KSP1 Computer Building/Buying Megathread

[Elthy]

Downscaling would be stupid, why buy a high-res display in the first place?

[cantab]

@Elthy, perhaps if you want the higher resolution for productivity or for quality movies, but your GPU can't handle it for gaming.

[worir4]

Not sure if this counts as a PC building question but does any one have any recommendations for a HOTAS under £50? (first time getting one)

[Alphasus]

4 hours ago, Harry Rhodan said:

Really? You can't even scale it back to 1080 (or exactly half the native resolution) without it looking awful? That's a bummer.

Not really a point in doing that.

3 hours ago, cantab said:

@Elthy, perhaps if you want the higher resolution for productivity or for quality movies, but your GPU can't handle it for gaming.

Yeah, but Windows UI is messed up at high DPI.

[robopilot99]

2 hours ago, worir4 said:

Not sure if this counts as a PC building question but does any one have any recommendations for a HOTAS under £50? (first time getting one)

From personal experience I can recommend the Logitech Extreme 3D Pro. I've had for a while and it works great with KSP. It can also be had for as little as $35.

[Randox]

2 minutes ago, robopilot99 said:

From personal experience I can recommend the Logitech Extreme 3D Pro. I've had for a while and it works great with KSP. It can also be had for as little as $35.

I have one. It's a fair joystick, and I can't argue with the price (that is why I bought it). I got mine to play DCS world and it has worked find for that. That said, mine has been a little loose since the day I bought it, having just enough wiggle to the left to register as an input, which would be super annoying in a game like KSP where flying arrow strait for long periods of time is very important. That might be something I can fix on my end, and it may just be a defect in my particular joystick.

I also get a kick out of the throttle, which seems to have been installed backwards. I always have to invert the axis so that I push the throttle forward to increase it (which is logical to me), rather than pulling it back, which seems to be how it was designed.

[robopilot99]

2 hours ago, worir4 said:

 

1 minute ago, Randox said:

I have one. It's a fair joystick, and I can't argue with the price (that is why I bought it). I got mine to play DCS world and it has worked find for that. That said, mine has been a little loose since the day I bought it, having just enough wiggle to the left to register as an input, which would be super annoying in a game like KSP where flying arrow strait for long periods of time is very important. That might be something I can fix on my end, and it may just be a defect in my particular joystick.

I also get a kick out of the throttle, which seems to have been installed backwards. I always have to invert the axis so that I push the throttle forward to increase it (which is logical to me), rather than pulling it back, which seems to be how it was designed.

Can't say I have your problems with sensitivity, I assume you've tried recalibrating it? As for the inverted throttle it's not a defect in your unit. It's stupid how the throttle axis is inverted from the physical markings on the stick!

[Randox]

7 minutes ago, robopilot99 said:

Can't say I have your problems with sensitivity, I assume you've tried recalibrating it? As for the inverted throttle it's not a defect in your unit. It's stupid how the throttle axis is inverted from the physical markings on the stick!

I actually just opened it up to take a look. The wiggle issue may be a 'me' problem, where basically I expect there to be absolutely no play at all, and that just might be asking too much from a $35 joystick. It just doesn't feel 'tight' to me.

Also, like my wireless controller, the buttons are numbered starting at 1 even though every game ever made registers controller buttons starting at 0 

 

But for all my whinging, it has been well worth the money. I needed a joystick, and it has worked beautifully. It's not the best stick ever made, but it's a solid buy for the money, and it gets the job done.

[ToukieToucan]

Nooby question here,

 

what are the specs needed for a visually enhanched and (heavy) modded ksp to run at 60 FPS / >40 FPS at things like space stations?

 

(my little 2.1 Ghz, 2 GB RAM laptop handles mods extremely well but the framerate is normally around the 30/40 FPS and like 5 FPS when controlling stations.)

Edited September 7, 2016 by ToukieToucan

[Camacha]

11 minutes ago, ToukieToucan said:

what are the specs needed for a visually enhanched and (heavy) modded ksp to run at 60 FPS / >40 FPS at things like space stations?

There are too many variables there to give you any sort of reasonable estimation Size of station, parts used, resolution, you name it. Even with an exact situation it is hard to predict anything without someone actually trying it.

[ToukieToucan]

7 minutes ago, Camacha said:

There are too many variables there to give you any sort of reasonable estimation Size of station, parts used, resolution, you name it. Even with an exact situation it is hard to predict anything without someone actually trying it.

Let me state it differently, what are the specs for a smoothly running Ksp with visual mods on max settings?

[Camacha]

8 minutes ago, ToukieToucan said:

Let me state it differently, what are the specs for a smoothly running Ksp with visual mods on max settings?

Still too many variables. Any answer would be correct and wrong at the same time. I am not trying to annoying, but an answer that might or might not be applicable to your situation is of no use to you.

[Daveroski]

The best equipment currently available would still be slowed to a crawl when viewing a base with enough triangles in its composition to do so.

The more parts- the more triangles. The more triangles, the more rendered faces, the more rendered faces, the more calculations.

Any computer design can be bogged down if you give it enough calculations.

To answer your question you would have to be more precise.

Have a standard scene display with a set number of parts and triangles.

Present this scene to the very knowledgeable chaps in this forum.

Then you may get an estimate.

It would be the best guess of one of the knowledgeable chaps and not a scientific fact as even two machines with identical hardware and software do not always operate at the same speeds.

So the bottom line is - more data required for a meaningful response. (Not a hard fact - that can never happen.)

[ToukieToucan]

People who have ksp on high settings, what are your specs?

[Daveroski]

Just now, ToukieToucan said:

People who have ksp on high settings, what are your specs?

Ah right.. now this I can answer.

I play on highest settings with clouds and umpteen visual mods.

There used to be a lot of lag when viewing my more complex stations and bases but now,since the last optimizations,  it is much more acceptable with barely any lag at all.

My machine is an I7-4790 graphics is Nvidia GTX980

Memory 16 gigs

I run it under linux.

I run the 64 bit version.

 

 

[Alphasus]

43 minutes ago, ToukieToucan said:

People who have ksp on high settings, what are your specs?

I have a GTX 970(in effect a 950 because only 1/2 is given to my Linux VM) and a Xeon E3 1246 v3. 16 GB RAM.

[Elthy]

Graphics shouldnt be a problem, even the current low-end solution (RX 460) should be enough. A bigger issue is the processor, no matter how powerfull it is, you can still make the game lag by adding more parts...

[Camacha]

50 minutes ago, Elthy said:

Graphics shouldnt be a problem, even the current low-end solution (RX 460) should be enough.

Looking at much more anaemic cards that run a modded KSP just fine, even that seems massive overkill.

[worir4]

I went for this one 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/381265582085?_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2648&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

It looks like a good one for its price.

[Beechnutk Jr.]

My specs:

CPU: Intel Core i7 6700K 4.00 GHz Quad Core Skylake

GPU: MSI GeForce GTX 970 4GD5T OC

RAM: 16gb (4 x4) G.Skill Ripjaws

Storage: Intel 750 Series AIC 400GB

MoBo: Maximus VIII Hero

CPU cooler: DEEPCOOL GAMMAXX 400 

PSU: CORSAIR RM Series RM850 850W ATX12V

Monitor: Seiki Pro SM40UNP 40.0-Inch 4K LED-Lit Monitor

Mouse: Logitech G502 Proteus Core

Keyboard: Microsoft Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000

[Camacha]

On 12-9-2016 at 8:45 PM, Beechnutk Jr. said:

My specs:

Cool. What is your question?

[Elthy]

Now that me and my friends got our MSI RX 480 Gaming X (8GB) i want to share my experiences with them, since they may be interesting for others:

We have ordered 5 of them since we all were on HD 7XXX cards or worse (2x 7970; 1x 7870; 1x 7850; 1x IGPU). Our reasons for upgrade differ a bit, but we all dont want to upgrade for 3-4 years now, so we went for 8GB and AMD. Since my friends let me keep the cards for one day i had the rare opportunity to test 5 identical cards for their differences in chip quality.

The ASIC values ranged from 72% to 93%, which later proved to be quite irrelevant. The cards came with different stock voltages on the highest powerstate 1305mhz (which is applied 99% of the time), ranging from 1100mV (the 93% card) to 1168mV (78,5% ASIC). It directly resulted in greatly different powerusages under load (i used Witcher 3 Beauclair main square for testing), 155W for the 1100mV, 175W (powerlimiterd!) for the 1168mV card.

First i tried Memory OC on the cards (since Polaris 10 is bandwidth limited), all cards managed 2150mhz (from a default 2000mhz) without touching memory voltage. 2200mhz seemed stable on some cards, but i didnt have enough time to properly test that. This memory OC resulted in 5W higher power consumption, propably from the better used chip (it also resulted in higher FPS).

Secondly i wanted to test how low i could get the powerconsumption with undervolting. Especialy the 1168mV card had a lot of potential, i got it down to 1030mV which resulted in 135W power consumption (still with memory OC). The other cards also got down to 1020mV to 1060mV, bringing them to 130W-140W power consumption. I was kinda supprised by the fact that the highly different ASICs didnt make a big difference here.

Thirdly i wanted to test OC, but quickly got away from that idea. 1370mhz werent stable on stock voltage for 2 cards i tested futher, also they ran into the powerlimit with those values. While the performance gain is minimal the power consumption increases a lot, making OC unviable.

I also tested downclocking and futher undervolting on 2 cards, but apparently the chips wont accept values below 1000mV (no matter which value i entered, they stayed at 1000mV during testing), which reduces this potential a lot.

Additionaly i want to comment on the cooling solution. At 175W consumption the cooler gets quite loud (1800rpm), but chip temperature wasnt the limit here (maybe the power converter things got to hot). Its totaly different at 140W, the cards remain so silent i cant hear if the fans are running at all, only MSI afterburner reveals about 1000rpm.

The cards had a bit of coil chirping under high load, the higher the power consumption the worse it got (although its not to bad with a closed case). It still seemed more silent than the Gainward 1070 Phoenix ive tested before.

[dewin]

On 9/6/2016 at 10:44 AM, worir4 said:

Not sure if this counts as a PC building question but does any one have any recommendations for a HOTAS under £50? (first time getting one)

Didn't see it mentioned here, but I have one of these for Elite:

https://www.amazon.com/Thrustmaster-T-Flight-Hotas-Flight-Stick-Pc/dp/B001CXYMFS

 

Seems like a good introductory HOTAS. It could stand to have another hat switch and/or a couple more buttons, but for something not much more than a Xbox controller in price it's totally worth trying out if you're not sold on the idea entirely.

Plus, it's not made by MadCatz, who have some pretty severe QC issues.  (See: Saitek before and after MadCatz bought them.)

[worir4]

1 hour ago, dewin said:

Didn't see it mentioned here, but I have one of these for Elite:

https://www.amazon.com/Thrustmaster-T-Flight-Hotas-Flight-Stick-Pc/dp/B001CXYMFS

 

Seems like a good introductory HOTAS. It could stand to have another hat switch and/or a couple more buttons, but for something not much more than a Xbox controller in price it's totally worth trying out if you're not sold on the idea entirely.

Plus, it's not made by MadCatz, who have some pretty severe QC issues.  (See: Saitek before and after MadCatz bought them.)

Yeah man, i got this a few days ago and it is awesome. I have been missing out all these years.....

[FlyingPete]

I've barely played KSP in months. Not through lack of interest, but since 1.0, I got bored fairly quickly of the game repeatedly crashing to desktop- either with an "oops! the game crashed" notification or nothing. Up to 0.90 inclusive it worked without any major trouble. Running a totally unmodified, 32-bit windows version, the game now reliably crashes to desktop whenever you switch from a flight back to KSC, or revert to the VAB. I've tried 1.04, 1.05 and 1.1(something)  with the same results. I noticed that the recommended minimum specs have snuck up at some point from 2gb to 3gb of RAM. My system is relatively modest, but has 4gb of RAM installed- on a 32-bit version of windows I can't use any more, so that can't be it. What am I doing wrong? Is it any better on Linux? Considering setting up a dual-boot system so if that's a solution I'll take it...