[Does anyone actually use the first level runway?]

I drive my plane slowly to the grass land on the left then take of from there.

it proves a safer environment to take off than the runway =P.

[You hardest contract in KSP]

Gosh, i am spending 2 days now still cant get this mission to work....

Eject a Class E out of Solar orbit...........

3000T of un-unified rock, even lock on the center of gravity, when i start my 2000kn engine, it just spines around in 10 second. i need 3890m/s to eject it out.......

working on AsteroidE Mark3 now,, to have a tow rockect, maybe this time works.....

i am thinking of a part that can turn the rocket 180 degree that would easily transfer a push rocket to a tow rocket....(without undock/dock)

it could also provide a lot of opportunity to make a transformer rocket ?! XD.

[KSP1 Computer Building/Buying Megathread]

22 hours ago, scribbleheli said:

 

If you already purchased the parts. Then have at it, you'll have a great computer.

If not, I would suggest going skylake too.

Pretty much any discrete graphics card can handle KSP at really any settings.

I started on a HD 4850, then a GTX 760 WF3 OC, Now a GTX 980 WF3 OC.

There was no appreciable difference with stock graphic settings. The CPU is 1000% the bottle neck of this game, since its single core till 1.1.

which again, is why I suggest skylake. IPC (Instructions per clock) is the real important number when it comes to KSP performance, not Ghz.

And skylake has the highest.

Getting an i7 or i5 is up to you. Unless your asking for budget advice, ignore the people who say you don't need it. You also don't need a gaming PC (which your obviously trying to build), KSP, Pizza, beer, football or a snuggie.

But they are all really nice to have. 

 

THAT'S RIGHT I SAID A SNUGGIE!

 

 

12 hours ago, Camacha said:

This is false. You do not need an i7, not because it is a luxury, but because you will not be able to use it in games. Hyper-threading is a technology that yields very specific advantages. In short, it helps in applications that internally switch tasks a lot. It does not actually add any calculative power, but it helps making optimal use of the cores that you have. The main difference between HT and no HT is that your CPU cores are spending more time waiting on the next instruction/task in the i5. Obviously, this leads to slightly reduced performance. In an i7, work is resumed faster, making better use of the hardware. However, and this is the major factor: you will only see gains if your task actually means a lot of switching. A good example is doing render work, where you do lots and lots of small calculations over and over. On the flip side, it does not really work out when you do more complicated tasks less often.

If you look at the benchmarks, it turns out hyper-threading gains you little to nothing in games. The task does not line up with the technology. You simply blew 100+ dollars on a technology you will not put to good use. In more than one case it even hurts performance. This means that 9 times out of 10, you are better off spending those dollars/euros/yens on a better video card than on a CPU. In other cases, you spent is on something you will not actually use.

As it stands today, it remains true: unless you know why you would need hyper-threading (and thus an i7), you do not need it. People get fooled by the Intel marketing time and time again without understanding the technology or even knowing what the actual difference between an i5 and i7 is.

 

My old GTS450 ran KSP at 1920x1440 (well over Full HD) really well, and that card is many times slower than a 380. You will be absolutely fine - and then some.

Thanks for your reply and advice.. unfortunately, i saw a I7 4790K at £220 and think its a good deal and bought it.....

luckily I kept the r9 380 than 390 that saved me £120 plus.....

took me half hour to dock in my Spaceship Minimus Mrk4 in 1600:900 ...XDXD

looking forward to play proper KSP =D

[The "You know you're playing a lot of KSP when..." thread]

when i set an alarm about 40 mins in order to come back to cut the ion engine...

[KSP1 Computer Building/Buying Megathread]

my old pc is about 5 yr old now, 

amd fx-6300, ATI Radean 5770 graphic,

8gb memory,

samsung ssd.

Asus mobo..

and i had a base of 241 parts... with max physics, it moves like an ant.(like 8 sec real life for 1 sec in KSP)............and i am on a project of Battlecruiser Minimus Mrk3.... 182 parts space ship... Jeb.......i need a better PC......

where i have a question now, i just placed order of following parts

I7 4790k + heatsink

MSI z97 gaming 5

16gb memory

750w corsair PSU,

MSi R9 380  graphic

i am bit worry now is r9 380 good enough.. since i have been playing my KSP in 1600x900....not even 1080p.........

anyone have similar build that could give some advice?