Ksp at 60fps, I just can't get enough of it

[322997am]

So I finally got my new pc running and I downloaded Ksp and then I boot it up and it boots in under five seconds. I got an ssd so it boots insanely fast. I built a quick plane and it turned out to fly very well. It was just a 4 passenger passenger plane that weighed very little(a bus can plow through it) and it flew not very fast. But because of its tiny 5t weight it was extremely nimble. So I called it Jedediah airlines flight Jeb-1 with service to the island airport. I flew it to there and back and I'm sitting there and my brain cannot get away from the thought of OMG 120FRAMES PERSECOND. I love the smoothness of my new pc and plane. So now I have a huge urge to play Ksp for the frames and for the content. So thank you squad for making such an enjoyable game that has been a huge fun to me even with the old 30 fps that i got. And now I can enjoy it even moar.

Edited December 28, 2015 by 322997am
Okay fine my average is 60

[Delrey]

Stats? 

[comham]

Some games are so good you play them even when the framerate really chugs. When you finally upgrade, and you can play them at a decent FPS, that's a great feeling.

[cantab]

Nice. Sadly I doubt you'll maintain that framerate when you make more complex craft.

[KerbMav]

I always edit the config to limit the frames ...

[Majorjim!]

1 hour ago, cantab said:

Nice. Sadly I doubt you'll maintain that framerate when you make more complex craft.

This.

 I have an i7 4790k which is one of if not the fastest for single core performance and at 250 or more parts I start to get lag. I really hope 1.1 bring s performance up to what it was in 0.90.

Edited December 26, 2015 by Majorjim

[Triop]

12 minutes ago, KerbMav said:

I always edit the config to limit the frames ...

Sounds interesting, how ?

[KerbMav]

2 hours ago, Triop said:

Sounds interesting, how ?

Open the settings.cfg in your KSP folder and look for FRAMERATE_LIMIT = x - set the x to what you want.
For me it lowers the load on my GPU especially when solar panels are involved, somehow those let it work like crazy.
 

[xiej]

I can't wait until they add multi-threading support in 1.1. Right now, a 70$ Pentium G3258 clocked at 3.2 Ghz can get almost the same performance than a i7-5960X at 3.0 Ghz(1000$)

[Gargamel]

1 hour ago, KerbMav said:

Open the settings.cfg in your KSP folder and look for FRAMERATE_LIMIT = x - set the x to what you want.
For me it lowers the load on my GPU especially when solar panels are involved, somehow those let it work like crazy.
 

I believe it's in the settings too without having to edit a file.

 

I'd be happy just to get one second per second, even if it's at a low (10-12) fps.  

[Pecan]

Woohoo, I've just ordered my new computer to replace this 10-year old one ^^.  Single 970 to start with, I'll buy another one, or possibly a 980, later.

[KerbMav]

36 minutes ago, gargamel said:

I believe it's in the settings too without having to edit a file.

 

I'd be happy just to get one second per second, even if it's at a low (10-12) fps.  

Yes, but the lowest you can do is 60 without editing the file yourself.

[selfish_meme]

4 hours ago, KerbMav said:

Open the settings.cfg in your KSP folder and look for FRAMERATE_LIMIT = x - set the x to what you want.
For me it lowers the load on my GPU especially when solar panels are involved, somehow those let it work like crazy.
 

KSP is not GPU heavy, its your CPU limiting the frames and that is a function of physics not graphics, more parts = less frames

[nosirrbro]

You lucky little Kerbal.

[problemecium]

I can corroborate the warning about part counts. I don't get 120 FPS, but I can easily get upwards of 30 on a small, simple plane. It's always been when I get over 200 parts that the lag's kicked in.

[mythic_fci]

Yay, someone else got a new computer for Chrisrmas! I got one with a GTX960M, so I'll be on the lower-spec side, but it's plenty for running KSP at a decent FPS...

[cubinator]

120 fps?!?!?!?! Haaaaaaaax! I'll just wait patiently for 1.1 to come out... *pressure inside patience chamber increases*

[Motokid600]

I said goodbye my 60fps for KSPRC. More then worth it. I can live with 20-30 with near Space Engine visuals.

[joekidd1992]

I'd like to know the stats of the OP as well. I'm kinda/sorta in the market to build a new one. This will be the first one I have ever built.

[Whackjob]

Now imagine that at five frames per second. 

The full Whackjob launch experience.  

[Majorjim!]

4 hours ago, Whackjob said:

Now imagine that at five frames per second. 

The full Whackjob launch experience.  

Meh.. The state of the game at the moment, that happens to everyone.

10 hours ago, joekidd1992 said:

I'd like to know the stats of the OP as well. I'm kinda/sorta in the market to build a new one. This will be the first one I have ever built.

Buy an i7 4790k

[322997am]

11 hours ago, joekidd1992 said:

I'd like to know the stats of the OP as well. I'm kinda/sorta in the market to build a new one. This will be the first one I have ever built.

It's an Intel i5 4790 k with 16gb ram and 2gb gpu. I get those frames while flying above the ocean with no textures but the plane.

20 minutes ago, Majorjim said:

Meh.. The state of the game at the moment, that happens to everyone.

Buy an i7 4790k

No game ever uses hyper threading. The main difference between an i7 and an i5 is that one has hyper threading and one does not. I don't even think Ksp 1.1 will use it

[Majorjim!]

Just now, 322997am said:

It's an Intel i5 4790 k with 16gb ram and 2gb gpu. I get those frames while flying above the ocean with no textures but the plane.

You mean i7? I don't think there is an i5 4790k.

Just now, 322997am said:

It's an Intel i5 4790 k with 16gb ram and 2gb gpu. I get those frames while flying above the ocean with no textures but the plane.

Also, the CPU is going to pay dividends in the newer versions. I hope. ;-)

Just now, 322997am said:

It's an Intel i5 4790 k with 16gb ram and 2gb gpu. I get those frames while flying above the ocean with no textures but the plane.

No game ever uses hyper threading. The main difference between an i7 and an i5 is that one has hyper threading and one does not. I don't even think Ksp 1.1 will use it

No sorry that is not correct. Also there is no such CPU as an i5 4790k. You must be mistaken. The i7 4790k is a lot faster than the best i5. Hyperthreading is just a bonus.

 

 Have a look here: http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-4790K-vs-Intel-Core-i5-4690K

You can see the i7 outpaces the i5 at every step. And you just lost HALF your FPS! what happened?

Edited December 28, 2015 by Majorjim

[_Astra_]

Even if you achieve these 60 fps, Shadowplay may transparently miss some of frames on recording. Some dozens of frames, perhaps.

So the rocket behaves more "discrete" compared to 30 fps.

 

 

I have met the problem with mods only, especially when a *lot* of shaders applies.

Mostly ran the game on maximum settings.

But simply raising the FPS number is not a panacea

Limiting FPS is a smart idea, though, due to heat issues.

[cantab]

1 hour ago, Majorjim said:

The i7 4790k is a lot faster than the best i5. Hyperthreading is just a bonus.

At stock speeds, yes. But when you overclock there is no difference in clock speed reached.