Jump to content

How will the game perform? Speculations


How well will the game perform?  

26 members have voted

  1. 1. How well will the game perform?

    • Same
      4
    • Better but don’t expect much
      11
    • Wow, they actually didn’t make this in a garage, (no offense squad)
      11


Recommended Posts

I have a laptop with 8gb of ram and it runs decently with plenty of mods but once scattered is installed it slows down to a snails pace. I don’t really think visual mods won’t be that necessary because we will have atmospheres and stock real plume. How do you think this game will run on a typical laptop. 8 gigabytes of ram and no gaming oriented cpu or gpu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the footage we've seen so far it appears extremely large megastructures are indeed possible at a decent framerate, so its safe to say at least some performance gains have been made with KSP 2 over its predecessor. I'm going to conservatively guess that smaller structures akin to the ones we make in KSP 1 will be gentle on the framerate and that the part count has been extended to a couple hundred, but not thousand parts before experiencing frame drops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suspicion is that for a small rocket the performance will be roughly similar to KSP1 - but that slowdowns will be managed, and 'top out'  (that is - it won't get any slower, despite you building bigger) for all but the very largest ships pretty quickly, so that it'll feel much faster for medium/large ships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just found this: https://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=36152&game=Kerbal Space Program 2

Don't know if this is official or just a guess, but here's what they said.

Quote

 

Predicted minimum requirements:

  • OS: Win 7 64
  • Processor: Intel Core i3-560 3.3GHz / AMD Phenom II X4 805
  • Graphics: AMD Radeon R9 270X or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050
  • VRAM: 1000MB
  • System Memory: 8 GB RAM
  • Storage: 40 GB Hard drive space
  • DirectX 11 Compatible Graphics Card

Predicted recommended requirements:

  • OS: Win 7 64
  • Processor: Intel Core i5-4670K 3.4GHz / AMD FX-8370
  • Graphics: AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060
  • VRAM: 4GB
  • System Memory: 8 GB RAM
  • Storage: 40 GB Hard drive space

 

 

Edited by RoninFrog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SpaceFace545 said:

Regular KSP doesn’t even need a gpu to run decently-emphasis on decently.

I have an MX150 which, with scatterer and EVE on RSS, reaches 20+ in the atmosphere and 40+ in space. I reckon KSP2 would be able to natively render those sorts of graphics even faster with optimizations. Those predicted requirements shouldn't be taken as accurate, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tonas1997 said:

I have an MX150 which, with scatterer and EVE on RSS, reaches 20+ in the atmosphere and 40+ in space. I reckon KSP2 would be able to natively render those sorts of graphics even faster with optimizations. Those predicted requirements shouldn't be taken as accurate, imo.

I do about the same on my computer what has a i7.9 what does about the same. Either I will get the game on my computer or I will get it on Xbox for full performance but sacrifice mods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RoninFrog said:

Just found this: https://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=36152&game=Kerbal Space Program 2

Don't know if this is official or just a guess, but here's what they said.

 

I'm going to take them saying "predicting" as a educated guess. Since it's a guess, I would add some salt to it. 

I have to say that site is interesting, I checked my A10-7080K against some of the games I own. It says I can't play them on my A10 using the on board graphics at the minimum settings, but I have at medium settings or above. That just adds proof that some salt is needed with their guesstimate.

(The games I checked was BSG Deadlock, Cities: Skylines, BattleTech, No Man's Sky, Astroneer.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not even a 1050Ti, the lower 1050 version which will be something like three years old by the time KSP2 actually comes out

Then consider that the 1050 is beaten in most benches by the even older (circa 2015) mainstream 960 by 10-20%, which will be something like six years old by the time KSP2 comes out

This doesn't seem like a particularly high bar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive me if I sound too harsh.

Why are you all comparing a game that was first available in what, 2011? To something that is hopefully going to be released in the upcoming months? Even if we say 2015 instead of 2011, that's still a huge difference.

The requirements are gonna be higher, there is no doubt about it, and I cannot see why there is a discussion. 

The overall performance, on the other hand is worth discussing. What I mean is: how much you can do if your hardware meets the requirements before you start to lose frames. And I say a lot more than in the previous game, since the new devs made huge colonies one of their targets. Squad did not, and when they realized that players build 1000-part monsters out of the few parts available, it was too late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it can do multi threading and use all the processor cores instead of just one, performance should be drastically improved physics-wise. No more 4FPS at 0.2x speed when trying to do a two hour transfer burn with a big interplanetary ship would be fantastic, I once left my PC running for nearly an entire day to do one of those and even then it still missed the target and I had to do a course correction.

KSP was made years ago and things have moved on tech-wise since then, so KSP2 will probably be considerably faster even if you load up some mods and planet packs and build a 3000 part super station or six as it will be built to use all the latest hardware tricks that KSP just can’t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

I'm going to take them saying "predicting" as a educated guess. Since it's a guess, I would add some salt to it. 

I have to say that site is interesting, I checked my A10-7080K against some of the games I own. It says I can't play them on my A10 using the on board graphics at the minimum settings, but I have at medium settings or above. That just adds proof that some salt is needed with their guesstimate.

(The games I checked was BSG Deadlock, Cities: Skylines, BattleTech, No Man's Sky, Astroneer.)

They probably are taking the gtx 1060 from the cinematic trailer not realizing it was cgi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...