• 1
Kerbonaut M

Breaking grounds slowed down KSP

Question

Hello fellow Kerbonauts!

Since I got the new DLCs Making history and Breaking grounds, my KSP game has lags... I uninstalled all the mods, put every graphic option in the KSP settings to minimal, but it still has problems when landing on planets, even on Kerbin! Like even moving the camera around is not without lags. 

I use the 64 bit version of KSP

I have :

- 8GB of RAM, but KSP only uses under 4GB every time I checked (maybe that is the problem? Can I allocate more RAM to KSP?)

- Nvidia Geforce GTX 570

- quadcore (I think) intel i5-2500K CPU @3.30GHz

Before the DLCs, I remember playing with a few graphic mods, and the graphic options of KSP set to medium / high. Did you experience the same trouble? 

Thanks in advance :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Have you tried checking if you have Terrain Scatters enabled? That can cause a lot of lag but is a stock setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Kerbonaut M said:

It is disabled. :/ I'm still searching what could cause the lag...

How about Terrain Detail and Surface FX?

BE very CAREFUL when changing terrain detail!!!!Its very risky!Backup first and i suggest using World Stabilizer mod if things dont go the right way when loading vessels at ground!!!!!

Edited by Boyster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

1.7.2 & BG have definitely slowed my system down.  Of course, on the load screen you can see at least part of the reason:  Pre-BG, with all my mods, I had ~2200-2300 patches to load.  Post-BG/1.7.2 it's jumped to 3500.   My mods did not change, and very few needed updates (KAS was the main one).  Actually, I've deleted around 100 parts since I got BG, it was originally loading ~3600 patches.  I've just been dealing with it, but it is noticeable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Most of the slowdown I see is in orbit and the surface of the Mun. I've got a 220 part station in orbit around Kerbin that runs a little over 30fps with the clock green, so physics is running real time. A similar station in orbit (230 parts around the Mun physics run at less that half speed (10 secs in game takes 23 seconds real time) with 25 fps. Landed I am always running physics in the yellow on Mun while it's green on Kerbin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
12 hours ago, Cavscout74 said:

1.7.2 & BG have definitely slowed my system down.  Of course, on the load screen you can see at least part of the reason:  Pre-BG, with all my mods, I had ~2200-2300 patches to load.  Post-BG/1.7.2 it's jumped to 3500.   My mods did not change, and very few needed updates (KAS was the main one).  Actually, I've deleted around 100 parts since I got BG, it was originally loading ~3600 patches.  I've just been dealing with it, but it is noticeable.

Loading more patches just means it will take longer to patch when the game starts up. It doesn't automatically translate to lag in-game. And the extra time it takes to patch is only the first time you have to process new patches. After that, MM caches the patches so on subsequent startups it only has to apply the cached patches without processing them all from scratch.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
11 hours ago, Starwaster said:

Loading more patches just means it will take longer to patch when the game starts up. It doesn't automatically translate to lag in-game. And the extra time it takes to patch is only the first time you have to process new patches. After that, MM caches the patches so on subsequent startups it only has to apply the cached patches without processing them all from scratch.

 

I know it's loads from cache once the cache is built, but I thought the more parts you had, the more RAM that was used?  

Regardless, post-BG is definitely running slower than pre-BG for me - it's not huge for me (as opposed to the OP), but it is noticeable enough to start trying to trim down my installed mods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, Cavscout74 said:

I know it's loads from cache once the cache is built, but I thought the more parts you had, the more RAM that was used?  

Regardless, post-BG is definitely running slower than pre-BG for me - it's not huge for me (as opposed to the OP), but it is noticeable enough to start trying to trim down my installed mods.

Are any of your mods Kopernicus and/or a scaled Kerbol system? If so there is an issue with Kopernicus and the BG surface features (ROCs)

One way to test if your lag is from the ROCs is if you still have lag in a saved game that existed before you installed Breaking Ground. Older saved games do not have ROCs by default because they could break any bases or vessels you have on the ground. (ROCs are physical and if they spawn in on top of a vessel it will not end well)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, Starwaster said:

Are any of your mods Kopernicus and/or a scaled Kerbol system? If so there is an issue with Kopernicus and the BG surface features (ROCs)

Bingo! I removed Kopernicus and my performance more than doubled. It's now running physics in real time with between 30-40fps around my Mun station that was less than half realtime physics at 25fps. Bye, Bye planet packs.

I wouldn't recommend deleting Kopernicus and a planet pack if you don't know what you're doing. I started this save with the release of BG and hadn't left the Kerbin SOI yet, so deleting the planet pack doesn't really affect the current state of my game. I still spent an hour chasing errors before my save would load without any new errors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Just now, Starwaster said:

@Tonka Crash it is possible to do but you’ll need to disable ROCs. Edit your save file and change ROCSeed to -1

I'd rather keep the ROCs at least while it still a relatively new feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Hmm, I’m going to try this (rocseed -1) out later since I’m definitely noticing FPS problems. 

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
Answer this question...

×   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.