Hardware discussion about prepare for unity 5

[X-SR71]

The general speculation - but it is only speculation - is that Unity 5 will bring one thread per vessel, and that single vessels will still be limited by your processor's single-core performance. Therefore the ideal CPU for KSP remains the same as now - a modern fast-clocked Intel CPU.

For the GPU KSP wants something competent but it doesn't need massive performance. A GT 610, which is a weak display card that's worse than good integrated graphics, clearly underperformed. A GTX 750 Ti, which is a great budget gaming card, does well. That said gaming at higher resolutions will always be demanding.

For RAM, expect the stock game to continue being happy with 4 GB. But if you want to play modded and run a 64-bit build of KSP then 8 GB is probably better. There's already a 64-bit KSP for Linux, KSP 1.1 might or might not bring it for Windows and/or OSX.

For the monitor, bear in mind KSP currently has poor user-interface scaling. We've no idea if that will change, but don't be surprised if you have to drop down to 1080p or thereabouts for the game wasting your "Retina" display.

I know you mentioned it's speculation, but has any dev mentioned anything on how they plan to take advantage of multi-threading? I'd love for it to be more than simply 'one thread/core per vessel'.

[cantab]

Allow me to end that speculation right now. That isn't how programming works. There is no way to specify in game terms (i.e. one ship) what a thread is comprised of so you will just have to take my word for it.

Errm, what? Of course the programmers will decide whether an algorithm is parallelized or not. What I've been hearing is that the physics of a connected chain of rigid bodies, which is what KSP vessels are, is difficult if not impossible to parallelize. It's also not in Squad's hands, in fact I don't even think it's in Unity's hands but rather is done by NVidia's PhysX.

(And yes, technically a program could implement an entirely sequential algorithm using a whole bunch of threads. But that's just being pedantic.)

What is poor about it? It scales fairly well, it might get a little stretched on a retina display but it's the ship and the solar system you really want to look good.

Last I checked some things were fixed in terms of pixel size and ignored the "UI size" option, making them miniscule to the point of being unusable on retina-type displays. The right-click menus on parts I think. Unless Squad have fixed that now or do in 1.1.

[MarcAlain]

Purchasing a retina iMac is a bad choice. I owned several iMacs over the years, and almost every single one of the newer ones (2009 on) failed due to overheating in some capacity - either the HDDs failed, or the GPUs failed. This is a common occurrence as well.

I knowe this is anecdotal, but I worked as an Apple Technicianfrom 2009-2013, and that was enough to prevent me from ever purchasing an apple product ever again - even the computers that appear to be a good deal.

The iMacs have never been, and never will be a good deal. They're insanely overpriced for their specs, they use poor designs with bad air flow, are quite a bit hotter than a computer really should be at idle, and use inferior parts than what the price point suggests.

OP, do not buy an iMac, and do not buy AMD products to run KSP on. Unfortunately you really do need to go Intel/Nvidia here.

[Umlüx]

I'd love for it to be more than simply 'one thread/core per vessel'.

me too, but it's not possible. you can't do parallel executed physics calculations because they are dependent on each other.

[ModZero]

So, from another Mac user here - Mac's are great programmer's laptops, and competent for your gaming on the go - especially the top tier ones - and will generally run KSP just fine. It just doesn't make sense to buy one specifically for the purpose of gaming. If KSP were your only game, then you could get a really cheap PC. And for a price of a high-tier Mac with a dedicated GPU and all that you could buy a monster desktop PC. Sure, it wouldn't have fancy touchpads and retina and stuff, but playing KSP on a touchpad sucks anyway - I know, I tried. Oh, and way too many games are developed for DirectX first - KSP included - which also tends to be a drag on them (KSP runs on OpenGL, but many others use weird compatibility layers for Macs). That makes a Windows PC the best enthusiast gaming console ever (and is a reason why I own both a PC and a Mac, btw).

And if you can't have both and dislike (like I do) Windows for work, you're actually likely to find Linux very competent for most things, and you'll get better mileage dual booting. Of course you can dual-boot an iMac for games just fine, but again efficiency would be against you. Oh, and judging by how well iMacs do compared to Macbooks, I'd also be worried about how seriously Apple treats them. They're kinda weird machines, nice in concept, but for most people it's a really weird decision, with Minis, Macbooks or PCs usually being better choices.

[xtoro]

me too, but it's not possible. you can't do parallel executed physics calculations because they are dependent on each other.

Yes, you could do this, but since Unity does the physics calculations, that all depends on if you have access to thread management. You could easily have 2 ships on screen each being calculated by a different thread provided they aren't interacting with each other. If I were programming it, I would simply set a threshold so that if the ships come to within 1m of each other, then they get handled by a single thread.

[PixelClef]

As a fellow Mac user also looking to acquire a new computer in the near future, I'm also interested in getting real world feedback on iMac performance and how its options affect KSP. So, let's hear it!

[lordlundar]

Are you sure about that? I'm pretty sure you have to buy Mac-approved components, which are more expensive. A hackintosh is for someone who wants to build and mess with their computer and also wants Mac OS X. You might save a few bucks, but I don't think that's the point.

That is a lie. For the most part there hasn't been apple exclusive components in years. Most of the time you can get the same parts (in some cases the exact same parts) that a mac will run under for a significantly lower price point.

The OSX does have a smaller range of components that it will recognize, but the difference between a "mac-approved" component and the same one that isn't is the price tag.

[juanml82]

Yes, you could do this, but since Unity does the physics calculations, that all depends on if you have access to thread management. You could easily have 2 ships on screen each being calculated by a different thread provided they aren't interacting with each other. If I were programming it, I would simply set a threshold so that if the ships come to within 1m of each other, then they get handled by a single thread.

I it were up to me, I wouldn't execute any physics calculation if the vessel isn't subject to any force, but that's me and my rants.

Of course, that means you can assemble a 1000+ parts space stations and have the game grind to a halt the moment you turn the RCS on and press a single key in the keyboard.

[keeper]

I'm interested in this multi threading malarkey.

I was under the impression if they get unity5 to do that, then they will then be able to make KSP do that.

Why are we talking about single vessels being limited to a single thread core? Thats horrible!

Would my single vessel not use all my cores? Please??

Is that not depending how they update KSP??

I hope all my cores get used 100%, hell each and every part should use its own core pl0z. I got 8 of the damn things!

The idea that 64 bit or multi threading will not improve the game much at all is a horrible idea.

No comment on the mac thing. I just dont bother with apple stuff. IMO its all garbage. Expensive, good quality garbage.

All the reasons why you think you need an imacapple, believe it or not you can do it all with a PC.

TBH the only time i heard of someone NEEDING an imac was a software developer, probably making something specifically for apples.

I never needed, or wanted one

[cantab]

Why are we talking about single vessels being limited to a single thread core? Thats horrible!

Would my single vessel not use all my cores? Please??

See my previous posts. In simpler terms, some things are relatively easy to make use multiple cores, while other things are hard or even impossible to do that with.

[OddFunction]

I'm interested in this multi threading malarkey.

I was under the impression if they get unity5 to do that, then they will then be able to make KSP do that.

Why are we talking about single vessels being limited to a single thread core? Thats horrible!

Would my single vessel not use all my cores? Please??

Is that not depending how they update KSP??

I hope all my cores get used 100%, hell each and every part should use its own core pl0z. I got 8 of the damn things!

The idea that 64 bit or multi threading will not improve the game much at all is a horrible idea.

No comment on the mac thing. I just dont bother with apple stuff. IMO its all garbage. Expensive, good quality garbage.

All the reasons why you think you need an imacapple, believe it or not you can do it all with a PC.

TBH the only time i heard of someone NEEDING an imac was a software developer, probably making something specifically for apples.

I never needed, or wanted one

LOL I love your optimism but its not as simple as the bolded. Multithreading with one to three cores would be just as good as with eight in all honesty.

And as far as the performance increases associated with Unity 5, nothing is confirmed... so for all you people out there (and this is not directed specifically at you, keeper!) that say the performance increase will be negligible... please, please stop saying that without citing a source. Because the only source I've read is that there are gains to be had, only they are not discussing how much!

[nalfz]

How so? It was just released and the port is coming in the next version. The only way to be faster than that was to have ported to the beta version.

You're kidding, right? Full release was in march and the release candidates were out long before that

I know of several games that were ported to U5 in january

[Eric S]

You're kidding, right? Full release was in march and the release candidates were out long before that

I know of several games that were ported to U5 in january

That puts the full release out when the 1.0 development cycle was at or past the half way mark, and I don't blame anyone for not planning around release candidate software. A place I used to work for got screwed once doing that just to have a "minor" bug fix at the last minute change the API enough and just in the wrong way to cause serious delays in one of our projects.

And yes, there are testimonials talking about porting programs from U4 to U5 in an afternoon, but none of those are about programs that make much use of PhysX. PhysX is probably the most major Unity component that isn't backwards compatible between U5 and U4. Not the fault of the Unity devs, PhysX 3 isn't backwards compatible with PhysX 2, and even that incompatibility was necessary in order to allow better software optimization. Honestly, of the Unity-based games I'm playing that use PhysX heavily, it looks like KSP is going to be the first one to release an update based on U5.

Simply put, 1.1 is the first non-patch version of KSP that had it's development cycle start after the Unity 5 release, so yes, this is a prompt upgrade.

[Alshain]

You're kidding, right? Full release was in march and the release candidates were out long before that

I know of several games that were ported to U5 in january

On the Beta version. Several games were written on Unity 5 and ready for release on the beta version (Cities: Skylines for example, was released on the beta of Unity 5). Full release was in march, Squad was already working on a build release at the time. They started Unity development as soon as that build was released. They were NEVER going to release or even develop on a U5 beta version. That is about has as fast as they could have done it without developing for the pre-release version or stopping the build that was nearly finished already.

[nalfz]

<lots of things>

I was just justifying my statement that unity 5 doesn't seem to be coming too soon. It's not too incredible an observation

<some other things>

The betas were there for no other reason than to let developers have a head start porting to the new version or developing on the new version as soon as possible

I wasn't complaining about the development pace in that post, just mentioning it

I'd guess that this thread isn't looking for this sort of discussion so if this makes either of you too cranky you should probably PM

[Alshain]

The betas were there for no other reason than to let developers have a head start porting to the new version or developing on the new version as soon as possible

They said early on that they weren't going to do that, and that they would only port when it was released. Your original comment made it sound like they have been working on it for an inordinate amount of time (I believe your words were "a snails pace"), and that just isn't the case, since they didn't start working on it till full release and we knew years ago when Unity 5 was supposed to be released that they wouldn't. It's coming in the very next version, perhaps you missed the announcement?

[Eric S]

I was just justifying my statement that unity 5 doesn't seem to be coming too soon. It's not too incredible an observation

And I was just justifying the original statement, which is more in tune with the way I see this unfolding. What you see as a snails pace I see as faster than any other Unity-based game that uses the same feature sets to the same degree as KSP. Not cranky, I just have a different point of view.

[richfiles]

I put together a 3.5 GHz i7, 32 GB, Hackintosh, and built it into a 1939 Philco radio cabinet. My initial parts cost was $630, and I later spent $50 to upgrade my GPU to a used ATI/AMD Radeon HD 5770, $100 For a good PSU, $50 for a kickin' Noctua cooler (so i can overclock), and whatever i spent to double my original 16 GB RAM to the 32 I have now, along with the pair of SSDs i have. If you want a Mac, look up "tonymac" and you'll find monthly build guides and the software needed to make it all function.

My hackintosh has been my main computer since summer of 2013, and as a person that prefers using Mac OS... It was well worth it to build it myself!