Squadcast Summary 2015/08/21 - Short Show, Long Summary

[Jouni]

All the mods in the world would never put you up against a 16Gb limit, much less a 32Gb one. I'd save my money for something else in my build rather than buying an extra 16Gb of RAM...

It's always better to have at least 2x more memory than a single application requires, unless the system is devoted to a single purpose. 16 GB is enough, if the desktop is just a gaming console, but otherwise I'd go for 32 GB to avoid having to close and reopen applications all the time.

[colmo]

I want to be able to run a load of stuff in the background (inc. video capture), and Haswell-E is quad channel, hence the 16gb v 32gb decision.

More RAM is also handy for photo (big panos) and video editing.

A huge surplus of RAM means I could mount KSP in a RAM disk to really speed repeat reloads.

Edited August 22, 2015 by colmo

[Ignath]

I want to be able to run a load of stuff in the background (inc. video capture), and Haswell-E is quad channel, hence the 16gb v 32gb decision.

More RAM is also handy for photo (big panos) and video editing.

Yep, certainly true. I assumed you were building your PC around KSP as you stated your decision was due to this recent announcement of KSP perhaps having stable WIN and MAC x64 builds (thereby addressing all available RAM if necessary). If you want to have numerous other applications running in the background along w/video capture / streaming and do photo/video editing then it'd be worth it; but I was just stating that KSP (and your OS and perhaps some extra things like a few web browser windows, etc..) would never need more than 16Gb.

I run a Linux Mint dual-boot and have loaded up my KSP with something like 115 mods (not even RSS-related) and haven't even got close to my 16Gb. Maximum of something like 9Gb usage in Linux with all those mods.

[Red Iron Crown]

All the mods in the world would never put you up against a 16Gb limit, much less a 32Gb one.

Challenge accepted.

[StarStreak2109]

Hi there,

thanks for the summary! It's getting me excited for the new version. Seems like there's lots of new stuff to play with!

[EladDv]

Challenge accepted.

try filling 64 Gb- maybe with 1:1 pixel per meter of earth on kerbin and all the planets and like 100 star systems rendering at the same time

[Red Iron Crown]

RSS with textures from Google Earth. At all zoom levels.

[Moon Goddess]

KSP will only break when you hit your personal RAM limit.

I need to buy more ram.

[smjjames]

All the mods in the world would never put you up against a 16Gb limit, much less a 32Gb one.

Would that be true for 8Gb of RAM? Because that's how much my laptop has.

[viktor19]

Would that be true for 8Gb of RAM? Because that's how much my laptop has.

I also have laptop, but with 6 gigs. I am very excited for 1.1 but this...worries me... If you don't know if 8 GB can be reached, you haven't seen EVE mod.

*offers crying shoulder*

[selfish_meme]

Would that be true for 8Gb of RAM? Because that's how much my laptop has.

I'm running 8GB on my Linux desktop and that runs EVE and Astronomers and about 15 other mods in under 6GB

[smjjames]

I also have laptop, but with 6 gigs. I am very excited for 1.1 but this...worries me... If you don't know if 8 GB can be reached, you haven't seen EVE mod.

*offers crying shoulder*

I don't use EVE mod, so I'm not too worried. Currently, things work well with OpenGL enabled, it's the memory leaks that get me.

[Eric S]

That is fantastic news! I have never been so happy to have been wrong about something.

I'm hoping to have been wrong as well, I'm just not certain that this isn't the case of a non-programmer (Maxmaps) getting something wrong when talking about something technical.

[Red Iron Crown]

I'm hoping to have been wrong as well, I'm just not certain that this isn't the case of a non-programmer (Maxmaps) getting something wrong when talking about something technical.

I may have spoken too soon, to be honest.

[magico13]

Will this 64bit jazz mean this is a non concern? http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/82739-max-number-of-year?p=1207176&viewfull=1#post1207176

That's already a non-concern. Time is stored internally as a double. For it to start being off by, say, 1 millisecond (1/1000 of a second) it would take about 1x10^12 seconds, or about 31,710 earth years. If you're worried about how time is displayed, I suppose that's a minor issue, but it's just the display and not how time is actually stored.

(I'd gladly take corrections to this. I'm assuming a double can store 15 digits accurately, so to be off by 1 millisecond (1e-3, 3 digits to the right of the decimal) it would have to have 12 digits to the left of the decimal, hence 1e12 seconds)

Really? in the new experimental tread they said they'll announce them tomorrow (EST, its 01:00 here)

Lastly, I’ve been going through the experimental applications and I’ve got them narrowed down. Successful applicants can expect to hear back during this week and the next.

I take that as "by the end of this coming week".

[basic.syntax]

I lol'd with Max's moment of humility, around 9m 20s, after maximizing the webcam view to full-screen... It was just too much.

"I feel weird if I'm not in my little box."  great line

[OddFunction]

I lol'd with Max's moment of humility, around 9m 20s, after maximizing the webcam view to full-screen... It was just too much.

"I feel weird if I'm not in my little box."  great line

Yeah I laughed at that too hahaha

[Starwhip]

I think he's referring to the cargo ramp.

http://i.imgur.com/8ovTcPv.gif

I haven't seen that yet! PRETTY!

[pxi]

As usual, thanks for the summary.

Definitely one of the best Squadcasts in recent memory, due to the high information content. Shorter, more focused episodes like this would be great.

Really quite hyped for 1.1 right now, (and I'm not usually one for update-excitement).

[keeper]

Thanks for posting that! All good news, sounds amazing, cannot wait for teh update!

[problemecium]

Not to nitpick, but when I watched I heard "ships over multiple cores," which is ambiguous: one ship may be able to split across cores, or only groups of ships can be distributed among cores.

I just want to avoid letting anyone jump to any conclusions until we get some conclusive evidence, as it were

[Pixel of Life]

Well, in any case, I'm sure we can expect some pretty significant performance improvements. I'm really hyped for this update, I think it'll be the best one since 0.90 or 0.21 (The SAS update)

[Renegrade]

(I'd gladly take corrections to this. I'm assuming a double can store 15 digits accurately, so to be off by 1 millisecond (1e-3, 3 digits to the right of the decimal) it would have to have 12 digits to the left of the decimal, hence 1e12 seconds)

That's right. The IEEE 754 double-precision floating point number has a 53-bit mantissa (it's actually only 52 bits physically, but there's an implied leading 1 bit). Windows calc.exe tells me that's about 15.95458977-and-change base-10 digits.

Of course they could have used a scaled int64_t (whatever that's called in C#/mono) and had a 63-bit mantissa, for 19-and-change base-10 digits of precision.. I'm surprised that they're using a 32-bit integer for display though. Maybe someone at Squad isn't so sharp on the modf/fmod stuff?

[Whizzkid]

Not to nitpick, but when I watched I heard "ships over multiple cores," which is ambiguous: one ship may be able to split across cores, or only groups of ships can be distributed among cores.

I just want to avoid letting anyone jump to any conclusions until we get some conclusive evidence, as it were

[monstah]

2) A single ship will span multiple cores. I don't recall anybody saying this before this Squadcast. Everything I saw, people were saying that you can use multiple cores but only if you had multiple ships. Each ship could get its own core, in other words. This is not the case, and it excites me greatly.

Yeah, I noticed that too. My machine is 4GB RAM, so while I'm happy for others I don't get a boost from 64. Multicore, however...

- - - Updated - - -

Not to nitpick, but when I watched I heard "ships over multiple cores," which is ambiguous: one ship may be able to split across cores, or only groups of ships can be distributed among cores.

I just want to avoid letting anyone jump to any conclusions until we get some conclusive evidence, as it were

Someone on the blog post on 1.1 said that gameObjects are split evenly across cores in U5. As each part is a GameObject, then one craft should be split across multiple cores.

Hadn't read these when I replied. Hope's still up.

Edited August 24, 2015 by monstah