Galileo

[KSP 1.6.1] Stock Visual Enhancements [v1.4.1] [20 March 2019]

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Jebs_SY said:

I think I had that while prerelease testing. EVE needed 1-2 seconds to load in main menu. Quickstart was faster loading into the last career. So maybe even Quickstart should add a little delay. Or can EVE block loading a savegame before it finished loading itself?

The problem is that with AssetBundles EVE doesn't get to say "load this now" - it has to request the load and wait. I'm not sure why QuickStart causes problems though - the author of that mod would need to give me some tips to be able to fix it or work with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@galileo

You can use the alt+0 menu in EVE to disable shadows without needing the SVE EVE shadow config (which didn't work for me). Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Galileo

I noticed that antialiasing level effects to performance significantly. As I changed antialiasing level from 8x to none, average FPS increased from 24 to 65.

I guess that this phenomenon is related with volumetric clouds, and would you mind to investigate for it? Is this already known phenomenon?

Sorry for no logs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ofzpMxB.png

This is an artifact that i've encountered in SVE. It only appears after the camera is above 100km. Is this a bug with scatterer mentioned under "known issues"?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for me if I try to use the force-opengl switch i get a black sky and pink kerbin in the map view. d3d11 seems to work fine. and everyonce in awhile still getting a scatterer/fourier spam 

Edited by COL.R.Neville

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally missed that this was updated for 1.2, Gal. Add my apologies to the God of the Red Text as well... I feel ashamed. Thanks much. This is what I get for following your other works too closely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Galileo! I haven't been on the forums in a long while so I decided to check in. I can't help but assume the volumetric aurora project has been halted... The idea seemed too fantastical to be built into, let alone modded into the game engine KSP is run on. I also haven't worked on that Astronomer's Visual Pack Rework in a while either, I've been so busy with life lately. I may start working on it again as soon as I earn the money to build a better computer. The one I have now is eight years old and can barely run KSP with any mod installed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HereComesTheBoom said:

Hey Galileo! I haven't been on the forums in a long while so I decided to check in. I can't help but assume the volumetric aurora project has been halted... The idea seemed too fantastical to be built into, let alone modded into the game engine KSP is run on. I also haven't worked on that Astronomer's Visual Pack Rework in a while either, I've been so busy with life lately. I may start working on it again as soon as I earn the money to build a better computer. The one I have now is eight years old and can barely run KSP with any mod installed.

Well auroras are at least glowing on the dark side now.  Also,  just be cognizant of the fact that astronomer is back and is working on a new visual pack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I swear there was a visual pack that had auroras which stood perpendicular to the planet but I can't for the life of me remember where that was :/ - none of astronomers' packs and not Better Atmospheres or KSPRC (Installed them all last night to look).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new astronomer's pack promises to have volumetric auroras so we can see how that turns out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nhawks17 said:

The new astronomer's pack promises to have volumetric auroras so we can see how that turns out.

Adding volume to the auroras is easy but until waz looks into optimizing the performance of volumetric clouds,  I'm going to avoid it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Galileo said:

Well auroras are at least glowing on the dark side now.  Also,  just be cognizant of the fact that astronomer is back and is working on a new visual pack

Well... progress is progress! I wasn't aware Astronomer was even active again, let alone working on a new pack. Then again, I wasn't ever going to release it to the community, it was more like a personal project. On that note, is there a link to his new forum thread where I could get any more information?

Edited by HereComesTheBoom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Galileo said:

Adding volume to the auroras is easy but until waz looks into optimizing the performance of volumetric clouds,  I'm going to avoid it. 

Unacceptable! :P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14.10.2016 at 2:18 AM, Galileo said:

 

sC52pQ2.png5EIvPdM.pngs57MoRM.png

@Galileo How do you even have this kind of performance? At every scene I would have about 20 frames less. What kind of system are you running?

I don't think KSP has been ever optimized for graphical performance. I tested vanilla KSP today and found that I lost 50 % of my framerate as soon as aerodynamic effects (mach and heating) show up. That is simply insane performance loss. Interestingly with SVE HR the performance drop is only 10 frames instead of 30 but with SVE performance is 20 frames less anyway. Without SVE my performance is around 60 frames as soon as I enter the flight scene, with SVE it is around 40, on ascend with full aero effects I get 25 frames and 35 when those disappear

I have an AMD System, does KSP perform better on Intel?

My system specs:

Windows Windows Version 6.2 (Build 9200)
Internet Explorer 9.11.14393.0
Memory (RAM) 16284 MB
CPU Info AMD FX(tm)-8320 Eight-Core Processor
CPU Speed 4214,8 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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Flashblade said:

@Galileo How do you even have this kind of performance? At every scene I would have about 20 frames less. What kind of system are you running?

I don't think KSP has been ever optimized for graphical performance. I tested vanilla KSP today and found that I lost 50 % of my framerate as soon as aerodynamic effects (mach and heating) show up. That is simply insane performance loss. Interestingly with SVE HR the performance drop is only 10 frames instead of 30 but with SVE performance is 20 frames less anyway. Without SVE my performance is around 60 frames as soon as I enter the flight scene, with SVE it is around 40, on ascend with full aero effects I get 25 frames and 35 when those disappear

I have an AMD System, does KSP perform better on Intel?

My system specs:

Windows Windows Version 6.2 (Build 9200)
Internet Explorer 9.11.14393.0
Memory (RAM) 16284 MB
CPU Info AMD FX(tm)-8320 Eight-Core Processor
CPU Speed 4214,8 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

 

I don't know if it performs better on Intel or AMD tbh and I don't know anything about AMD processors.   I can't test on an AMD unfortunately.  That might be a reason though.  Also just for the sake of consistency, I don't develop with any mods besides what comes in SVE so when you see those fps in my pics know it's with SVE only.  Part packs will lower you fps pretty significantly even if you aren't using them during a flight.  Just having them in your gamedata folder will cause performance loss.  So if you have a few part packs try without those and see if the performance is any better.  That can at least help you narrow down where performance loss might be coming from.  As for your performance with aero effects,  I have no idea. Hope this helps a little

I just recently sent my gtx 1070 in because it wasn't registering for some reason.  So currently I am using a

MSI Nvidia gtx 980 

i5 4690k @ 3.5GHz

250gb SSD x 6

32gb ram 

Windows 10

All screenshots have been taken with the 980 btw

Edited by Galileo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Installed medium resolution SVE for 1.2. The only change I made was to the volumetric clouds  distance thingy. I changed it from 10000 to 5000. I can see a visual difference (still looks great) and a slight performance gain. I run KSP on a HP laptop with an AMD processor. Taking 8 minutes to get to orbit instead of 3 doesn't trouble me as the view is worth it. 

The real reason for this post is to report what I hope you can see in the picture.

sUUPRrC.jpg

I am getting a dark green band along the horizon instead of hazy land. Not in this pic, but I've also noticed mountains along the horizon with out the scatter effect, I am pretty sure it was this way before I made the one change to EVE clouds GUI. I do not recall this issue being in the medium res pack I used with 1.1.3. This is not troubling enough in itself to warrant another 140mb download but thought I would report it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Red Shirt said:

Installed medium resolution SVE for 1.2. The only change I made was to the volumetric clouds  distance thingy. I changed it from 10000 to 5000. I can see a visual difference (still looks great) and a slight performance gain. I run KSP on a HP laptop with an AMD processor. Taking 8 minutes to get to orbit instead of 3 doesn't trouble me as the view is worth it. 

The real reason for this post is to report what I hope you can see in the picture.

sUUPRrC.jpg

I am getting a dark green band along the horizon instead of hazy land. Not in this pic, but I've also noticed mountains along the horizon with out the scatter effect, I am pretty sure it was this way before I made the one change to EVE clouds GUI. I do not recall this issue being in the medium res pack I used with 1.1.3. This is not troubling enough in itself to warrant another 140mb download but thought I would report it. 

This is because you made a change in the EVE GUI.  To fix,  change scenes i.e. Go to the tracking station and exit. The issue should be fixed.  You cannot compare this to the 1.1.3 version as quite a bit has changed and some bugs need to be fixed with EVE in 1.2. 

Edited by Galileo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Galileo said:

This is because you made a change in the EVE GUI.  To fix,  change scenes i.e. Go to the tracking station and exit. The issue should be fixed.  You cannot compare this to the 1.1.3 version as quite a bit has changed and some bugs need to be fixed with EVE in 1.2. 

I'm stupid. Could have sworn I did change scenes. I obviously didn't. I predate DOS and can't be trusted trying to multitask. I've been shaking down all my latest mod installs and pretty happy with this version so far. More so now that I know the one issue I had was me. No mod update for that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Flashblade said:

 Interestingly with SVE HR the performance drop is only 10 frames instead of 30 but with SVE performance is 20 frames less anyway. 

FPS is not additive. The measure you want is milliseconds (the time for a frame), which is fps-1. For example, 60 fps is 16.7 milliseconds. 30fps is 33ms. 40fps is 25ms. 20fps is 50ms, etc. So if mach effects cost 15 milliseconds, they'll take 60fps down to 31fps, or 40fps down to 25fps, or 10fps down to 8fps.

Edited by Waz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2016 at 6:11 AM, Rdivine said:

ofzpMxB.png

This is an artifact that i've encountered in SVE. It only appears after the camera is above 100km. Is this a bug with scatterer mentioned under "known issues"?

 

It shouldn't look like that at all.  I have tried for the last 25 min to replicate it. Unless I make a change in the EVE GUI,  I don't see any artifacting like that.  If you did make a change,  just enter the tracking station and exit.  Should fix the issue

Edited by Galileo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ockidj said:

Can I change how far volumetric clouds load?  

You can but for aesthetic purposes,  I wouldn't suggest it.  It causes clouds in the form of a hexagon shape to follow underneath you when in orbit.  Give me a min and I will hop on and tell you exactly which value needs to be changed as I cannot remember off of the top of my head

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.