Elthy

Afaik Starlink is volume constrained, most other payloads also dont push the limits of the falcon 9. Its propably simply not neccessary.

Well, you asked for thoughts... A few points: You cant compare CPUs by their clockspeed (only within the same achitecture), AMDs 3000/4000 Series CPUs (based on Zen2) are able to calculate more stuff per clock than Intels Skylake-based CPUs (as the i7 10750H). Also the maximum stated clockspeed isnt used all the time, only when thermals and power usage allow. Here Zen2 is more efficient than Skylake, allowing it to sustain its speed for longer, while its still possible that the Intel CPU is faster for short bursts (a few seconds long) due to its way higher maximum clockspeed. You are right that the corecount doesnt matter much for KSP so its important to focus on the single thread speed. Sadly there are few tests that compare those CPUs directly at the same allowed power usage, so im comparing the score in Cinebench, which is a syntetic benchmark that favors AMD slightly: 4800H@45W ST: 1240 4800H@45W MT: 10575 i7 10750H@45W ST: 1149 i7 10750H@45W MT: 6541 (Source: https://www.computerbase.de/2020-11/cinebench-r23-community-benchmarks/#abschnitt_die_ergebnisse) As you can see the i7 is slightly slower in ST performance, but since Cinebench favors AMD a tiny bit the speed should be more or less identical. But for multithreaded workloads AMD is far ahead, you just wont notice in KSP1. I would still go with AMD as MT will get more important across the board, e.g. in KSP2, especialy since its cheaper. AMD has caught up to Intels Skylake based CPUs with the Zen2 based 3000 series, Intel is only able to outrun them (in single threaded workloads) with their extremly high clocked high end desktop models that draw an obscene amount of power. Intel had to counter their mobile lineup with Icelake/Tiger Lake, which are currently only avaiable as low power models with 4 cores in low power notebooks, everything higher is still based on sklyake, still loosing to AMDs Zen2 in most circumstances. With AMDs Zen3 based 5000 series they made another big leap in performance, outclasing Intel on the desktop in all workloads. Those will soon also be available in notebooks, just like Intels Tigerlake with 8 cores, resulting in an extremly interessting duel. Simliary Intel will soon launch Tigerlake based deskop CPUs, which will likely be on par with Zen3 in single thread tasks. But since they will only offer up to 8 cores and are likely to have lower efficency they will still be behind in Multithreading. The 11th Gen is actualy the biggest leap Intel made in the recent years, since it combines the high IPC of Icelake with the high clockspeed of Skylake.

At least in germany both are available, Nvidia GPUs and AMDs 12/16 core at very high prices (+30%) while AMDs 6/8core are close to UVP. And for almost 2000$ its easy to build a better PC using those instead of the outdated stuff. The Ryzen seems to be a bit better, but not enught to warrant a much higher price.

Thats an extremly unbalanced PC for gaming, if your main usage case isnt video editing or other massively multithreaded workload that a realy bad deal for the money. And you compared GPUs with their VRAM, which is one of the least important specs as long as you have enough. Its all about the processing power. Both the CPU and GPU are also allready outdated...

Didnt the DC-X do a powered landing in 1996, way before both companies?

That was one of the coolest things ive seen in my whole life. Beginning with the liftoff, those blue flames are beautiful. I cant imagine how Superheavy will look like with way more engines, especialy at night. Extremly impressive they got the bellyflip right on the first try, its one of the most extreme maneuvers in the history of flight. Also its funny the engine that shut down first on the way up (which looked to violent) made it down to the ground, while engine 42 that went all the way up never reignited (propably on purpose).

Video memory is just one aspect, but the easiest one: You either have enough (for a game/setting) of you dont. If its not enough you will experience extreme stutter, making the game unplayable. The other main aspect is the graphics processor performance, which is depending on so many factors that there is no way to predict it from raw numbers like FLOPS, only to measure it.

There is also video from the cable as it snaps. At least we got two fine videos of this destruction, something positive. Would be a real shame if noone filmed this.

Im not sure about this one, prebuilds are usualy of realy bad value. Building your own PC is realy easy... But now is a realy bad time to buy a PC. The Ryzen 3000 and Geforce 2000 Series are allready outdated, but their succesors are almost impossible to source for a reasonable price. The CPU is especialy important for KSP and here the new Ryzen 5000 series wipes the floor with anything previous. So just wait until next year, then most stuff should be available at reasonable prices.

Well, when they finaly make the high hop that will change for sure. Its kinda strange that the legs are a tough problem, but the more i think about it the less i see an easy solution. The first one to land on Mars will be especially hard, i guess everyone after that will at least have a flat landing site.

Maybe on shutdown a few valves of the preburner didnt close properly, leading to a more stochiometric=hotter flame which melted the housing like a bunsen burner. This could have been caused by failed pneumatics... Edit: Elon Musk said that the engine failure caused the loss of pneumatics, not the other way around, so maybe something else kept the valves from closing.

It takes less, Reddit isnt the most stable website. They are regulary down from ordinary traffic if enough people are bored.

Isnt that totaly obvious? The topic isnt allowed to be discussed here, but maybe you should watch the news. There is a reason its completly overloaded...

Damn, if this is called almost a year before the old release date KSP2 seems to be in a sorry state, not even close to finished... Edit: At least at that point noone should care about PS4/XBox One anymore, so we arent limited by their bad CPU performance.

The question is if you realy need better VRMs. CPU overclocking is dead for ordinary users and every CPU will run fine with stock settings on any mainboard. All B550 MBs can handle even a 3950X, everything below that will be even easier.

Do not buy a new GPU in that price range, used ones offer way more value. You should get at least an RX 480 8GB for that money.

The biggest difference is the chipset, the B550 would be ideal since it doesnt limit you to PCIe3 as the A520 while the X570 doesnt realy offer any advantages other than more ports than you will ever need while being more expensive and powerhungry. If you dont have special requirements for overclocking, soundchip or special connectivity as Wifi you can simply go for the cheapest B550 in your prefered format. It may be wise to watch for an Type-C USB port for futureproofing... I would also strongly consider an RX5800 instead of the RTX 3070, since its not neutered by 8GB VRAM. Of course you should wait for tests of all the components, but i doubt you will get any of the GPUs/CPUs any time soon (for a reasonable price), so just wait.

Thats not comparable at all since TV satellites do only send the same stuff to every user.

They could troll and build another Dynetics lander mockup to scale, it should fit into the cargobay.

Thanks, it never crossed my mind that the quarks could be at fault, i usualy forget they even exist.

How exactly? As far as i remember the mass of ordinary matter is very close to the mass of the protons/neutrons its made of, isnt it?

It wont in most games (in KSP any CPU would bottleneck almost every GPU), but you realy dont need to OC an 3600. AMDs CPUs are allready running at their optimum speed from factory, most OC wont realy make them faster. Its quite easy to make them slower by tinkering, though.

Since KSP doesnt multithread very well you wont see much improvement by using more cores, only by using faster ones. But even the most recent Ryzen 5XXX will propably be only about 20% faster than your current CPU per Core, so the improvement will likely not be noticable. If you havent overclocked your CPU you could do that as well, but dont expect huge improvements.

Is it? Isnt the human brain just a complex biochemical computer, with its neurons firing according to physical laws? Of course there could be more to this, something that makes us self aware, but thats religios/philosophical speculation.

Thats another strange thing. Usualy AMDs stuff leaks a lot before presentations, while Nvidia comes from the dark. This time its the other way around, hardly anything surprising in the Ampere reveal, while there is almost nothing known about AMDs chips other than 80 CU on the biggest one, the other leaks are often inconsistent. There are rumors about quite small memory interfaces on AMDs new chips, which would be the complete opposite of their usual strategy. Also Nvidia went the way of extreme raw processing power which is usualy AMDs job, while it seems for now that suddenly AMD could be ahead in energy efficency. Somehow they completly traded roles.