Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'gpu performance'.
After attempting to determine frame rate loss and unnecessary lagging, I have been able to identify that a large portion of issues are being related to the physics engine running through the GPU and the utilization of said GPU will become choked if the perceived framerate exceeds what the engine is calculating in comparison to the GPU. This could be part of the engine to ensure that the engine physics can't run away with GPU utilization and cause damage or overheating on the cards. Full utilization can happen in the game with smaller vessels and when out of Kerbin, but why would the utilization drop when needing more resources due to the number of part, physics calculations, etc. Is this something that is being looked into or are we expected to see this resolve with the future patches and updates? Currently running these specs: AMD Ryzen 9 5900X 12-Core Processor 3.70 GHz EVGA 3080ti 12GB 64 GB DDR4 3200 MHz Ram Please let me know if there are any tips or if there is any other information required.
So, my RTX2060 maxes out at 30% on startup while I only get around 30 fps. There are also moments where fps drops to 15 and GPU usage drops to 10%. Similar things happen when I have a couple of vehicles next to me and I look at them, the usage drops along with the FPS. My Specs: Ryzen 5 3600 Rtx 2060 16GB RAM And my ksp is on SSD
Beware that this is heavy on screenshots, but they serve an important purpose! Dear @SQUAD here is something that really needs looking into if you are continuing the development of this game and that is graphical performance. This might come of as a bit ranty but bear with me. Your game looks like something from the early 2000s. It is not very impressive in the looks department at all. Your skybox is an empty blue, your water looks nothing like the real deal. There are no god rays, there is no bloom, no depth of field etc... There is basically nothing going on and still graphical performance is shockingly aweful. I have here a few nice screenshots that ilustrate this very convincingly. Follow me now on a launch of one of my SSTOs to orbit. Note that this savegame is empty, there are no satellites in orbits anywhere, no space stations hanging about, and no debris. There is only this SSTO. My SSTO is idling on the runway and graphic performance is okay at this point but it doesn't reach a full 60 frames. Notice that my GPU is also nearly idling CPUs are about 50 % used. My SSTO has taken off and is on ascent. I am fast enough and aerodynamic effects have kicked in. 50 % FRAMEDROP. Is my GPU that busy? No. Are my CPU cores bottlenecking? No. My craft is now higher in the atmosphere and the framerate has recovered after the aerodynamic effects are gone. Framerate is even above 60 frames for the first time because nothing but my craft is on the screen Now comes the speed up phase to reach orbital velocity. Aerodynamic and heat effects are visible. OVER 50 % FRAMEDROP. GPU? Nah still bored to tears. CPUs? Like walking to jogging active. The vessel coasts toward the apoapsis, heat and aerodynamic effects are gone so framerate isn't aweful anymore. The GPU is on 1/3 capacity like at all times and the CPUs the same as always. To some it up, at no point was my system overly taxed at all quite the contrary. KSP simply doesn't make use of available resources. And neither the aerodynamic effects nor the heat effects warrant a 50 % drop in framerate when the GPU is basically doing a whole lot of nothing. They do not look anywhere near good enough to warrant this happening. An effect that is so poorly optimized that it can murder over 50% of the framerate should not be in the game! This screenshot is now my SSTO on the runway with the Stock Visual Enhancement Mod which includes EVE, Distant Object Enhancement and scatterer. There are now, clouds, cloud shadows, atmospheric scattering etc. Framerate is significantly impacted by this. But is my GPU taxed to capacity? No. KSP leaves 50 % capacity on the table. The CPUs aren't that much more taxed either. Funnily enough there is ONE scene where my GPU is on full work load and that is in the KSP overview. Squad I don't even know what I should say to this..... Another bizarre thing for performance is the more part mods you have, the more your FPS suffer. What is even happening there? Is KSP rendering all parts including those that are not in use in the background? There must be a way to only bring the parts into the flight scene that are currently in use to circumvent this happening. Maybe you should take a page out of ferram4s book. And I don't mean make his FAR mod stock. As you know FAR makes it so that computation is not happening on all the individual parts but on a voxel model that represents the whole craft. To me that should slim down things quite considerably and help people who build huge crafts not to suffer 4 FPS in Space. I can only stress Squad that I think this should be the next big thing to work on. As totalbiscuit would put it: This is unacceptable opimization work. Please get this sorted out as soon as is viable! This was on KSP 64Bit latest version. I have an AMD System, maybe Intel fairs better? Here are my system specs: Item Details Windows: Windows Version 6.2 (Build 9200) (Win 10) Internet Explorer: 9.11.14393.0 Memory (RAM): 16284 MB CPU Info: AMD FX(tm)-8320 Eight-Core Processor CPU Speed: 4218,3 MHz Sound Card: Lautsprecher (Sound Blaster Z) | SPDIF-Out (Sound Blaster Z) | Display Adapters: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Monitors: 1x; Generic PnP Monitor | Generic PnP Monitor | Generic PnP Monitor | Generic PnP Monitor | Screen Resolution: 1680 X 1050 - 32 bit