Will Kerbal Space Program 2 be optimised for low end pc

[jimmymcgoochie]

Why would they make the brand new game have the same minimum requirements as the 10 year old game? That would be like making a brand new mobile game with loads of cutting edge features but then making it compatible with my decade old iPod touch just because another app was released back then that also worked on my iPod. Or, it would be like making the next Mariokart game backwards compatible with the GameCube; it just doesn’t make any sense to impose  those limits.

KSP has to support legacy code and has low requirements because people might still be running v1.0 and then try to upgrade to 1.10; KSP2 has no such issues and is using much more modern underpinnings, so expect the minimum requirements to be quite a lot higher than KSP.

[K^2]

5 hours ago, The Doodling Astronaut said:

my guess is that the delay mostly came from Covid-19. It totally slowed down progress. We heard December 2020 before covid happened.

Yeah, a lot of companies used that as good time to announce delays, as it would be better accepted than without an explanation. But just looking at vacancies at Intercept, they weren't landing 2020 after change of dev team. And again, actual impact of pandemic on schedules hasn't been that drastic across the industry. That just isn't the situation in the field. We're all already used to working with remote contractors, dialing into virtual meetings, and working over VPN. Switching everyone at once to WFH was very disruptive, of course, but most of us know how to continue doing our jobs. After period of adjustment, things are back to business. You could explain slipping by 2-4 weeks with the adjustment, maybe even couple of months, but not half a year or more.

And again, that's not to dismiss psychological impact. This is definitely hitting some people pretty hard, and over next half a year, studios might start losing some good people. But it's not going to impact release dates for anything scheduled sooner than Q1 2021. And it's not clear how big an impact it will be even that far out.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, jimmymcgoochie said:

 KSP2 has no such issues and is using much more modern underpinnings, so expect the minimum requirements to be quite a lot higher than KSP.

I’m guessing that’s why they aren’t releasing pre-alphas or betas and waiting till they complete the game 

[coyotesfrontier]

I'm pretty sure that KSP2 will be playable on a 1030. I'm running EVE and Scatterer on integrated graphics (Vega 11) with roughly the same power as a 1030, with acceptable framerates. I imagine KSP2 will be better performing then EVE+Scatter KSP1, so you should be good.

[kerbiloid]

It will be optimized for the low-end PC...

... by the standards of its release date.

Mwahahah...

[magnemoe]

8 hours ago, jimmymcgoochie said:

Why would they make the brand new game have the same minimum requirements as the 10 year old game? That would be like making a brand new mobile game with loads of cutting edge features but then making it compatible with my decade old iPod touch just because another app was released back then that also worked on my iPod. Or, it would be like making the next Mariokart game backwards compatible with the GameCube; it just doesn’t make any sense to impose  those limits.

KSP has to support legacy code and has low requirements because people might still be running v1.0 and then try to upgrade to 1.10; KSP2 has no such issues and is using much more modern underpinnings, so expect the minimum requirements to be quite a lot higher than KSP.

Good point, now you can scale back graphic pretty well cutting out or limiting graphical effects and dropping resolution. Yes its limits here. Testing is an major factor and saying you include weaker system for people not wanting to play in ultra low and get errors is not worth it. 
Now the scale of the ships in KSP 2, and my obvious second though seeing the starship undocking after wow awesome, was 1+6 asparagus and Orion boosters. 

And yes Musk, THIS is an starship 

That think you are building down in Texas is the tool to build the tools needed to build this. 
Still it will be on the top 100 list of things build, above image will not be it. 

[mcwaffles2003]

On 8/3/2020 at 4:59 AM, TLTay said:

Seeing as the consoles that it will be releasing on are roughly equivalent in graphics processing power to a GTX 750/750ti, that would probably be the minimum to shoot for. GT1030 *might* get the job done at 30fps 720p low detail. The 460 and 550ti I doubt will be able to handle it. I wouldn't upgrade anything until we see what the requirements will be, unless you need it for another game.

I have played fortnite on a gt 1030 at 4k 30 fps with medium settings. I think most will be able to play KSP 2 at 1080p fairly well with modest equipment. Graphics have never been the real bottleneck for this game and even if they're stunning I don't think they'll be what's really holding people back

 

[Ryan@123]

7 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

I have played fortnite on a gt 1030 at 4k 30 fps with medium settings. I think most will be able to play KSP 2 at 1080p fairly well with modest equipment. Graphics have never been the real bottleneck for this game and even if they're stunning I don't think they'll be what's really holding people back

 

Yes But this time KSP engine has undergoing a freaking overhaul.Most likely the cpu part will remain unchanged with slight better optimisation than the last one allowing to take full advantage of the single core power and all core and all thread power i.e multi-core support hence I suggest that a true quad core with 3.6ghz + all core frequency or possibly 4.0ghz all core turbo should be the ideal CPU or a  6 core CPU(always recommended).  A fast dual core with hyperthreading will be the minimum and a fast quad core which can rival a 6core cpu with it frequency will be the recommendation.As for GPU I guess GT 1030 Will run it at 900p(which is the native resolution of my monitor) CSGO runs at max at a freaking 190fps,GTA V ultra 4k 19fps.Since I saw the alpha gameplay KSP 2  will become a heavy ram and GPU game alongside cpu for which it is always known.Yes my prebuilt dell Inspiron sff may not be upgradable easily but what about a e-gpu and a e PSU.Then I can use any GPU I want but first I will see whether it runs on GT 1030 or not.I hope that the minimum requirements state a GTX 750 hence most people will be able to run it.Alsk I HOPE. THAT THE DEVS WONT STATE THE FREAKING PS5 AS THE MINIMUM AS IT WILL THEN BECOME MS FLIGHT SIMULATOR 2020 REQUIREMENTS.Mostly a GTX 1650 will be the recommended and the minimum a GTX 750ti or GT 1030

[mcwaffles2003]

3 hours ago, Ryan@123 said:

Yes But this time KSP engine has undergoing a freaking overhaul.Most likely the cpu part will remain unchanged with slight better optimisation than the last one allowing to take full advantage of the single core power and all core and all thread power i.e multi-core support hence I suggest that a true quad core with 3.6ghz + all core frequency or possibly 4.0ghz all core turbo should be the ideal CPU or a  6 core CPU(always recommended).  A fast dual core with hyperthreading will be the minimum and a fast quad core which can rival a 6core cpu with it frequency will be the recommendation.As for GPU I guess GT 1030 Will run it at 900p(which is the native resolution of my monitor) CSGO runs at max at a freaking 190fps,GTA V ultra 4k 19fps.Since I saw the alpha gameplay KSP 2  will become a heavy ram and GPU game alongside cpu for which it is always known.Yes my prebuilt dell Inspiron sff may not be upgradable easily but what about a e-gpu and a e PSU.Then I can use any GPU I want but first I will see whether it runs on GT 1030 or not.I hope that the minimum requirements state a GTX 750 hence most people will be able to run it.Alsk I HOPE. THAT THE DEVS WONT STATE THE FREAKING PS5 AS THE MINIMUM AS IT WILL THEN BECOME MS FLIGHT SIMULATOR 2020 REQUIREMENTS.Mostly a GTX 1650 will be the recommended and the minimum a GTX 750ti or GT 1030

You should read the earlier threads, many say that multi-threading in KSP 1 is doing all it can and rigid body dynamics (RBD) for single vessels can't be multithreaded, though its possible optimizations will be made to reduce the stress from RBD by making groups of parts single body. Either way, better clock speeds will be the biggest factor again probably and having a million threads won't alleviate that by much. As for graphics... in todays day and age nearly everything reasonable will play ok on 1080p 30+ fps with med settings and I highly doubt it will overall be very graphics intensive unless you absolutely NEED 16x anti-aliasing at 4k 60 fps. It would be cool if more work could be put into part and planet surface textures to take advantage of the GPUs out there seeing as this game may last past 2030.

 

Overall if you don't have a great PC I wouldn't be too worried, your processor will just once again limit your max parts and perhaps less so than in KSP 1 if grouping parts actually comes about. Beyond that... if you want the game to be prettier you need a better graphics card, thats just how it is, stock up on VRAM.

[Harry Rhodan]

4 hours ago, Ryan@123 said:

but what about a e-gpu and a e PSU.

You need a Thunderbolt 3 connector for a external GPU and your board doesn't have that. Same goes for the PSU as these prebuilt SFF machines have custom connectors for their PSUs.

Honestly instead of throwing money at stand-up guyizing a mediocre office machine you could just buy a machine that is actually capable of using high end components.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

On 8/3/2020 at 9:30 PM, Ryan@123 said:

Yes I agree KSP 2 will push hardware to limits(but I hope that it doesn't push to the extent Battlefield series or GTA series does).In game debate they played a GTX 1050 as minimum and i3 560 as minimum.In recommended GTX 1060 and i5 4th gen Haswell overclockable(i5 4650k is guess).As for my hardware I can't upgrade my cpu quickly as for GPU I am trying to find a GTX 1050ti but none of them will fit in my prebuilt dell Inspiron 3470 SFF.Only external GPU is the option or placing the GPU in the pcei-x1 slot as it's dual slot GPU.

As for my case I can UPGRADE TO A I7 9700K which I will but the GPU I am unsure But if GT 1030 can't handle it then I will do a external GPU setup

There is absolutely no reason to use E-GPU on a desktop, you'd be far better off with a low-profile GTX 1050 ti that could fit than even a much more powerful card in an EGPU enclosure. The performance of any GPU will be cut roughly in half by the overhead from TB3, and the enclosures themselves aren't cheap. You're looking at a combined cost of >600 dollars USD for even a low-end GPU and enclosure. And for that price you could easily grab a new ATX case, PSU, 16GB RAM and a motherboard and cooler compatible with your existing CPU, along with a RX 570.

You can actually use much of what you have (CPU, HDD, even RAM if you wanted) which further reduces costs. I know it sucks, but the solution to avoiding spending even more in the future is to take the time now to actually think about what you can do to use what you have instead of trying to make it work with parts it never was supposed to.

[Ryan@123]

On 8/5/2020 at 11:28 AM, mcwaffles2003 said:

You should read the earlier threads, many say that multi-threading in KSP 1 is doing all it can and rigid body dynamics (RBD) for single vessels can't be multithreaded, though its possible optimizations will be made to reduce the stress from RBD by making groups of parts single body. Either way, better clock speeds will be the biggest factor again probably and having a million threads won't alleviate that by much. As for graphics... in todays day and age nearly everything reasonable will play ok on 1080p 30+ fps with med settings and I highly doubt it will overall be very graphics intensive unless you absolutely NEED 16x anti-aliasing at 4k 60 fps. It would be cool if more work could be put into part and planet surface textures to take advantage of the GPUs out there seeing as this game may last past 2030.

 

Overall if you don't have a great PC I wouldn't be too worried, your processor will just once again limit your max parts and perhaps less so than in KSP 1 if grouping parts actually comes about. Beyond that... if you want the game to be prettier you need a better graphics card, thats just how it is, stock up on VRAM.

Actually yes there may or may not be multi threading for single.Vessels but there may be for two or more vessels.Like while handling one vessel another one in orbit comes to screen then the physics calculation part may be transmitted to another core unlike KSP 1 where everything in a single core.As for fact clockspeed any cpu with atleast 3.7-3.9ghz all core turbo is good while it's recommended to have a 4ghz all core turbo cpu.But graphics KSP 2 will have substantially more GPU requirements but I hope not the THE BATTLEFIELD SERIES(THAT SERIES MADE MY PC CRY THOUGH IT RAN).I guess anyone with a GTX 750 TI or GT 1030 should be fine.

[Ryan@123]

On 8/5/2020 at 12:59 PM, Harry Rhodan said:

You need a Thunderbolt 3 connector for a external GPU and your board doesn't have that. Same goes for the PSU as these prebuilt SFF machines have custom connectors for their PSUs.

Honestly instead of throwing money at stand-up guyizing a mediocre office machine you could just buy a machine that is actually capable of using high end components.

Thanks for the advice but my pc has a pcei-x16 express slot and I can just use a pcei-x16 extender cable to add e-gpu.

As for KSP I am sure that my pc has enough horsepower to run that game but if I get a good GTX 1050ti LP from gigabyte then I will replace it by the GT 1030 and then rock all setting high.In KSP 1 my pc was able to handle massive 2000part rocket(though my pc fan was running like mad)

[mcwaffles2003]

1 hour ago, Ryan@123 said:

Actually yes there may or may not be multi threading for single.Vessels but there may be for two or more vessels.Like while handling one vessel another one in orbit comes to screen then the physics calculation part may be transmitted to another core unlike KSP 1 where everything in a single core.As for fact clockspeed any cpu with atleast 3.7-3.9ghz all core turbo is good while it's recommended to have a 4ghz all core turbo cpu.But graphics KSP 2 will have substantially more GPU requirements but I hope not the THE BATTLEFIELD SERIES(THAT SERIES MADE MY PC CRY THOUGH IT RAN).I guess anyone with a GTX 750 TI or GT 1030 should be fine.

KSP 1 does multi-threading for multiple vessels already.

[Jeb_Needs_A_Parachute]

Do you think it would run on my current PC/Laptop? I can run KSP 1.10 easily, just not sure about KSP2. I have a Intel 8th Gen i7-8650U @1.90GHx, 8Gb RAM, Intel UHD Graphics 620. Hope to play KSP2, just concerned

[Incarnation of Chaos]

2 hours ago, Jeb_Needs_A_Parachute said:

Do you think it would run on my current PC/Laptop? I can run KSP 1.10 easily, just not sure about KSP2. I have a Intel 8th Gen i7-8650U @1.90GHx, 8Gb RAM, Intel UHD Graphics 620. Hope to play KSP2, just concerned

The RAM seems a little light, and that's an IGPU. So I'd say no guarantees either way.

[Ryan@123]

It's purely speculation,even the devs do not know how each piece of hardware will behave when this code of a game i.e ksp2.But I guess it will be WAAAY better optimised for modern low end hardware.Propably it will use a new engine(obviously) unity 5 and I have heard that it's quite well optimised.Atleast for the cpu part

Note:sorry I couldn't reply I have upgraded my pc.E-gpu via pcei-x16 extender cable  and new cpu and psu.

Now specs-

I7 9700KF

GTX 1060(my pc now seems a beast such a feeling of power I have never experienced)

16gb ram. All my 5 years of savings 50% gone.

On 8/7/2020 at 1:01 PM, Jeb_Needs_A_Parachute said:

Do you think it would run on my current PC/Laptop? I can run KSP 1.10 easily, just not sure about KSP2. I have a Intel 8th Gen i7-8650U @1.90GHx, 8Gb RAM, Intel UHD Graphics 620. Hope to play KSP2, just concerned

How does it handle KSP 1 if it handles it well then ofcourse I guess it will run well on 720p low.Note I had a razor note book with a weaker igpu hd 530 and KSP ran VEERY well on 1080p even used some cloud mods.UHD 620 ofcourse is better so you can run it on 720 low or atleast 600p.The cpu is quite good and the ram may become slight less.Upgrade to 16gb then stay tension free(sort of)

Edited August 10, 2020 by Ryan@123

[Jeb_Needs_A_Parachute]

4 hours ago, Ryan@123 said:

It's purely speculation,even the devs do not know how each piece of hardware will behave when this code of a game i.e ksp2.But I guess it will be WAAAY better optimised for modern low end hardware. Propably it will use a new engine(obviously) unity 5 and I have heard that it's quite well optimised. At least for the cpu part

Note:sorry I couldn't reply I have upgraded my pc.E-gpu via pcei-x16 extender cable  and new cpu and psu.

Now specs-

I7 9700KF

GTX 1060(my pc now seems a beast such a feeling of power I have never experienced)

16gb ram. All my 5 years of savings 50% gone.

How does it handle KSP 1 if it handles it well then of course I guess it will run well on 720p low.Note I had a razor note book with a weaker igpu hd 530 and KSP ran VEERY well on 1080p even used some cloud mods.UHD 620 ofcourse is better so you can run it on 720 low or at least 600p.The cpu is quite good and the ram may become slight less.Upgrade to 16gb then stay tension free(sort of)

KSP 1 handles well - It dosn't complain under at least 25 mods, and RAM is fine except for loading and launching. The graphics are fine: handled (without mods) high quality settings on KSP 1, and seemingly fitted in with my default screen at 2736x1824. Thinking about graphics, probably RAM. I am thinking in the future to build myself a pc with better specs, but as KSP1 is running on a laptop, I sorta can't exactly change out the RAM.

Definitely think that it will be on a newer version of unity, but that is really up to the devs. I think they didn't do this for 1.9 because they where doing KSP2, and the last time unity changed (about 1.0-1.2, I think?) the mod community really had problems, because large portions of the code changes.

[mcwaffles2003]

43 minutes ago, Jeb_Needs_A_Parachute said:

Definitely think that it will be on a newer version of unity, but that is really up to the devs. I think they didn't do this for 1.9 because they where doing KSP2

SQUAD is doing KSP 1, they're not doing KSP 2

[Harry Rhodan]

6 hours ago, Ryan@123 said:

Note:sorry I couldn't reply I have upgraded my pc.E-gpu via pcei-x16 extender cable  and new cpu and psu.

Now specs-

I7 9700KF

GTX 1060(my pc now seems a beast such a feeling of power I have never experienced)

Cool, have you tried a stress test with Prime 95 if the CPU is stable? Do you have a case for the GPU or is it just naked right next to case?

[Forgot_To_Quicksave]

I have an i5-4970, 8gb 1660mhz DDR3, 1TB HDD and gtx775M all in an iMac. Do you think it'll run well (bear in mind a potential RAM and SSD upgrade down the line)? I hope to be able to run it well, as KSP 2 looks interesting.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

On 8/12/2020 at 12:42 AM, Forgot_To_Quicksave said:

I have an i5-4970, 8gb 1660mhz DDR3, 1TB HDD and gtx775M all in an iMac. Do you think it'll run well (bear in mind a potential RAM and SSD upgrade down the line)? I hope to be able to run it well, as KSP 2 looks interesting.

Do we even know if KSP2 is supporting openGL/Vulkan on release? Because otherwise you're not running it on Mac without boot camp.

[Ryan@123]

On 8/12/2020 at 11:12 AM, Forgot_To_Quicksave said:

I have an i5-4970, 8gb 1660mhz DDR3, 1TB HDD and gtx775M all in an iMac. Do you think it'll run well (bear in mind a potential RAM and SSD upgrade down the line)? I hope to be able to run it well, as KSP 2 looks interesting.

I think it will run as any modern game along with directX 12 must support opengl or Vulcan.Vulcan is not recommended with Nvidia GPU.But I guess it will run with openGL as it's tough to day what star theory will do.They most likely will implement it.

On 8/10/2020 at 4:50 PM, Harry Rhodan said:

Cool, have you tried a stress test with Prime 95 if the CPU is stable? Do you have a case for the GPU or is it just naked right next to case?

Well I tried overclocking to 5ghz and tried KSP (THIS THING CRUSHED MY 2000PART ROCKET) And a few of the street test(I forgot name) but my cpu and GPU fans where GOING BERSEK.And its lying inside a e-gpu stand with a pcei-x16 extender and a 500 watt 60+ egpu

B

On 8/10/2020 at 3:29 PM, Jeb_Needs_A_Parachute said:

KSP 1 handles well - It dosn't complain under at least 25 mods, and RAM is fine except for loading and launching. The graphics are fine: handled (without mods) high quality settings on KSP 1, and seemingly fitted in with my default screen at 2736x1824. Thinking about graphics, probably RAM. I am thinking in the future to build myself a pc with better specs, but as KSP1 is running on a laptop, I sorta can't exactly change out the RAM.

Definitely think that it will be on a newer version of unity, but that is really up to the devs. I think they didn't do this for 1.9 because they where doing KSP2, and the last time unity changed (about 1.0-1.2, I think?) the mod community really had problems, because large portions of the code changes.

That's Great then I suggest that KSP 2 will run atleast on low 720p.But ram may be the bare minimum hence I suggest to upgrade to 16gb 

[steve_v]

36 minutes ago, Ryan@123 said:

Vulcan is not recommended with Nvidia GPU.

Citation required.

Vulkan (spelt with a 'k' BTW) works swimmingly over here on an Nvidia GPU, and unlike DirectX[whatever] it's an open, manufacturer and platform agnostic API. It's also faster (in terms of CPU overhead) than DirectX or OpenGL, at least when implemented properly.
Vulkan sure would be nice, but It doesn't sound like KSP2 will support it, at least not at launch. Then again It probably wont have GNU/Linux or MacOS support either... In which case I really don't care since I won't be buying it.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

21 hours ago, steve_v said:

Citation required.

Vulkan (spelt with a 'k' BTW) works swimmingly over here on an Nvidia GPU, and unlike DirectX[whatever] it's an open, manufacturer and platform agnostic API. It's also faster (in terms of CPU overhead) than DirectX or OpenGL, at least when implemented properly.
Vulkan sure would be nice, but It doesn't sound like KSP2 will support it, at least not at launch. Then again It probably wont have GNU/Linux or MacOS support either... In which case I really don't care since I won't be buying it.

Yeah I really don't know where people get that Vulkan and team green don't mix. I'd like Vulkan just because it would keep one of my V56 happy (I sincerely doubt any mGPU support for KSP 2 lel). 

I really really wish they'd actually come out and just make a statement either way on Linux and MacOS support. Right now it's just looking sleezy, but if they at least acknowledged the lack of support then people who have these devices know where they're at.