RSS in 1.1.2 compared to KERBIN 1.1.2

[maceemiller]

Hi all. So, I thought I would install via CKAN RSS in 1.1.2 as 1.1.2 has been brilliant for me. 3 CTD's in the last 30 hours of gameplay with the stability "seeming" to just get better. One thing I still have though is when in orbit looking down at Kerbin I suffer a framerate drop - no biggy, just annoying, however tonight in RSS 1.1.2 that drop is not there. The game is as smooth as silk even when looking down at Earth - its simply stunning! Why is this? I shut down RSS and went stock 1.1.2 and boom, same framerate problem with a 5 part probe - the probe I've built in RSS has 14 parts @NathanKell ,you may be able to explain why RSS (on my weak laptop) plays SOOOO much smoother than stock KSP?

Heres the mods Im using if it helps explain anything

 

Edited May 10, 2016 by maceemiller

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, maceemiller said:

 @NathanKell ,you may be able to explain why RSS (on my weak laptop) plays SOOOO much smoother than stock KSP?

As I understand it's due to using SM3 shaders for the terrain, which is packed much tighter by the PQS system on Kerbin than on a realistic-sized Earth.  If you set LEGACY_UNSUPPORTED_TERRAIN_SHADERS = true (or similar, I don't remember the exact) in the settings file you will get much better performance on Kerbin.  I get the same sort of thing, RSS has always run better on my system than stock except when I use the older shaders.

What video chipset do you have?  I'm on an Intel 4000.

Edited May 10, 2016 by regex

[waterlubber]

5 minutes ago, regex said:

As I understand it's due to using SM3 shaders for the terrain, which is packed much tighter by the PQS system on Kerbin than on a realistic-sized Earth.  If you set LEGACY_UNSUPPORTED_TERRAIN_SHADERS = true (or similar, I don't remember the exact) in the settings file you will get much better performance on Kerbin.  I get the same sort of thing, RSS has always run better on my system than stock except when I use the older shaders.

What video chipset do you have?  I'm on an Intel 4000.

Very interesting, I'll try it myself and see if I can get some performance improvements.
It may also be Claw's stock bug fixes but I'm not sure if they're installed for you or not. 

[Guest]

Just now, waterlubber said:

Very interesting, I'll try it myself and see if I can get some performance improvements.
It may also be Claw's stock bug fixes but I'm not sure if they're installed for you or not. 

I'm basing that assertion on a totally bone-stock install.

[waterlubber]

33 minutes ago, regex said:

I'm basing that assertion on a totally bone-stock install.

Odd. 
Then you're probably right about the shaders, or maybe loading more vertices of the planet into memory/rendering them, since they are spaced farther apart on RSS.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, waterlubber said:

Odd. 
Then you're probably right about the shaders, or maybe loading more vertices of the planet into memory/rendering them, since they are spaced farther apart on RSS.

That's what I mean, SM3 shading probably taxes the video chipset much less when the vertices aren't packed so tightly, as they are in stock.  For instance, I get lag in stock on launch when the particle effects are at their greatest but once the pad stops making those pretties everything settles down to green; the graphics chipset doesn't have to claim all the processing time.  I don't mind because the rocket is going straight up for the first 50~60m/s anyway.  That happens whether I'm using the legacy terrain shaders or not, and on RSS.

Edited May 10, 2016 by regex

[waterlubber]

Just now, regex said:

That's what I mean, SM3 shading probably taxes the video chipset much less when the vertices aren't packed so tightly, as they are in RSS.  For instance, I get lag in stock on launch when the particle effects are at their greatest but once the pad stops making those pretties everything settles down to green; the graphics chipset doesn't have to claim all the processing time.  I don't mind because the rocket is going straight up for the first 50~60m/s anyway.  That happens whether I'm using the legacy terrain shaders or not, and on RSS.

Most of my framerate seems to be the game refusing to slow down time, for example, I could be at my (rather low?) 150 part station and, while the time remains in the green, my framerate tanks. 
I'd rather this not happen since I'd prefer a livable 30 or 60 fps than a 1 fps crawl.

I think there's a bug in the resource/electrical system that causes lag, or maybe just inefficient handling in that regard.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, waterlubber said:

Most of my framerate seems to be the game refusing to slow down time, for example, I could be at my (rather low?) 150 part station and, while the time remains in the green, my framerate tanks. 
I'd rather this not happen since I'd prefer a livable 30 or 60 fps than a 1 fps crawl.

LKO station?  Looking at the planet?

1 minute ago, waterlubber said:

I think there's a bug in the resource/electrical system that causes lag, or maybe just inefficient handling in that regard.

Yeah, I'm hoping the craft resource crawling algorithm gets changed in a future update.

[waterlubber]

3 minutes ago, regex said:

LKO station?  Looking at the planet?

Yeah, I'm hoping the craft resource crawling algorithm gets changed in a future update.

In Minmus orbit, at 35km. Same lag no matter where I look, so I'm suspecting it's got to do with a modded part of resource system.

I know heat has some lag behind it, I'm waiting for 1.1 to be a bit more stable on Linux as well as my mods updating.

[Guest]

Just now, waterlubber said:

In Minmus orbit, at 35km. Same lag no matter where I look, so I'm suspecting it's got to do with a modded part of resource system.

Ah, yeah, using mods means you never know what you'll get.

Just now, waterlubber said:

I know heat has some lag behind it, I'm waiting for 1.1 to be a bit more stable on Linux as well as my mods updating.

The heating system has been optimized pretty heavily during 1.1.x, IIRC during the pre-release.

[waterlubber]

Just now, regex said:

Ah, yeah, using mods means you never know what you'll get.

The heating system has been optimized pretty heavily during 1.1.x, IIRC during the pre-release.

Oh, wow! I guess I better expedite my updating process (i.e: coercing CKAN into installing stuff it doesn't want to)

[Wjolcz]

It's because when you are below 160km over Kerbin the higher-res textures are still loaded. Once you are above it the lower-res Kerbin becomes a thing (render distance, or sth). In RSS you get to orbit above that if I'm not mistaken? Like 200km at least? Not sure where the atmosphere ends in RSS since I've never played it.

That's the main reason why I put all my station above the 160km limit.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

It's because when you are below 160km over Kerbin the higher-res textures are still loaded. Once you are above it the lower-res Kerbin becomes a thing (render distance, or sth). In RSS you get to orbit above that if I'm not mistaken? Like 200km at least? Not sure where the atmosphere ends in RSS since I've never played it.

That would make sense as well considering Duna was a veritable lag-fest for me even though it has no ocean.

[maceemiller]

7 hours ago, regex said:

As I understand it's due to using SM3 shaders for the terrain, which is packed much tighter by the PQS system on Kerbin than on a realistic-sized Earth.  If you set LEGACY_UNSUPPORTED_TERRAIN_SHADERS = true (or similar, I don't remember the exact) in the settings file you will get much better performance on Kerbin.  I get the same sort of thing, RSS has always run better on my system than stock except when I use the older shaders.

What video chipset do you have?  I'm on an Intel 4000.

I have an nvidia nvs 3100m 512mb. It runs KSP well though with all settings on high.