Would this run KSP smoothly?

[kenbobo]

I was wondering because of my upcoming birthday if I could get this to run KSP smoothly, aka 30-120 FPS.

Would this run it like I want to?

Thanks

Ken

[Slam_Jones]

Well, looking at the stats, it looks you should be able to run it pretty decently.

The CPU on it is equivalent(ish) to one I've been using for a few years, so you're good there. Edit: The i5 you're looking at actually has a better single-core score, so you'll probably run it a little smoother than I do.

Plenty of RAM, no problem there. KSP, in it's current form, only really needs 4 gigs.

Not sure how GPU intensive KSP really is, but the GPU there should definitely be able to handle at least the basics, if not EVE/Astronomer's Pack.

Persnoally, I'd stay away from Win8 if you have a choice, but that's just my opinion.

Good luck!

[ZedNova]

Yeah it should run it decently. Graphics are crap and it's using slow Vram so don't expect it to run many games well.

Edited May 29, 2015 by ZedNova

[kenbobo]

Thanks! I'll probably load windows 10 once it comes out... i like it from my VirtualBox testing

[Camacha]

I looks like the GPU is rather underpowered. As such, I would not recommend this as a gaming system.

Persnoally, I'd stay away from Win8 if you have a choice, but that's just my opinion.

2012 called, it wants its opinion back. It is a good OS, I would even argue Microsoft's best, though as always YMMV.

[Slam_Jones]

2012 called, it wants its opinion back. It is a good OS, I would even argue Microsoft's best, though as always YMMV.

Maybe I'm influenced by the opinions of others, but Win8 should really only be on touchscreens. That's what it was designed for, right? Big, brightly colored blocks are easy to poke. When you have a mouse, well, they're just annoying.

Again, this is just my opinion. Maybe I'm crazy. (or just stubborn)

[kenbobo]

It also seems like it IS user accessible, so if the RAM isn't enough or I need a better graphics card I can do that so... i guess give me some suggestions as to what to add for a gaming PC...

[Camacha]

It also seems like it IS user accessible, so if the RAM isn't enough or I need a better graphics card I can do that so... i guess give me some suggestions as to what to add for a gaming PC...

Why not build something right the first time? Chances are that the PSU is dimensioned minimally for that configuration, so you would need to replace that too if you want to upgrade your video card. Maybe the case or motherboard will not accept the card of choice. It is just unnecessary trouble.

Maybe I'm influenced by the opinions of others, but Win8 should really only be on touchscreens.

I honestly feel it is the best OS I ever used when it comes to production work.

[ZedNova]

Why not build something right the first time? Chances are that the PSU is dimensioned minimally for that configuration, so you would need to replace that too if you want to upgrade your video card. Maybe the case or motherboard will not accept the card of choice. It is just unnecessary trouble.

Not everyone has the time, interest, or patience to build their own rig like you and I.

[icecreamberni]

Just build it yourself. Its not hard.

[Camacha]

Not everyone has the time, interest, or patience to build their own rig like you and I.

But they do have enough time to fiddle until eternity with a rig that simply is not up to the job you want it to perform? Besides, you can pay someone to do it and the rig might very well end up costing the same or less, as components are generally cheaper.

I never get those strange priorities.

Edited May 29, 2015 by Camacha

[void_error]

Not sure how GPU intensive KSP really is, but the GPU there should definitely be able to handle at least the basics, if not EVE/Astronomer's Pack.

Persnoally, I'd stay away from Win8 if you have a choice, but that's just my opinion.

It's not GPU-intensive at all, well, at least not on my AMD R9 270. GPU usage never goes to 100% with no framerate drops. However KSP uses only 2 cores so you'll need a fairly high performance per core CPU so the physics don't lag.

[Camacha]

It's not GPU-intensive at all, well, at least not on my AMD R9 270. GPU usage never goes to 100% with no framerate drops. However KSP uses only 2 cores so you'll need a fairly high performance per core CPU so the physics don't lag.

Then again, a R9 270 can already be considered a quick card in relative terms, as in, it is faster than ~95% of the GPU hardware out there.

[steve_v]

I''l poke my nose in with: Don't buy a brand-name system if you want a decent upgrade path in the future. Seriously, you'll get better specs for your money building a machine... and you won't have to deal with non-standard components later on.

It's not a bad box, and pretty good value for what it is, but really aimed at "general purpose desktops" and not particularly good for anything in particular. I'd buy a bunch of 'em if I was outfitting an office, but for personal use you get way more options if you build a beige box.

My opinions on Windows 8 are mostly unprintable, but a fair bit of that is because I loathe Windows in general. If you build it yourself you could save the cost of the OS and enjoy 64bit on GNU/Linux

It'd also be a valuable learning experience if you haven't assembled a PC before

If you really can't be arsed with assembly, there are many outfits that will build to order from a web-based part picker.

Edited May 30, 2015 by steve_v
Helps if one actually looks at the specs ;)

[impwarhamer]

Looking at it it should run ksp fairly well, but the GPU isn't that good so it will struggle to run most other games (ksp just isn't that gpu intensive).

Obviously as many people have said I'd recomend building your own pc since its so much cheaper, but if you really want a pre-built, I'd recomend this website: https://www.cyberpowersystem.co.uk/