KSP 64 bit, mods and performance - somebody please explain to me how that works

[SpaceK]

Hi,

after having lots of RAM related crashes in previous versions, I was looking forward to cram KSP with mods in the 1.1 64 bit version, which I now did.

 

However, I'm somewhat disappointed about the performance... This is an un-small, but not humungous ship with 177 parts. The launch starts with about 2 to 3 RL seconds per ingame second, and this number goes up to 5 to 6 at about Max Q. I didn't measure the FPS, but I don't think they're much higher than 10. After dropping a few stages and leaving the atmosphere, KSP almost keeps up with real time with the mission timer flickering between green and yellow, but there are still small, but noticeable lags.

During all this time, though, my System was not nearly running at its maximum. I had about 5.7 GB of my RAM in use, with KSP contributing something between 3.5 and 4 GB of that, and the CPU was running at between 10 and 20%.

 

My system specs are:

8 GB DDR-3 RAM (7.89 useable),

Intel i7-4700HQ CPU (4x2.4-3.4 GHz)

GeForce GT 750M

 

installed mods:

Spoiler

B9 Part Switch (B9PartSwitch v1.1)
Community Resource Pack (CommunityResourcePack 0.5.0.0)
Community Tech Tree (CommunityTechTree 2.4.0)
Contract Configurator (ContractConfigurator 1.10.4)
Contract Parser (ContractParser 2.0)
Contracts Window + (ContractsWindowPlus 6.2)
Crowd Sourced Science (CrowdSourcedScience v3.0.2)
DMagic Orbital Science (DMagicOrbitalScience 1.2.3)
Environmental Visual Enhancements (EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements 2:EVE-1.1-1)
Environmental Visual Enhancements - Config files (EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements-HR 2:EVE-1.1-1)
Filter Extensions - Plugin (FilterExtensions 2.5.0)
Firespitter Core (FirespitterCore v7.2.1)
Interstellar Fuel Switch (InterstellarFuelSwitch 1.24)
Interstellar Fuel Switch Core (InterstellarFuelSwitch-Core 1.24)
Kerbal Alarm Clock (KerbalAlarmClock v3.6.1.0)
Kerbal Attachment System (KAS 0.5.6)
Kerbal Engineer Redux (KerbalEngineerRedux 1.1.0.2)
Kerbal Inventory System (KIS 1.2.7)
KSP Interstellar Extended (KSPInterstellarExtended 1.8.12)
KW Rocketry Redux (KWRocketryRedux 3.0.1)
KW Rocketry Redux - Instant Power Response Configs (KWRocketryRedux-InstantPwr 3.0.1)
Magic Smoke Industries Infernal Robotics (InfernalRobotics v2.0.0)
MechJeb 2 (MechJeb2 2.5.7.0)
Modular Rocket Systems (ModularRocketSystem 1.12.6)
Module Manager (ModuleManager 2.6.23)
Near Future Construction (NearFutureConstruction 0.6.0)
Near Future Electrical (NearFutureElectrical 0.7.0)
Near Future Electrical Core (NearFutureElectrical-Core 0.7.0)
Near Future Propulsion (NearFuturePropulsion 0.7.0)
Near Future Solar (NearFutureSolar 0.6.0)
Near Future Solar Core (NearFutureSolar-Core 0.6.0)
Progress Parser (ProgressParser 3.0)
SCANsat (SCANsat v16.0)
SCANsat mission pack (ContractConfigurator-SCANsat 1.0.2)
scatterer (Scatterer 2:v0.0244)
SpaceY Expanded (SpaceY-Expanded 1.1.8)
SpaceY Heavy Lifters (SpaceY-Lifters 1.12.2)
Toolbar (Toolbar 1.7.11)
TriggerAu Flags (TriggerAu-Flags v2.7.4.0)
TweakScale - Rescale Everything! (TweakScale v2.2.7.2)
Universal Storage (UniversalStorage 1.1.0.11)
USI Core (USI-Core 0.2.1.0)
USI Kolonization Core (USI-UKS-Shared 0.2.1.0)
USI Kolonization Systems (MKS/OKS) (UKS 1:0.40.1.1)
USI Life Support (USI-LS 0.4.2.0)
USI Tools (USITools 0.7.1.0)

I noticed that the RAM usage stayed pretty much constant, no matter if I was working in the VAB or had a vessle loaded, which I considered somewhat odd... is there an inbuild ceiling on how much RAM KSP can use?

Also, is there any way I can increase the performance e.g. via start options, or do I have to live with the low framerate/uninstall mods?

Edited April 28, 2016 by SpaceK

[sarbian]

Let me guess. Laptop ?

 

[SpaceK]

Yes, it's a laptop, but the inspector thingy didn't help...

plus, the framerate is more like 3 at its worst.

I couldn't add any executables without removing the two which were listed anyway at first, so I removed the old ones and added them again, and when I kinda knew what I was doing I also added the absolute link for good measure.

Anyway, I'm starting to seriously doubt my capabilities. Does this look right?

 

[sarbian]

This looks ok. You did press the 'Apply Change' green button in the upper right corner ?

[stupid_chris]

RAM and 64bit does not affect performance. It affects memory. It lets you load more mods, that's about it.

From your hardware, I think it's simply that your GTX 750m can't provide enough when rendering celestial bodies, this is usually especially true when they have oceans. What does your performance look like in map mode/deep space? Also, if the option is available in the NVidia control panel, make sure it starts KSP_x64.exe using your dedicated card, and not a CPU integrated one.

[AlphaAsh]

You've got EVE and scatterer with that GPU, on a laptop? Uninstalling just those two would probably help a lot.

[SpaceK]

Removing EVE and scatterer helped not at all, but decreasing resolution, texture quality and disabling all the extra graphic thingies helped.

The game looked like something that doesn't look good afterwards and I increased the resolution and the texture quality a bit again. Now I've found a balance that looks meh and has a meh performance (much worse than 1.0.5, actually).

I've also checked with my less modded KSP version (I'm keeping a cleaner primary version in case something goes horribly wrong during an update) which is 1.1.1 now and has scatterer+eve enabled. I've tried building a more or less equivalent craft and only partly succeeded due to the absence of sufficiently powerful SRBs in vanilla, but the craft has 180 parts, is larger and wobblier than the original, but also a bit slower. I have a solid 12 +/- 1 frames for most of the launch and it doesn't drop lower than 8 during Max Q (afterwards the rocket exploded due to the wobbliness and lack of sepratrons) - all with maximal or near maximal graphics settings.

I haven't reached outer space in the modded playthrough yet, but the framerate at least rises to playable levels in orbit.

Edit: I get 25 FPS in map mode (modded), while in not map mode it's down to 3 FPS (decent graphics settings). I guess I just launch in map mode for now.

Edited April 30, 2016 by SpaceK

[Kerbalstar]

20 hours ago, SpaceK said:

I guess I just launch in map mode for now.

Well don't switch to map mode right after launching what I bit. Otherwise Bad things can happen.

Hope this helps.

[SpaceK]

Map mode doesn't always help anyway... I'm currently on Minmus with the 70 part or so Lander stage (it has lots of experiments and solar cells, due to ISRU capacities) and I still don't get more than 10 FPS, even when landed. I can't do experiments in map mode and landing in map mode isn't that great either.

 

I somehow suspect FW Rocketry or the experiments pack now. Anyway, I'm gonna wait until all mods are available in 1.1.2 and try to find out the real culprit.

[SpaceFoon]

Did you find anything? I'm running a ton of mods with a gtx 660 (Desktop) and only get a little better performance. Just like you the graphic mods don't really affect the FPS as much as turning the res way down and part count seems to be the biggest factor. 

[maceemiller]

Not sure if you are, but if any of your mods are not up to tbe current version of KSP, you will have issues. This I know for a fact due to me visiting this forum daily........around 8 times daily........

Quick question,  are you using Windows 10? If you are, make sure to install your graphics card driver as Win 10 does not do this.

If, after reading my miniscule comments you still have issues then I bow down in admittance of the realisation I not only dont know what im talking about, but also Jeb told me to say it......

[createdbeard]

Hey there,

 

I play with the same specs, Asus 550JV - i7-4700hq+GT750

Search and install a program called "ThrottleStop". Make your settings match mine and enjoy the performance!