Ksp 1.0 System Requirements.

[areutheman]

Im having trouble finding specific info on 1.0s system requirements. Im barely running the current version so if it is any more complex i wont be able to get it. Please give source with answers no rumors.

[r4pt0r]

bottom of here mate, https://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/kspstore/index.php?p=22

Recommended System Specs:

* 2.0Ghz Dual Core CPU or higher (preferably higher)

* 4GB RAM

* 512MB Video Card, Shader Model 3.0

* 1GB Free HD space

* Windows XP, Vista, 7 or 8

* An Intel-based Mac running Mac OS X 10.6 or higher

* A Debian based Linux distro

And on Steam it says:

MINIMUM:

OS:Windows Vista

Processor:Core 2 Duo

Memory:3 GB RAM

Graphics:SM3 512MB VRAM

Hard Drive:1 GB HD space

RECOMMENDED:

OS:Windows 7 or 8 64 bit

Processor:Core i5

Memory:4 GB RAM

Graphics:SM4 1GB VRAM

Hard Drive:2 GB HD space

[Fel]

Huh, isn't 0.9's base install 2GB?

[Varsi]

They've been doing a lot of optimizations so 1.0 could run better than 0.9 did. At least loading times have been reduced.

[ackzsel]

Why the dual core? I've never seen KSP really making use of it anyways.

[jarmund]

From my experience, recommended OS should simply be debian based linux. For me it ran better on Linux Mint than it ever did in Windows 7, and from what I've read on the forum, running KSP on Mac is pretty much gambling.

[Taki117]

Why the dual core? I've never seen KSP really making use of it anyways.

This is so that KSP can use one core while the rest of your computer uses the other.

[kStrout]

From my experience, recommended OS should simply be debian based linux. For me it ran better on Linux Mint than it ever did in Windows 7, and from what I've read on the forum, running KSP on Mac is pretty much gambling.

It's not that bad, and aside from alienware, it's hard to find a laptop that will match a Mac in performance and not weigh 3 times as much, I use a 6 year old macbook pro and I can use mods. (but not very many)

[katateochi]

As well as having the standard min/recommended system specs I think KSP should have a guideline for a recommended/max part-count for each spec where the performance of the game will still be acceptable. i.e: 150 part craft on min spec will run ok, 300 part craft on recommended spec. (those are just guess numbers I picked out of thin air).

[juanml82]

Why the dual core? I've never seen KSP really making use of it anyways.

I think only some Celeron procesors are single core nowadays and I wouldn't try to run KSP in those anyway

[Wjolcz]

They've been doing a lot of optimizations so 1.0 could run better than 0.9 did. At least loading times have been reduced.

I hope so, because I remember playing pre-0.90 on medium terrain detail and 0.90 struggles when on low.

Yes, I know my laptop sucks but I remember the times when it had better frame rate than it has now.

[Red Iron Crown]

Why the dual core? I've never seen KSP really making use of it anyways.

KSP is multithreaded, but the physics aren't. A dual core or better keeps all the lesser stuff from reducing the performance of the physics thread.