Physics Question on Slow Computer

[Whovian41110]

So is there any way to make the physics less "accurate" on KSP i.e. not calculate some frames to ease processor load on the computer?  Some other simulators I've played can do this in a sort of legacy mode.

Edited January 17, 2016 by Whovian41110

[Snark]

Well, first of all, make sure that the slowdown you're experiencing is actually the CPU (physics) and not the GPU (graphics).  Either one can be a bottleneck, depending on your computer, graphics card, game settings, and ship design.

For example, when I started out in KSP, my computer had a somewhat puny graphics card in it, and the game had slowdowns because of it-- i.e. having a ship in LKO, it would slow down every time the camera was looking down (even if I'm just flying a little satellite with half a dozen parts on it), since Kerbin filled the screen and the graphics card had trouble keeping up with it.  I got myself a nicer card and the problem went away.

So if graphics are the problem, and upgrading your graphics card is not an option, then the thing to do would be to go to the settings menu and crank down the various video settings.

If it really is a physics/CPU problem:  I have a feeling like there's some setting somewhere about minimum diff between frames, or something, i.e. sacrifice physics accuracy for performance.  Unfortunately, it's just a vague recollection, and I'm not in front of my KSP computer at the moment, so I don't know this-- perhaps someone else could chime in.

Also, it's worth noting that 1.1 will be arriving soon with the Unity upgrade, and there's a high likelihood that it will affect the performance of in-game physics, so it may be worth hanging on for another few weeks to see whether that improves things.

[Whovian41110]

10 hours ago, Snark said:

Well, first of all, make sure that the slowdown you're experiencing is actually the CPU (physics) and not the GPU (graphics).  Either one can be a bottleneck, depending on your computer, graphics card, game settings, and ship design.

For example, when I started out in KSP, my computer had a somewhat puny graphics card in it, and the game had slowdowns because of it-- i.e. having a ship in LKO, it would slow down every time the camera was looking down (even if I'm just flying a little satellite with half a dozen parts on it), since Kerbin filled the screen and the graphics card had trouble keeping up with it.  I got myself a nicer card and the problem went away.

So if graphics are the problem, and upgrading your graphics card is not an option, then the thing to do would be to go to the settings menu and crank down the various video settings.

If it really is a physics/CPU problem:  I have a feeling like there's some setting somewhere about minimum diff between frames, or something, i.e. sacrifice physics accuracy for performance.  Unfortunately, it's just a vague recollection, and I'm not in front of my KSP computer at the moment, so I don't know this-- perhaps someone else could chime in.

Also, it's worth noting that 1.1 will be arriving soon with the Unity upgrade, and there's a high likelihood that it will affect the performance of in-game physics, so it may be worth hanging on for another few weeks to see whether that improves things.

So I've seen an option of delta physics something but that basically puts the game into slow motion

[Evanitis]

That suggest a CPU based bottleneck in your case. Toning that dial down will lead to smoother gameplay, and slightly more inaccurate transfers. You can also look for that mod that welds parts together, as it means less part-count, thus less physics calculation.

On the plus side, that also means your GPU can probably handle more than the stock KSP, so if you wanted to make it look prettier, most likely visual mods wont affect much of the performance.

[Whovian41110]

 

1 hour ago, Evanitis said:

That suggest a CPU based bottleneck in your case. Toning that dial down will lead to smoother gameplay, and slightly more inaccurate transfers. You can also look for that mod that welds parts together, as it means less part-count, thus less physics calculation.

On the plus side, that also means your GPU can probably handle more than the stock KSP, so if you wanted to make it look prettier, most likely visual mods wont affect much of the performance.

Well these are my specs

MacBook Pro (15-inch, Mid 2009)

Processor 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo

RAM 8 GB 1333 MHz DDR3

Graphis NVIDIA GeForce 9400M 256 MB

[DrMarlboro]

i think in your case, a potato is a potato ( seriously no offense meant), and your best bet would be the mod ubio welder, and set yourself to half textures. Other than ubio I don't realy believe there's a way to lessen the physics load.

[Evanitis]

That, but having the textures on half sounds a bit harsh for me. I'd guess unmeasurable performance boost with serious ugliness. If lower texture resolution indeed has a considerable impact on fps, I'd also pick the Dynamic Texture Loader mod (while still keeping them on maximum).

[DrMarlboro]

1 hour ago, Evanitis said:

That, but having the textures on half sounds a bit harsh for me. I'd guess unmeasurable performance boost with serious ugliness. If lower texture resolution indeed has a considerable impact on fps, I'd also pick the Dynamic Texture Loader mod (while still keeping them on maximum).

if you're having issues with graphics issues (which he probably is) then yes, half res textures make a huge impact... even though they are disappointing.

[Evanitis]

Dunno, my specs are similar (more GPU memory helps a bit, less ram is irrelevant before 1.1). Shadow cascades and physics delta has a great impact on my end, but other visuals less so or none at all. Running scatterer, planetshine, that water mod, reflections, clouds (though lower res ones). I don't go below 30 fps while under 250-300 parts. I start welding if I reach that count.

Edited January 17, 2016 by Evanitis

[Whovian41110]

7 hours ago, Evanitis said:

Dunno, my specs are similar (more GPU memory helps a bit, less ram is irrelevant before 1.1). Shadow cascades and physics delta has a great impact on my end, but other visuals less so or none at all. Running scatterer, planetshine, that water mod, reflections, clouds (though lower res ones). I don't go below 30 fps while under 250-300 parts. I start welding if I reach that count.

So do you use Mac? 

[Gaarst]

KSP has an option called "Max physics delta-time per frame" (no wonder why I forgot that name) that determines the interval between each calculation frame.

It is set at 0.04s by default.

Increasing that time should increase your framerate but time elapsed in the game will be slower (slow motion). Only reporting words from other users who have used it, don't take what I say for granted.

Edited January 18, 2016 by Gaarst
Checked KSP and got the name