Jump to content

KSP2 Performance Update

Nerdy_Mike

By Nerdy_Mike
in Announcements

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Community Lead
Nerdy_Mike

Nerdy_Mike

Posted
  • Community Lead
Posted

KSP2 Performance
 

Hey Kerbonauts, KSP Community Lead Michael Loreno here. I’ve connected with multiple teams within Intercept after ingesting feedback from the community and I’d like to address some of the concerns that are circulating regarding KSP 2 performance and min spec.

First and foremost, we need to apologize for how the initial rollout of the hardware specs communication went. It was confusing and distressful for many of you, and we’re here to provide clarity.

TLDR:

The game is certainly playable on machines below our min spec, but because no two people play the game exactly the same way (and because a physics sandbox game of this kind creates literally limitless potential for players to build anything and go anywhere), it’s very challenging to predict the experience that any particular player will have on day 1. We’ve chosen to be conservative for the time being, in order to manage player expectations. We will update these spec recommendations as the game evolves.

Below is an updated graphic for recommended hardware specs:

KSP2_SystemSpecs_V9.png

I’d like to provide some details here about how we arrived at those specs and what we’re currently doing to improve them.


To address those who are worried that this spec will never change: KSP2’s performance is not set in stone. The game is undergoing continuous optimization, and performance will improve over the course of Early Access. We’ll do our best to communicate when future updates contain meaningful performance improvements, so watch this space.


Our determination of minimum and recommended specs for day 1 is based on our best understanding of what machinery will provide the best experience across the widest possible range of gameplay scenarios.


In general, every feature goes through the following steps:

  1. Get it working
  2. Get it stable
  3. Get it performant
  4. Get it moddable

As you may have already gathered, different features are living in different stages on this list right now. We’re confident that the game is now fun and full-featured enough to share with the public, but we are entering Early Access with the expectation that the community understands that this is a game in active development. That means that some features may be present in non-optimized forms in order to unblock other features or areas of gameplay that we want people to be able to experience today. Over the course of Early Access, you will see many features make their way from step 1 through step 4.


Here’s what our engineers are working on right now to improve performance during Early Access:

  1. Terrain optimization. The current terrain implementation meets our main goal of displaying multiple octaves of detail at all altitudes, and across multiple biome types. We are now hard at work on a deep overhaul of this system that will not only further improve terrain fidelity and variety, but that will do so more efficiently.
  2. Fuel flow/Resource System optimization. Some of you may have noticed that adding a high number of engines noticeably impacts framerate. This has to do with CPU-intensive fuel flow and Delta-V update calculations that are exacerbated when multiple engines are pulling from a common fuel source. The current system is both working and stable, but there is clearly room for performance improvement. We are re-evaluating this system to improve its scalability.

As we move forward into Early Access, we expect to receive lots of feedback from our players, not only about the overall quality of their play experiences, but about whether their goals are being served by our game as it runs on their hardware. This input will give us a much better picture of how we’re tracking relative to the needs of our community.
 

With that, keep sending over the feedback, and thanks for helping us make this game as great as it can be!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sh1pman

sh1pman

Posted
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Nerdy_Mike said:

it’s very challenging to predict the experience that any particular player will have on day 1.

An obvious solution to this is to use a pre-built reasonably sized rocket (e.g. Kerbal X) and test how well it performs on various PC hardware during launch. Then just publish the results.

Edited by sh1pman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scarecrow71

Scarecrow71

Posted
Posted
Just now, sh1pman said:

An obvious solution to this is to use a pre-built reasonably sized rocket (e.g. Kerbal X) and test how well it performs on various PC hardware during launch.

The problem is that reasonably-sized means different things to different people.  For example, you could think a 200 part/150 ton rocket is a reasonable size, but someone like ShadowZone or Manley or Towne who build massive ships might think that's small.  So, like Mike said, it's hard to predict what any given player - or even a cross-section of the community - may do at launch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stoup

Stoup

Posted
Posted

I appreciate the frank communication and clarity provided! Early access titles are bound to have a few blunders along the way, but seeing an effort made to make sure communication is well provided for and letting us know we're heard is something I really like and hope to see more of in the future

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LoSBoL

LoSBoL

Posted
Posted (edited)

I would like to know a prognoses of the frequency of rolling out updates, what can we expect? Weekly updates with bug squating and performance upgrades? monthly updates or quarterly updates like it has been with KSP? 

Edited by LoSBoL
Link to comment
Share on other sites
whatsEJstandfor

whatsEJstandfor

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, AtomicTech said:

You might be in trouble:

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1660-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1070-Ti/4038vs3943

For another comparison, here are the leaderboards on 3DMark for Time Spy Extreme on a 1660 (sorted by graphics score). And for the now-minimum 1070 Ti. And for a 2060, which was previously the minimum required card. Lastly, a 5600 XT, which hasn't changed in this newer minimum spec.

To summarize, looking at average score, the 1660 seems to perform at about 75% relative to a 1070 Ti and about 70% compared to a 2060 or 5600 XT.

Edited by whatsEJstandfor
Cleaned up those links
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RyanRising

RyanRising

Posted
Posted

I appreciate the post, as much as it seems like damage control. I’m very disappointed to hear there are issues with scaling the fuel flow, however. This was a known and problematic issue with large scale crafts in KSP1, and I would have expected the development of KSP2’s system to specifically avoid that, since very large crafts are supposed to be common in this game.

but, whatever. I’m not gonna fix it by complaining. I hope you guys can work that out satisfactorily, and if you do I’ll be happy to buy the game.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
poopslayer78

poopslayer78

Posted
Posted

Thanks for posting this, this is a big relief for me.

Growing pains are easy to tolerate when it's clear that the issues are only temporary.  Thanks for sharing insights on the fine-grained lifecycle for different features so we know what to expect when something new comes out.

1 hour ago, Nerdy_Mike said:

In general, every feature goes through the following steps:

  1. Get it working
  2. Get it stable
  3. Get it performant
  4. Get it moddable

In particular, thanks for providing this level of detail.  You aren't mincing words or providing vague promises here.  This directly addresses some of the biggest criticisms of the ESA footage and shows that you're able to respond quickly.  It also prevents unhealthy speculation.

1 hour ago, Nerdy_Mike said:

Here’s what our engineers are working on right now to improve performance during Early Access:

  1. Terrain optimization. The current terrain implementation meets our main goal of displaying multiple octaves of detail at all altitudes, and across multiple biome types. We are now hard at work on a deep overhaul of this system that will not only further improve terrain fidelity and variety, but that will do so more efficiently.
  2. Fuel flow/Resource System optimization. Some of you may have noticed that adding a high number of engines noticeably impacts framerate. This has to do with CPU-intensive fuel flow and Delta-V update calculations that are exacerbated when multiple engines are pulling from a common fuel source. The current system is both working and stable, but there is clearly room for performance improvement. We are re-evaluating this system to improve its scalability.

I'll still be waiting and watching a bit before purchasing, but I feel much less anxious about the future of KSP2.

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
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...