Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'optimization'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 6 results

  1. Hi So I just sold off my RX 580 graphics card and is currently using my backup GT610, and I am wondering if there are any ways to make ksp playable on that graphics card without sacrificing too much. I have a watercooled R5 1600x CPU and 16 gigs of ram, and I am currently getting around 4 fps with settings maxed out. What can I do to get my framerate above 30 fps while sacrificing the least amount of detail? Thanks!
  2. Full disclosure, I'm an irredeemable mod-addict. However, I am intentionally asking in a stock modless context: What roadmap exists, if any, for KSP to receive optimization passes in future updates, if indeed any future updates ever come to pass? KSP is pretty much in a class of very few other gaming titles (Factorio being another notable example) which bottlenecks at the CPU and not at the graphics card. Worse, it's been the better part of a decade since anyone was likely to purchase a computer for use with computer games that had single-core CPUs, yet KSP still only utilizes a single core. Case in point, I run an octo-core i7, and while quads aren't exactly bargain-basement economy models quite yet, I think it'd be equally unfair to characterize hex- and octo-core systems as "newfangled" or "rare." In the context of my admitted mod addiction, I recognize that the more mods one uses (particularly plugins) the more likely any multi-core / multithread / optimization would be to bork the backend stuff that allows said mods to attach to the game so easily. That said... is hoping for 2015-cutting-edge performance here in 2017 really an unreasonable thing for a user to request?
  3. Beware that this is heavy on screenshots, but they serve an important purpose! Dear @SQUAD here is something that really needs looking into if you are continuing the development of this game and that is graphical performance. This might come of as a bit ranty but bear with me. Your game looks like something from the early 2000s. It is not very impressive in the looks department at all. Your skybox is an empty blue, your water looks nothing like the real deal. There are no god rays, there is no bloom, no depth of field etc... There is basically nothing going on and still graphical performance is shockingly aweful. I have here a few nice screenshots that ilustrate this very convincingly. Follow me now on a launch of one of my SSTOs to orbit. Note that this savegame is empty, there are no satellites in orbits anywhere, no space stations hanging about, and no debris. There is only this SSTO. My SSTO is idling on the runway and graphic performance is okay at this point but it doesn't reach a full 60 frames. Notice that my GPU is also nearly idling CPUs are about 50 % used. My SSTO has taken off and is on ascent. I am fast enough and aerodynamic effects have kicked in. 50 % FRAMEDROP. Is my GPU that busy? No. Are my CPU cores bottlenecking? No. My craft is now higher in the atmosphere and the framerate has recovered after the aerodynamic effects are gone. Framerate is even above 60 frames for the first time because nothing but my craft is on the screen Now comes the speed up phase to reach orbital velocity. Aerodynamic and heat effects are visible. OVER 50 % FRAMEDROP. GPU? Nah still bored to tears. CPUs? Like walking to jogging active. The vessel coasts toward the apoapsis, heat and aerodynamic effects are gone so framerate isn't aweful anymore. The GPU is on 1/3 capacity like at all times and the CPUs the same as always. To some it up, at no point was my system overly taxed at all quite the contrary. KSP simply doesn't make use of available resources. And neither the aerodynamic effects nor the heat effects warrant a 50 % drop in framerate when the GPU is basically doing a whole lot of nothing. They do not look anywhere near good enough to warrant this happening. An effect that is so poorly optimized that it can murder over 50% of the framerate should not be in the game! This screenshot is now my SSTO on the runway with the Stock Visual Enhancement Mod which includes EVE, Distant Object Enhancement and scatterer. There are now, clouds, cloud shadows, atmospheric scattering etc. Framerate is significantly impacted by this. But is my GPU taxed to capacity? No. KSP leaves 50 % capacity on the table. The CPUs aren't that much more taxed either. Funnily enough there is ONE scene where my GPU is on full work load and that is in the KSP overview. Squad I don't even know what I should say to this..... Another bizarre thing for performance is the more part mods you have, the more your FPS suffer. What is even happening there? Is KSP rendering all parts including those that are not in use in the background? There must be a way to only bring the parts into the flight scene that are currently in use to circumvent this happening. Maybe you should take a page out of ferram4s book. And I don't mean make his FAR mod stock. As you know FAR makes it so that computation is not happening on all the individual parts but on a voxel model that represents the whole craft. To me that should slim down things quite considerably and help people who build huge crafts not to suffer 4 FPS in Space. I can only stress Squad that I think this should be the next big thing to work on. As totalbiscuit would put it: This is unacceptable opimization work. Please get this sorted out as soon as is viable! This was on KSP 64Bit latest version. I have an AMD System, maybe Intel fairs better? Here are my system specs: Item Details Windows: Windows Version 6.2 (Build 9200) (Win 10) Internet Explorer: 9.11.14393.0 Memory (RAM): 16284 MB CPU Info: AMD FX(tm)-8320 Eight-Core Processor CPU Speed: 4218,3 MHz Sound Card: Lautsprecher (Sound Blaster Z) | SPDIF-Out (Sound Blaster Z) | Display Adapters: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Monitors: 1x; Generic PnP Monitor | Generic PnP Monitor | Generic PnP Monitor | Generic PnP Monitor | Screen Resolution: 1680 X 1050 - 32 bit
  4. Hi, I run KSP 1.2 prerelease on Ubuntu 14.04. I've followed every guide I can to increase my FPS, lowered every setting to the lowest it can be, (My computer is a lemon. Don't even ask!) and have it running as smooth as I possibly could get it to be. The problem is planet terrain. Say I have a ship in orbit around Kerbin and I rotate my camera to face space. Everything runs great. But say I rotate to face Kerbin. Everything starts to run slow and laggy. I've lowered my Rendering to Fastest, my Textures to Eight Res, and even created a custom Terrain Preset, "Lowest", where all minDistances = 3. I am wondering if the terrain detail is what is screwing with me though. Whenever I restart KSP, it defaults to "High." Stupid question, but could this mean that KSP is possibly rendering terrain using the High Preset even when it is set to Low or Lowest? I've also noticed that KSP still creates a log file, even when I turn on the "Do not create log" option in the launcher. Other than that, if anyone has any tips to increasing my FPS, mainly while at Kerbin, any help would be appreciated. This same problem occurs in older versions of KSP (so it's not just because of 1.2), and I've already tried redownloading the stock files multiple times. I can attach my settings.cfg file if needed. Ty ETPOF
  5. KSP continues to show sadly lacking performance for the level of graphics and functions the programming has to accomplish, especially on weaker computers. This game really shouldn't take that powerful of a computer to run at vastly better performance levels than it does now, yet its performance for any given CPU and graphics card setup *is* lackluster relative to what it should be and a sometimes laggy game (especially on weaker computers) is what we have to work with... I have started this thread as a development discussion thread: to solicit discussion of what the devs could actually do, in concrete terms, to improve the performance of the game (this is NOT a thread for off-the-cuff suggestions by people with no understanding of game programming, I want to see people with actual programming and optimization knowledge make specific educated suggestions here), and to remind the devs at SQUAD that the poor performance and lack of real optimization in KSP is still a major issue they need to work on, one that is still very much holding the game back from reaching its full potential. For that matter, a small tangential bit of commentary and a liberty I am taking as thread author (please do not side-track the discussion by commenting further on this, it is only my opinion)- I do not think the game should ever have been declared "released" in its current state. In my mind, the game will never truly be an acceptable product for a released game until it has seen a substantial amount of additional effort devoted to improving the game's performance (reducing lag, CPU load, etc.) within the context of its existing features. Go forth and discuss! And remember to keep the discussion educated, knowledgeable about the subject of programming, and on-topic! - Northstar
  6. Hi! Today I suggest a very simple but useful thing: a part search toolbar. A part search toolbar would be a tool to search parts to construction inside the "vehicle assembly building" and "spaceplane hangar". With every new version added more and more parts, and taking into account the mods, I think that search toolbar would be useful. It would be quite useful at times like parts experimental test mission, for example, where it is easy to forget the name while searching when there are many unlocked objects; another example is in case of have many mods. Do not think you need more details, it is a small utility suggestion without complexity.