log)? Do you experience something similar, or perhaps you have 200 mods and more than 5GB in GameData folder and yet everything runs just as smoothly as in stock? Either way, please report your experiences here (keep it civil, avoid excessive quoting, and include your rig configuration and specific test results if available).

Hi , Does anyone has started loving an FPS Game? Well mine are All Counter-Strikes And COD:Black Ops 2... ..

Hi all, I've got a fairly strong gaming desktop, and I can get >100 FPS on average even running a few mods (KER, MJ, KIS, and KAS) on my main career save. The problem is that I'm now reaching the point where I want to launch large ships (All-in-one Stations, Motherships, etc.), and my FPS is dropping to literally 7 FPS on average starting from pre-launch and continuing into orbit. I'm running: Intel Core i7 6850K (not overclocked other than the standard native OCing that happens under load to about 4GHz) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 16GB RAM SSD 1920x1080 Fullscreen I've dropped all settings to the lowest, uninstalled all mods, and started a new Sandbox. I've set the Process priority to Realtime via Task manager. I've confirmed that nothing is running that should strongly affect performance. During launch, I monitored CPU and GPU utilization - my GPU is only reaching maybe 20-30% utilization, and most Processor cores are sitting between 10-30% Utilization with one core reaching at most 60% utilization. Temperatures are low. I can't seem to find any bottlenecks based on utilization and temperature. I don't really know what else I can tweak here, and I'd really like to be able to start using larger ships and larger part counts. I don't understand why my machine is struggling this much given that normal ships sit well above 100FPS on average. I can understand it dipping to 30-60 FPS, and I'd be perfectly fine with that performance drop. I'm getting literally 7 FPS, however, and I'm getting periodic FPS drops even below that to the point where the screen appears to lock up/stutter. It doesn't make sense, especially since I reverted to Vanilla with the lowest settings. The ship I used as a benchmark is the first (smaller) of Mark Thrimm's Single Launch Space Stations shown at the start of this video: I found other topics that were from years ago, and trying their suggestions didn't make any significant difference. I really appreciate in advance any tips or suggestions you can provide.