[1.1][1.1-1] Apr-19-2016 Dynamic Texture Loader

[gendalf]

Quote

why you people keep coming back asking about a mod that worked around a deficiency of the 32-bit Windows KSP.

even if the intent was to work around the 32limit, the side effect was increased performance, which made the game more playable on older/slower pcs, that's why saying "just use 64bit to allocate more ram" sounds like buy a new pc.

Quote

Decreased performance in the editor and during load times, obviously

Quote

Increased performance? Funny how everything the mod author listed in the OP is _decreased_ performance. Still, what do they know?

and that's why I've mentioned  the Squad Texture Reduction Pack, which was a pure performance boost without side effects like loading time increase.

Edited September 14, 2016 by gendalf

[JordanL]

On 9/12/2016 at 8:41 AM, damerell said:

The problem DTL solved was running out of address space. 64-bit KSP fixes this problem.

Wait, you think that the ONLY purpose of mods like this was to prevent hard crashes?

[damerell]

48 minutes ago, JordanL said:

Wait, you think that the ONLY purpose of mods like this was to prevent hard crashes?

That was overwhelmingly the effect of this mod, yes. (Or, if you prefer, to increase the number of mods / texture resolution usable). As mentioned, the OS is more than capable of swapping out textures on parts that aren't in play, but it can't work around the overall address space issues.

Hard crashes are why people leapt on it with cries of glee, not the ability to look at all the part tabs in the VAB a bit more quickly.

Since it essentially has never worked well in a 1.1 world (the first of many bug reports is from the 20th April, the day after 1.1 was released) I am deeply sceptical of claims that it would improve performance in 1.1. How could anyone know?

These are all things you can verify by reading the thread. You'll also see that essentially no-one saw any benefit to using it on Linux. Why? Linux had 64-bit already and didn't need it because what it primarily did was to prevent hard crashes.

[Stone Blue]

On 9/13/2016 at 5:36 PM, COL.R.Neville said:

nope there were thousands of files that werent. maybe the stock game is but very few of the mods are.. 

Then you are using very old mods, or mods from very new mod devs who dont know better....???

Edited September 20, 2016 by Stone Blue

[Program Kerbal Space]

Seems Like A Good Mod It Would Make The EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements Mod Faster! If It was Fixed Sadly.

[xD-FireStriker]

Hey rbray89 how are you.

Are you still working on hunting down that fix or have you given up on this mod.

[BadLeo]

I would really like to know about current plans for this mod. Since @rbray89 last login was on June 14, I wonder if anyone else have some info about it. Did anyone try to PM him?

[Kdoge20]

which one is 1.0.5?

i'm confused at github link

[Nozyspy]

Any chance of this being updated?

[RA3236]

On 04/11/2016 at 0:58 AM, Kdoge20 said:

which one is 1.0.5?

i'm confused at github link

The second last download IIRC.

2 hours ago, Nozyspy said:

Any chance of this being updated?

No. (only because of the forum rule you just broke, which is don't ask for updates)

[Nozyspy]

18 hours ago, RA3236 said:

The second last download IIRC.

No. (only because of the forum rule you just broke, which is don't ask for updates)

So if you don't ask, how would you otherwise find out if it is or it isn't...

[Noah_Blade]

39 minutes ago, Nozyspy said:

So if you don't ask, how would you otherwise find out if it is or it isn't...

1.) @rbray89 has not been active for a long time so I would say it may be a while 

2.) a mod author will usually announce a new update.

3.) the rule exists so mod authors aren't bombarded by update requests

[Nansuchao]

1 hour ago, Noah_Blade said:

1.) @rbray89 has not been active for a long time so I would say it may be a while 

2.) a mod author will usually announce a new update.

3.) the rule exists so mod authors aren't bombarded by update requests

Other than this, @rbray89 has stated more than one times that this mod is broken, cause the last Unity hasn't anymore a function that was fundamental for it.

[Red Iron Crown]

23 hours ago, RA3236 said:

(only because of the forum rule you just broke, which is don't ask for updates)

That is not the rule. Nozyspy's post is fine.

It looks like rbray has moved on, but we'd prefer to leave this thread open in case of a return or if someone would like to attempt to pick it up.

[monstah]

For clarification, the rule forbids "messages that repeat inquiries for updates". The first time it's usually just to have an idea of how busy the modder is, wether they're already working on the mod or doing something else for awhile, wether they expect any difficulties updating it, etc. If it hasn't been brought up yet, we don't have that much of a problem with it (provided it's polite, of course).

That said, this discussion has been had on this thread, just one page back:

So yes, don't ask again and sit on tight. But don't hold your breath either, you may be disappointed.

[TAImatem]

On 01/12/2016 at 0:07 AM, monstah said:

But don't hold your breath either, you may be disappointed.

Or suffocate

[Stone Blue]

On 11/29/2016 at 5:17 PM, Nozyspy said:

So if you don't ask, how would you otherwise find out if it is or it isn't...

 

On 11/29/2016 at 5:59 PM, Noah_Blade said:

1.) @rbray89 has not been active for a long time so I would say it may be a while 

2.) a mod author will usually announce a new update.

3.) the rule exists so mod authors aren't bombarded by update requests

OR, you could just actually READ previous posts...

[sp1989]

Has anyone updated this for 1.2 or has something replaced this for 1.2? I have been away from ksp for a few months. 

[RA3236]

1 hour ago, sp1989 said:

Has anyone updated this for 1.2 or has something replaced this for 1.2? I have been away from ksp for a few months. 

Neither, and I'm not sure it will be.

[Jebs_SY]

1 hour ago, sp1989 said:

Has anyone updated this for 1.2 or has something replaced this for 1.2? I have been away from ksp for a few months. 

We don't need to save RAM anymore, we have a 64bit KSP and enough RAM aviable.

[Starslinger999]

On 2/10/2017 at 9:05 PM, Jebs_SY said:

We don't need to save RAM anymore, we have a 64bit KSP and enough RAM aviable.

I lag a ton launching small rockets. I need this.

[Jebs_SY]

2 minutes ago, Starslinger999 said:

I lag a ton launching small rockets. I need this.

I don't think, that this mod saves you CPU power. AFAIK it's intention was to save memory as KSP was limited to 32Bit aka 4GB RAM.
Maybe check also this.
I think, if you lag plenty, even with small part counts, then maybe your CPU is to low or you have some/much mods that are doing to much stuff per physics frame.

[RA3236]

3 hours ago, Jebs_SY said:

I don't think, that this mod saves you CPU power. AFAIK it's intention was to save memory as KSP was limited to 32Bit aka 4GB RAM.
Maybe check also this.
I think, if you lag plenty, even with small part counts, then maybe your CPU is to low or you have some/much mods that are doing to much stuff per physics frame.

This mod doesn't just save CPU RAM. It also saves GPU processing as textures are not loaded immediately. A GPU works harder if multiple textures are loaded at the same time rather than a single one. That's why some people have CPUs that can run the game fine but their GPU is limiting them to much laggier experiences. AFAIK, the only CPU- related part of this was model compression.

[Jebs_SY]

48 minutes ago, RA3236 said:

This mod doesn't just save CPU RAM. It also saves GPU processing as textures are not loaded immediately. A GPU works harder if multiple textures are loaded at the same time rather than a single one. That's why some people have CPUs that can run the game fine but their GPU is limiting them to much laggier experiences. AFAIK, the only CPU- related part of this was model compression.

Hmm, I have a Core i5, 4th generation and GTX 750. When I have low FPS, fo me  it's always the CPU, that's the limit. I don't want to say you're wrong, but even with my low end GTX750, GPU performance was never my problem.

[RA3236]

8 minutes ago, Jebs_SY said:

Hmm, I have a Core i5, 4th generation and GTX 750. When I have low FPS, fo me  it's always the CPU, that's the limit. I don't want to say you're wrong, but even with my low end GTX750, GPU performance was never my problem.

For some people we have extremely low power CPUs not designed to play games. For example mine is a 256Mb AMD Radeon HD 2600 (or in my new Surfaces case, Intel HD 4000). With these GPUs, especially while playing games, texture management is vital.