Why is Frame-rate so bad on Console and not on PC???

[Dr. Kerbal]

I have been playing KSP for a couple of months so far and when building rocket s when they get a big to fill the entire VAB the game starts to have bad framrate. And when on the launchpad it like 1fps. Which is annnyoign and sad because when I want to launch big things u have to worry KSP crashing. Is there a way for this to be improved like better gram rate so I can biuld massive ships like the Youtubers.

[RealKerbal3x]

@Dr. Kerbal What it essentially comes down to is this: most game consoles aren't as powerful as they're made to look. They're sort of in the league of a mid-range PC, and generally prioritise graphics capability over CPU power (which is what KSP mainly needs). The only reason a lot of console-exclusive games run quite well on them is because they've been designed and optimised from the beginning with consoles in mind. Meanwhile, KSP was originally coded for more capable PC hardware and was later ported to consoles.

Making KSP run better on consoles would likely require a rewrite of a significant portion of the code, and I don't think that's economically viable or worthwhile, especially with KSP2 on the way - which will probably have better console support built-in on release.

[Dr. Kerbal]

Well. I mean I play console and i whish maybe they would put console into mid so i can enjoy KSP2 with good framerate. To be honet. I just want to biiuld rockets with 1000 parts and not have 10 fps or less.

[Okhin]

Well, 1000 parts is _a lot_. My processor generally starts a strike way before that point, and reaching 900+ parts makes it melt. Granted I play on laptop. But 10 FPS with a craft of 1000 parts does not seems weird.

[catloaf]

Yes, once craft exceed 500 parts performance drops off very quickly, on PC and console. However poor game optimizations and lower hardware would probably make it worse on console.

[Dr. Kerbal]

Okay. I get it. That’s really helpful actually. But then how come when I use 10 of these mammoths i

sized tanks it get a bit glitchy?

[Lewie]

1 hour ago, Dr. Kerbal said:

Okay. I get it. That’s really helpful actually. But then how come when I use 10 of these mammoths i

sized tanks it get a bit glitchy?

That’s actually pretty normal. Are you clipping the tanks and engines together?

[DunaManiac]

21 hours ago, Dr. Kerbal said:

I have been playing KSP for a couple of months so far and when building rocket s when they get a big to fill the entire VAB the game starts to have bad framrate. And when on the launchpad it like 1fps. Which is annnyoign and sad because when I want to launch big things u have to worry KSP crashing. Is there a way for this to be improved like better gram rate so I can biuld massive ships like the Youtubers.

This is because consoles are designed for games with high-graphics usage and low-cpu usage (i.e shooter games), but KSP relies heavily on the CPU, so the cpu can't handle larger ships as much as youtubers with fancy gaming computers can. Even with the best cpu in the world, the game is designed in such a way that once the part limit gets above 300, the performance falls off very fast.

[Lewie]

21 hours ago, Dr. Kerbal said:

Well. I mean I play console and i whish maybe they would put console into mid so i can enjoy KSP2 with good framerate. To be honet. I just want to biiuld rockets with 1000 parts and not have 10 fps or less.

That’s pretty much impossible actually, with console or pc.

Edited October 9, 2020 by Lewie

[catloaf]

1 hour ago, Lewie said:

That’s pretty much impossible actually, with console or pc.

Not really, but they would have to use a different system for collision and bending than they use now, or somehow optimize the current system.

[Dr. Kerbal]

They could use a sysytem of mergering parts. Putting a whole bunch of parts the merging them into one. Like 5 Rocket Max tanks into one giant one! See. And it wil shorten the part count.

[DunaManiac]

3 hours ago, catloaf said:

Not really, but they would have to use a different system for collision and bending than they use now, or somehow optimize the current system.

Which would probably require rewriting the entire game, if I'm not mistaken.

[catloaf]

4 hours ago, DunaManiac said:

Which would probably require rewriting the entire game, if I'm not mistaken.

I don't know, but that kind of is what ksp2 is for. It is definitely more work than it's worth for ksp1.

Although it is probably why we haven't seen any major performance enhancing mods for ksp1

[Dr. Kerbal]

On 10/8/2020 at 5:37 PM, Lewie said:

That’s actually pretty normal. Are you clipping the tanks and engines together?

No. I dont not. 

On 10/9/2020 at 8:27 AM, Lewie said:

That’s pretty much impossible actually, with console or pc.

Thats helful and i get it now.

On 10/9/2020 at 1:51 PM, DunaManiac said:

Which would probably require rewriting the entire game, if I'm not mistaken.

Makes sense.

On 10/8/2020 at 11:25 AM, Okhin said:

Well, 1000 parts is _a lot_. My processor generally starts a strike way before that point, and reaching 900+ parts makes it melt. Granted I play on laptop. But 10 FPS with a craft of 1000 parts does not seems weird.

Okay. Yes that was over kill.

On 10/8/2020 at 9:48 AM, RealKerbal3x said:

@Dr. Kerbal What it essentially comes down to is this: most game consoles aren't as powerful as they're made to look. They're sort of in the league of a mid-range PC, and generally prioritise graphics capability over CPU power (which is what KSP mainly needs). The only reason a lot of console-exclusive games run quite well on them is because they've been designed and optimised from the beginning with consoles in mind. Meanwhile, KSP was originally coded for more capable PC hardware and was later ported to consoles.

Making KSP run better on consoles would likely require a rewrite of a significant portion of the code, and I don't think that's economically viable or worthwhile, especially with KSP2 on the way - which will probably have better console support built-in on release.

And thats helful to understanding coding.

[MZ_per_X1]

And I am still curious how it will run on PS5. I guess I will find out in a month. I'm expecting less stutter ,faster loads and fewer crashes. 

Edited October 17, 2020 by MZ_per_X1

[Mikenike]

On 10/17/2020 at 8:06 AM, MZ_per_X1 said:

And I am still curious how it will run on PS5. I guess I will find out in a month. I'm expecting less stutter ,faster loads and fewer crashes. 

We don't know yet. I am excited for the new AMD CPU. If I hear its a good or better than intel's i9 new gen CPU, I might actually assemble a computer for gaming.

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM...

I do not Knooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow

Asked by Dr. Kerbal and Solved By Dr. Kerbal?

Must've been a mental question...

[Corona688]

"Doctor, it hurts when I do this."  "Don't do that."

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

On 10/8/2020 at 2:04 PM, Dr. Kerbal said:

Well. I mean I play console and i whish maybe they would put console into mid so i can enjoy KSP2 with good framerate. To be honet. I just want to biiuld rockets with 1000 parts and not have 10 fps or less.

10 FPS. your being too generous. i cant even have a 300 part space station without the framerate dipping below 5FPS in console

[Goaty1208]

On 11/6/2020 at 4:20 PM, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

5FPS in console

300 parts on pc: 50

On my xbox 130 parts: 10 FPS

[Base]

On my PC 90 FPS