64 bit HYPE!!!

[Hrv123]

Playing 64bit on Xubuntu, so that part is not hype, but to have physic calculation be made on multiple CPU threads...

Now that would be thing for hype

[ColourOfFire]

Ah, I see, but hopefully it will be Soon!

In addition, I read (I believe in one of the devnotes) that even though 64 bit might happen, we shouldn't expect huge part counts to be suddenly a lot smoother, as single ships will still need to be in one thread. It will still be faster as other loads can be spread, but don't get overhyped.

[NoMrBond]

Playing 64bit on Xubuntu, so that part is not hype, but to have physic calculation be made on multiple CPU threads...

Now that would be thing for hype

Unfortunately Unity 5 doesn't really offer that either, I mean, it does, but not in the way that would be super amazing. A single vessel will still confined to a single thread even though PhysX v3.3 can run multiple threads. This will be great for things next to each other though (such as a ship coming in to dock at a station). Single thread performance will still be better (as v3.x uses SIMD acceleration while v2.x was x87 only) but not 'my ship can use all 8 cores for physics at once' better

[Hrv123]

Unfortunately Unity 5 doesn't really offer that either, I mean, it does, but not in the way that would be super amazing. A single vessel will still confined to a single thread even though PhysX v3.3 can run multiple threads. This will be great for things next to each other though (such as a ship coming in to dock at a station). Single thread performance will still be better (as v3.x uses SIMD acceleration while v2.x was x87 only) but not 'my ship can use all 8 cores for physics at once' better

This makes me Why do we still need to wait decade or so to software catch up today hardware capabilities. That it, Im off to become alcoholic...

[NoMrBond]

This makes me Why do we still need to wait decade or so to software catch up today hardware capabilities. That it, Im off to become alcoholic...

We really don't know how much of a improvement PhysX 3.3 will offer, I've seen estimates from 10% all the way up to 700% but since there isn't really anything like KSP except KSP we don't have much to go on

You can read through a lot of PhysX information on Pierre's site which sounds promising but again, nothing they test really approximates the system usage in KSP (the bridge and mesh drops tests are kind of close)

It will be better, we just don't know how much better.

[SAI Peregrinus]

This makes me Why do we still need to wait decade or so to software catch up today hardware capabilities. That it, Im off to become alcoholic...

Unity isn't exactly the most cutting-edge of game engines. It's good enough and cheap enough for most purposes. For cutting-edge stuff you want Unreal Engine (Or CryEngine, or...), but that's got a rather more expensive license (and wasn't as available when KSP was first being developed, and is in C++ which is harder to deal with than C# even though it gives you much more low-level access.)

[Eric S]

This makes me Why do we still need to wait decade or so to software catch up today hardware capabilities. That it, Im off to become alcoholic...

Threading physics simulation of connected rigidbodies isn't a trivial problem. In fact, I haven't seen anyone solve it in a general enough solution that it could be included in a physics simulation as the primary solver. So in this case, it's the software theory itself that isn't keeping up.

As NoMrBond points out, we don't have a really good idea of how much of a performance gain we'll get out of 3.3. The closest I've seen to KSP-like uses involved a microbenchmark that indicated that 3.3 runs about 50% faster than 2.8.4 in that microbenchmark (testing connected rigid bodies). In my experience, real world uses seldom see as much benefit as microbenchmarks do, so while it won't shock me if we see a 50% improvement in the single-craft case, I'm not expecting it.

And yes, there are other microbenchmarks where 3.3 beats 2.8.4 by a larger margin (orders of magnitude in one case), but I'd argue that those don't represent KSP's PhysX usage as well.

[T.A.P.O.R.]

Unity isn't exactly the most cutting-edge of game engines. It's good enough and cheap enough for most purposes. For cutting-edge stuff you want Unreal Engine (Or CryEngine, or...), but that's got a rather more expensive license (and wasn't as available when KSP was first being developed, and is in C++ which is harder to deal with than C# even though it gives you much more low-level access.)

Am I glad that KSP isn't on unreal!

Every game I've tried on that engine has given me some serious motion sickness.

I'm talking lay down for a few hours kind of sick.

I did get KSP 64 bit to install on a Linux partition, but it was such a pain to install any mods that I went back to PC.

Getting a lot of crashes lately, so I might revisit.

[Two]

Every game I've tried on that engine has given me some serious motion sickness.

Sounds like the Motion Blur effect, which can usually be disabled. For some reason this pointless and annoying effect has been hyped through the roof, so every developer totally wants this extremely pronounced in their game.

[hirschhornsalz]

Don't know what hype you are talking about. 64bit has been rock solid for ages, you just need to run it on Linux. You can use CKAN for mods in Linux too, but if you experience pain doing basic file system operations, I believe you decision to go back to Windows ("PC" as you call it) was a wise one.

[sam.johnson841]

Isn't it a little early to hype this?

- Sam

[spikes2020]

The developers have stated that with the Unity 5 upgrade, we can now have stable 64 bit KSP! That means practically unlimited mods, faster performance and faster loading times! Let the Hypetrain begin another voyage!

Can we get the 3 body problem for the physics then? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-body_problem

I want lagrange points!!! and all the other cool things with the 3 body model!

[eggrobin]

Can we get the 3 body problem for the physics then? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-body_problem

I want lagrange points!!! and all the other cool things with the 3 body model!

Allow me to shamelessly advertise my---somewhat unstable---mod, principia.

You can get a WIP build by going to the IRC channel linked in the OP.

[Perry Apsis]

Unfortunately Unity 5 doesn't really offer that either, I mean, it does, but not in the way that would be super amazing. A single vessel will still confined to a single thread even though PhysX v3.3 can run multiple threads. This will be great for things next to each other though (such as a ship coming in to dock at a station). Single thread performance will still be better (as v3.x uses SIMD acceleration while v2.x was x87 only) but not 'my ship can use all 8 cores for physics at once' better

You know what really disrupts my immersion?* When I pull into range of a station and parts of the station collide with parts they're attached to and blow up, or the station suddenly teleports 7km, or just disappears altogether. Do you think the multi-core physics would help with that?

*That is definitely going into my lexicon as a synonym for "frosts my muffins," "burns my biscuits," "harshes my mellow," and so on.

[montyben101]

I would be playing 64 bit if my Ubuntu partition would stop nuking itself or failing to install the Nvidia drivers... (some help would be nice )

[T.A.P.O.R.]

I fired up KSP in Linux and noticed that the graphics are super Jaggy compared to my win 7 install.

Is that a driver restriction for my NVIDIA card?

[NoMrBond]

I fired up KSP in Linux and noticed that the graphics are super Jaggy compared to my win 7 install.

Is that a driver restriction for my NVIDIA card?

You have to force AA from the nVidia control panel for it to work under OpenGL

[T.A.P.O.R.]

You have to force AA from the nVidia control panel for it to work under OpenGL

Thanks!

I had thought that I'd done that, but I'm not the strongest linux user. Will try again.

[ColourOfFire]

You know what really disrupts my immersion?* When I pull into range of a station and parts of the station collide with parts they're attached to and blow up, or the station suddenly teleports 7km, or just disappears altogether. Do you think the multi-core physics would help with that?

*That is definitely going into my lexicon as a synonym for "frosts my muffins," "burns my biscuits," "harshes my mellow," and so on.

No.

It does not change the physics calculations, it just unlocks the ability to use different threads to do it, so it can use more of your computers memory. It's not going to help gazillion part spaceships, it's not going to make miracles happen.

Of course, more memory to play with and the updated physics engine might mean there will be improvements, but purely changing from 32 to 64 bit will only makes certain things run a little faster.

[selfish_meme]

I would be playing 64 bit if my Ubuntu partition would stop nuking itself or failing to install the Nvidia drivers... (some help would be nice )

Do you have a laptop with nvidia/intel switching graphics? If so it can be a long and hard road. If it's a desktop with a GTX card it's as easy as pushing a button, unless you have already tinkered, if you have go back to scratch and push that button.

[montyben101]

Do you have a laptop with nvidia/intel switching graphics? If so it can be a long and hard road. If it's a desktop with a GTX card it's as easy as pushing a button, unless you have already tinkered, if you have go back to scratch and push that button.

Yeah.. its a desktop and I had "tinkered" far too much and had to reinstall . Works fine now though thanks to a PM from someone!

[KasperVld]

I think the statement in the first post is a bit too optimistic:

The developers have stated that with the Unity 5 upgrade, we can now have stable 64 bit KSP! That means practically unlimited mods, faster performance and faster loading times! Let the Hypetrain begin another voyage!

I can only assume the primary source for this were the May 19th devnotes, in which HarvesteR states:

The Unity Editor itself is now 64-bit, meaning we can now finally properly support 64-bit development. This doesn’t immediately translate itself to a 64-bit build coming out again, but the good news is that we caught some bugs in the new editor that were specific to previous KSP x64 builds. This means the Editor’s internal player is very similar to the x64 unity player, and that means we can now look for (and hopefully fix) bugs which until now were impossible to even reproduce in a development environment. As for when x64 will be available again, it’s way too early to tell yet, but we should be able to start targeting that platform once more, and run test builds on it again.

source

So there's definitely some nuance to be made there, even though there's reason to be positive.

Also, 64 bit KSP means that a computer can address more memory, it does not have any direct, significant impact on performance and loading times.

Edited June 12, 2015 by KasperVld

[Stratzenblitz75]

I would be excited for windows 64 bit KSP... But, I'm already playing windows 64 bit KSP with the unofficial hack and so far, its working great; running 4 gigs of mods (Interstellar extended, KW rocketry, all the near future mods, and more). MUCH better than earlier official releases; I haven't had a single CTD or any other game breaking bugs unrelated to the mods.

[OddFunction]

Also, 64 bit KSP means that a computer can address more memory, it does not have any direct, significant impact on performance and loading times.

Loading times perhaps not but the ability to not crash every 30 minutes is in my opinion a massive performance boost

I would be excited for windows 64 bit KSP... But, I'm already playing windows 64 bit KSP with the unofficial hack and so far, its working great; running 4 gigs of mods (Interstellar extended, KW rocketry, all the near future mods, and more). MUCH better than earlier official releases; I haven't had a single CTD or any other game breaking bugs unrelated to the mods.

I was too but I had to go back to Linux because exiting the VAB would crash me every so often, especially after long build sessions.

The performance (FPS) was AMAZING in win64, btw. Linux has painful FPS sometimes

Edited June 12, 2015 by OddFunction

[T.A.P.O.R.]

You have to force AA from the nVidia control panel for it to work under OpenGL

I got it working, now its mods galore for me

The only down side is GHUD doesn't work on Linux as far as I can tell