Jump to content

Anyone Else Recently Build A [email protected]** PC in Reponse to upcoming 1.1?


scribbleheli
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Falcon Coupe said:

Can't complain too much, means moving from a shoebox to a real house where I'll actually have space to set up my rig.

Ok, weeks are off the hook.

Moving house isn't my favourite, but at an upgrade in abode is good! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did. I had to upgrade my rig to work properly on KSP, so I think that counts. :)

Went from a Core i7 920 to a Core i7 4790K, OC'ed to 4.6GHz (stock 4GHz). Also upgraded the mobo to an Asus Sabertooth. That is definitely a badS piece of hardware. 

Compile times went from 1min+ to less than 30 seconds!

Cheers

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, HarvesteR said:

I did. I had to upgrade my rig to work properly on KSP, so I think that counts. :)

Went from a Core i7 920 to a Core i7 4790K, OC'ed to 4.6GHz (stock 4GHz). Also upgraded the mobo to an Asus Sabertooth. That is definitely a badS piece of hardware. 

Compile times went from 1min+ to less than 30 seconds!

Cheers

Does this have anything to do with your hard drive failing?  :sticktongue:  BTW, nice machine!  That must be nice to have those compile times. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, HarvesteR said:

I did. I had to upgrade my rig to work properly on KSP, so I think that counts. :)

Went from a Core i7 920 to a Core i7 4790K, OC'ed to 4.6GHz (stock 4GHz). Also upgraded the mobo to an Asus Sabertooth. That is definitely a badS piece of hardware. 

Compile times went from 1min+ to less than 30 seconds!

You might be able to improve compile times even further by running things from a RAM disk, though you would need to look into what is happening exactly to fully optimize that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am in the process of collecting computer parts to built a PC and right now I have a ASUS OC 4GB GTX 960 and since I had nothing to do with it I just stuck it into my old potato desktop to run KSP and do some blender stuff. The GPU is amazing but it is the rest of the computer that is really bottlenecking its performance. Still, I get 79 FPS solid with EVE in low part count planes and all the graphics cranked. It's when I start adding a lot of parts that it slows down because my garbage CPU can barely keep up. Overall I think a non-reference 960 is an amazing performer even in a crappy machine. The CUDA cores and clock speed are way up in my specific card from reference and I think anyone should go for it if your thinking about a cheap gaming beast. 250 is great for anyone looking to built a rig on a budget. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Asus-NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-960-OC-4GB-GDDR5-DVI-HDMI-3DisplayPort-PCI-Express-Video-/281837654041?hash=item419ed55019:g:NLgAAOSwl9BWK5b3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Okay, found my part count limit.

455 parts on a Minmus mining base with KIS, KAS, IR & PlanetaryBaseInc.

As soon as I got within 2.5km the frame rate dropped from 58 to 8.
I thought maybe it was one of the visual enhancement mods, but taking them out made no difference.

Oddly enough, the CPU wasn't anywhere close to being maxed out on any one core.
Is this my GPU limit showing up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, T.A.P.O.R. said:

Oddly enough, the CPU wasn't anywhere close to being maxed out on any one core.

Is this my GPU limit showing up?

Sometimes, the load is spread over all the cores due to the program switching rapidly between them. Check out what KSP uses. If that is about 25% (or 100 divided whatever number of cores you have), this is probably the case. Also, sometimes Windows does not report the CPU load correctly in the Task Manager. Using Process Explorer should help out in that case.

The only way to know whether your GPU is the problem is by looking at those graphs. You can use GPU-Z or MSI Afterburner (also if it is not a MSI card). A simple but less helpful way of testing the GPU is the limit is significantly lowering the video settings (resolution, shadows, effects, etcetera). If the frame rate is the same, it is probably the CPU. If the frame rate is significantly different, it might be the GPU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lowest settings and still get low frames.

I did read that Infernal Robotics on Minmus can have an issue where frames take a big fat hit.

That was from a few versions ago, but I wonder if its still a thing?

I have over 40 mods installed, could be any one of them (or none).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, T.A.P.O.R. said:

Lowest settings and still get low frames.

I did read that Infernal Robotics on Minmus can have an issue where frames take a big fat hit.

That was from a few versions ago, but I wonder if its still a thing?

I have over 40 mods installed, could be any one of them (or none).

Guessing is no use. You need to install the mentioned programs. If that does not clarify things, methodically eliminating mods is the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I got a gaming PC for reasons unrelated to 1.1 (namely, because I wanted to play AAA games and that sort of thing.) I may drop $50 on two more sticks of RAM, though-my install is pushing 7.5GB memory use.

On April 9, 2016 at 3:35 AM, Falcon Coupe said:

I was meaning the GPU specifically, for pretty much mostly KSP will a GTX 950 be enough? I almost feel that the 960 could be overkill. I know the 6600K will be a great CPU, I was going to put it on the MSI Z170A Tomahawk board, but I'll most likely need to downgrade for budget reasons. Might have to go a 6500, which will let me go for a cheaper range of motherboard.

Don't go with the Tomahawk. The only reason I got it was for the wifi, but the wifi card comes with no screws for installation and is generally a pain even if you can order the screws (though if you are still going with it, you'll need M2 x 3mm machine screws, three of them with wide heads).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Camacha said:

Guessing is no use. You need to install the mentioned programs. If that does not clarify things, methodically eliminating mods is the way to go.

I've got CPU-z but couldn't see the graph option, but then I didn't look too hard as I had other stuff needing my attention.
Does afterburner come with the installation disk (not sure where I put mine) or is that a free DL?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/05/2016 at 10:22 PM, T.A.P.O.R. said:

I've got CPU-z but couldn't see the graph option, but then I didn't look too hard as I had other stuff needing my attention.
Does afterburner come with the installation disk (not sure where I put mine) or is that a free DL?

Both are free. Afterburner can be downloaded here. At first I was surprised you managed to miss the sensor tab in GPU-Z, when I saw you downloaded CPU-Z. You need the former, not the latter. A CPU and GPU only differ a little squiggle in name, but are rather different devices :P

CPU-Z is a pretty useful application too, though, they make a great neat little set of usefulness.

Edited by Camacha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Camacha said:

Both are free. Afterburner can be downloaded here. At first I was surprised you managed to miss the sensor tab in GPU-Z, when I saw you downloaded CPU-Z. You need the first, not the latter. A CPU and GPU only differ a little squiggle in name, but are rather different devices :P

You sir may well be surprised, but anyone who has seen me try fetch coins from my wallet would not :wink:

Downloading now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I built a new PC (my first personal build) and it coincided with the release of 1.1.  I actually played it a bit on my old system before I migrated everything over.  Surprisingly, the game played just as good on my 6 year old heavily modifed Dell.  It had a phenom 3.0 ghz so it was alot more unstable (crashed alot and some dev notes here said there are problems with that processor).  My new rig crashes very rarely and the SSHD brings a heeeeeeeeeeavily modded start up from 10 mins to 2.  Oh and my GPU is no longer bottle-necked so I can use scatterer/every make-it-pretty mod imaginable without FPS loss.

New Rig (put together with only 400 bucks!  Migrating hardware over helped)

3.5 ghz FX-8250 ("8" core, haha).  Overclocked to 4.0 ghz.

8 gigs 1600 mhz Fury-X DDR3

R7 series 2 gig sapphire

250 Seagate SSHD

750 watt Corsair Gold PSU

+ Corsair Carbon series case

EVO 212 air cooler

It's a big machine but I like it.  Honestly having a nice clean OS beats everything else.

I'm looking for a video card upgrade.  Something under 200$.  Still looking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 27 May 2016 at 6:29 AM, Camacha said:

Both are free. Afterburner can be downloaded here. At first I was surprised you managed to miss the sensor tab in GPU-Z, when I saw you downloaded CPU-Z. You need the former, not the latter. A CPU and GPU only differ a little squiggle in name, but are rather different devices :P

CPU-Z is a pretty useful application too, though, they make a great neat little set of usefulness.

@Camacha

I have run the graphs.

My GPU hits and almost continually stays at 100%

I though I had the force Nvidia option selected, but shall check.

I built a 450 part ship without infernal robotics onboard and my frames dropped to ~8fps

SVE is installed and so is Kopernicus and OPM. Both known frame killers.

Might upgrade my graphics next year. But then again that's a touch frivolous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about upgrading this year, but with the new manufacturing process for this years graphics cards, I've decided that for now, I'll just sit back and watch to see what happens. I want to wait and see what this years performance and prices are actually going to look like, and what kind of deals we get on previous years hardware as a result. This kind of scenario, stagnation followed by large leap has happened with graphics cards before, before I got into hardware, and I think it led to all the old process stuff becoming obsolete very quickly, so while I am anticipating some better than average deals on last years tech, that might lead to wanting another upgrade sooner than I'd like, or at least change what I want to upgrade into.

It also depends a bit on game development. Games take years to develop, and this should throw off the projections for how much technology will progress during development time, so there could be a noticeable lag overall before games start to take advantage of this. I mean, I really do need a new graphics card this year, since I still don't have something that can run my current Skyrim setup as well as I would like (the card I have now did the trick, but then I made my game even more demanding. Overclocking has kept performance reasonable, but it's getting old).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/05/2016 at 8:27 PM, Randox said:

I really do need a new graphics card this year, since I still don't have something that can run my current Skyrim setup as well as I would like (the card I have now did the trick, but then I made my game even more demanding. Overclocking has kept performance reasonable, but it's getting old).

The first rule of computing is that no matter how fast the hardware is, someone will have modded Skyrim (or Minecraft) in such a way that the hardware will barely run it, or not run it at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Camacha said:

The first rule of computing is that no matter how fast the hardware is, someone will have modded Skyrim (or Minecraft) in such a way that the hardware will barely run it, or not run it at all.

Oh, so very true, but at least I could get back to running my current setup at 60fps. It also occurs to me that I could always cheese it, and go back to using my 1600x900 monitor instead of the 1080p one. That's gotta be worth what, a 15% frame rate boost at least :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Randox said:

Oh, so very true, but at least I could get back to running my current setup at 60fps. It also occurs to me that I could always cheese it, and go back to using my 1600x900 monitor instead of the 1080p one. That's gotta be worth what, a 15% frame rate boost at least :D

44% by sheer pixel calculations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/06/2016 at 8:51 PM, Alphasus said:

44% by sheer pixel calculations.

If you are GPU limited, that will translate almost fully to equivalent improved performance.

Edited by Camacha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...