xtoro

Yeah that's why I mentioned that I'll also do a test with graphics turned down including the mach effects. But I think those are more a graphics card thing which my crossfired cards can handle easily.

It's been done and possible as long as there's enough thrust. Just make a wingless plane and arrange the wheels so that the front wheel is lower than the rear to give it a positive pitch on the ground. You will also need either very little lift for the tail fins or lots of authority.

Yeah I'm aware of the added stock aero and heat calculations which is why I mentioned doing a test with the latest version with heat turned off and drag being applied as acceleration vice force to be more like pre-1.x. It may not completely eliminate null calculations, but when comparing it to pre-1.x versions running both DRE and FAR it would be more of a fair comparison. I think the shape has a lot to do with new players compared to veteran players. In hindsight I should have maybe put 2 options of "1.0.4 but never played pre-1.0 versions" and "1.0.4 and I have played pre-1.0 versions" to make a better assessment... But then I could have also added playing with and without mods, AMD and Intel processors... Really, the possibilities are endless but it's hard to get specific data using a simple poll

So I don't have time this evening but I started doing a bit. I'm using DMagic's 600-part benchmark rocket for this, and all future tests. I'll also be downloading an FPS counter. For now, I use the "physics realtime ratio" displayed by going into the F12 menu and clicking on "show flight debug stats". What I found so far (haven't downloaded DRE or FAR yet): KSP 0.25 completely stock, new install, all graphics settings on max. From VAB to launch, smooth as silk. Physics ratio between 0.7-0.8x and timer shows steady yellow at launch. Launch is smooth and ratio is between 0.6-0.8x. After dropping a few stages, ratio is 0.9-1x and timer is green. The rest of the flight is same high FPS, 1x ratio, and smooth. KSP 1.0.4 completely stock, new install, all graphics settings on max. VAB is smooth and launch is smooth until physics loads (the point when the camera drifts down to the CoM). At this point it is noticeably choppy, when moving the camera around. Physics ratio is between 0.4-0.5x, timer is steady yellow. Launch is still choppy, but as it approaches Mach 1, the ratio drops to between 0.3-0.4, even after dropping a few stages. This is when aero and heat are taking effect. Ratio only gets to 0.6-0.7x even when approaching the edge of the atmosphere and FPS is still choppy. There are less than 20 parts left at this point. During the entire ascent, the F12 menu shows a steady 25 FPS all the way up, but it clearly is not 25 FPS. It also shows Max and Min FPS to be 25. I don't think it works properly in atmosphere. The second I hit 70KM and escape the atmosphere (with the the last 2 stages) the FPS counter shoots up to 165 FPS and becomes very smooth for the rest of the flight (didn't reenter atmosphere). /END OF COMPARISON I still have yet to install and run the test on 0.25 again with DRE and FAR, but I will, along with 0.90. I also want something to display actual FPS outside of the game itself. I also want to hyperedit the ship into orbit and see how the performance is with a 600-part ship outside of atmosphere. And I want to run the 1.0.4 test again with 0% heating and the old aero which I think can be switched to in the settings config. Finally, I will retry with all the lowest graphics settings but will keep the resolution the same. More to come...

I'm going to run some tests. 0.25 vs 0.90 vs 1.0.4 all stock. Then the same tests again but with DRE and FAR installed on the pre-1.0 versions. My PC is a beast, so we'll see what the differences are.

Like everyone else said, last stage is first built. I'm big on sending probes first, and they sometimes have multiple miniprobes that I can separate when reaching systems like Jool, Sarnus etc because I use RemoteTech. So the main large probe has the long range antenna which connects to the smaller probes. In that case I build the smaller probe first and save it as a subassembly. Then build the main probe, add the small probe subassemblies and then the launcher. I do the same for motherships that have multiple Landers.

But previous versions running DRE and FAR ran smoother than stock 1.0.4... And they did heat and aerodynamics. But I wonder now if they ran on a different thread than physics... No worries about not voting and thanks for commenting anyways I've been playing since the early teen versions, but i found it better to not include them since so few people on the forums played them.

Thanks to everyone for contributing. Seems by the comments that the majority has seen better performance pre-1.0. But the votes show otherwise, and as others suspect, it's due to new players who haven't played older versions...

Why does the thumbnail say Unite and not Unity?

You didn't get a performance drop with 1.x? I found that building the same ships I had in 0.25 yielded much more lag. Don't really recall 0.90 because it went by quick for me in my mind for some reason.

By performance I mean the ability to create larger ships(150+ parts?) with good FPS. If crashes are a factor in your decision, I'd also like to know this. Or if your preferred version isn't listed, just post it up. NOTE: If you are a new player since 1.x, or you've only ever played one version, please don't vote since you can't make a comparison between versions. Thanks!

There are only 3 simple things I would like. Much less bugs Better performance (like it was pre-1.0) 64bit I could care less if anything else is added because there's mods for that. For example, new planets are in OPM. Better nukes in Atomic Age etc... I just want the game fixed. I'm contemplating going back to 0.90, add Deadly Reentry and FAR, and call it a day. But finding old versions of mods that are compatible with 0.90 might cause issues.

If you get low FPS with a craft that has less than 5 parts, it's your graphics card that's the problem. But if you have smooth high fps with 10-20 parts and it only gets slower the more parts you add, then its your CPU.

I agree, and I am subscribed to her channel, but I rarely ever click on anything unless it's something very recent in the news that I haven't read somewhere else yet, I know you were initially asking Johnny Wishbone that question but I will answer again. It has to do because Amy made the video. If it was just Joe Shmoe, then cool, whatever. If it was Scott Manley, likely awesome. But it was Amy who made it, and she has a reputation. It's like the Chinese company GooPhone (yes it's real) for example coming out with a high-end smartphone with awesome specs that rival the top companies in the field. Would I buy it? No. Why? Because they're known for making clones of phones such as the Samsung S5 using sub-par parts, and the phones are known for physically breaking easily within months and just plain bricking themselves. The reason I wouldn't buy it isn't because I dislike the Samsung S5, it's because of who makes the product in question (GooPhone). Amy makes a product in the form of videos, articles and blogs, but she has a history of making "clones" if you will. But in her case, she didn't even have to put forth as much effort to clone her product, all she needed was a keyboard. This video, is one of her products. New and original content or not, she's still no better than GooPhone. Even if they did start making their own original lines of smartphones, their reputation is already tarnished. Luckily for Amy, in the world of constant twitter feeds and youtube videos, things like this get lost for some.

Because she made the video, and it's a huge punch in her credibility's face to be outed on 4 plagiarized articles/blogs of hers. Reading into the link's comments and on other sites, there are many many more articles that she plagiarized. Yet she doesn't respond properly or even apologize, she just keeps doing it and removes posts/articles when she gets busted. Time passes and her peers and fans may forget. But anyone who is someone in that field is looking down on her. Fake it till you make it right? Not always... Things have a tendency to come back to haunt people just when things are getting good for them.

I probably thumbs up most videos I watch, including others she does. The whole purpose of the thumbs up/down is to get a feel of what people like and don't like. A videos doesn't have to be completely useless if you don't like it, regardless of how good the content is. That's the whole point of having a thumbs down option, otherwise they would only have a thumbs up...

Yeah I'll go give it a mention, but installing your OPM expansion fixed it all except Jool, which you gave me the fix for, so I'm happy!

Because freedom of opinion.

You can also try strutting the wing tips to the fuselage. I find physics warp bends the wings causing unwanted behavior. Strutting worked for me but they do add drag... Perhaps KJR would also fix this.

She didn't really play it, she just used it to show an example. Other than her using it as a tool, the video subject was 99% Albert Monkeys and 1% KSP. I thumbs downed it bcs monkeys don't interest me

I would be careful and look up performance on these things. I lived in Germany for several years and found their cheap computer parts to be lower end stuff. Even things that look good have a different letter or number in the part number resulting in a lower performing part. Do your research first, and then tack on the customs fees you have to pay for when getting it shipped to your country before deciding if it's actually a good deal or not. Don't even get me started on this "breakthrough innovation" (sarcastic). They come out with a hybrid drive that's been around for a long time(it's not new, they didn't invent it), call it their own thing, and then make sure you HAVE to buy it by modifying the SATA connector in their computers to make it proprietary and ensure that you just don't buy a regular SATA SSD drive, and then call it amazing. /facepalm

That's strange because I first only installed OPM and its prerequisites, then your antennas and stock recolor, and then Jool and the opm planets were green and black stripes. Through CKAN.

Awesome! Thanks for the quick fix, worked like a charm! But what about the issue where Stock Recolor does the same to the added OPM planets? Initially I had OPM and only wanted Eve and Jool recolored, but it messed up the rest as well.

Yep, installed all prerequisites, and have the latest mod manager. All installed through CKAN. .

Not sure what's going on with Jool here... Installed OPM, Stock Recolor and OPM Expansion. Happened after installing Stock Recolor. Removing it still leaves it looking like that, reinstall didn't help. How can I fix this? Also, Stock Recolor does this to all OPM planets, OPM Expansion fixes all except Jool...