KSP2 Performance Update

[Bej Kerman]

37 minutes ago, AtomicTech said:

@The Aziz and @Bej Kerman

Looks like we have a forum kraken!

Was gonna bring that up! Noticed this elsewhere as well:

at here:

 

I've also noticed that notifications say "February 23 2023" rather than something more appropriate like "1 hour ago", as well as occasionally blanking usernames:

Edit: there it is again! - this time, I captured the "Feb 23" bug.

And of course it fixed itself again.

Edit end \\

After some time passes, these fix themselves, only applying to really recent notifications. This specific bug also applies to the front page, to the right of each subforum where it shows the most recent post in that sub. But it doesn't blank the username.

The forum doesn't like the stress KSP 2 has put on it!

Edited February 23, 2023 by Bej Kerman

[regex]

1 hour ago, Nerdy_Mike said:

The game is certainly playable on machines below our min spec, but because no two people play the game exactly the same way (and because a physics sandbox game of this kind creates literally limitless potential for players to build anything and go anywhere), it’s very challenging to predict the experience that any particular player will have on day 1.

As expected. Thanks for the clarification.

[Kerbart]

54 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

The problem is that reasonably-sized means different things to different people.  For example, you could think a 200 part/150 ton rocket is a reasonable size, but someone like ShadowZone or Manley or Towne who build massive ships might think that's small.  So, like Mike said, it's hard to predict what any given player - or even a cross-section of the community - may do at launch.

But that's where the Kerbal X comes in. Unless I'm mistaken, that pilo 'o' rust should be the same for everyone, so you'll have at least some idea what the conditions for quoted frame rates are. It could even have it under different circumstances, right after launch, at LEO, and in deep space. Or something along those lines. We could refer to them as "Kerbal refined all standard heuristic rates" or KRASH Rates.

[VlonaldKerman]

Thanks for this post. I think that communication with the community is a lot of what can prevent the sort of speculation meltdown that was had, and this post goes a long way towards that. That being said...

1 hour ago, Nerdy_Mike said:

Fuel flow/Resource System optimization. Some of you may have noticed that adding a high number of engines noticeably impacts framerate. This has to do with CPU-intensive fuel flow and Delta-V update calculations that are exacerbated when multiple engines are pulling from a common fuel source. The current system is both working and stable, but there is clearly room for performance improvement. We are re-evaluating this system to improve its scalability.

Understood- but wouldn't this have been a priority for some time? I would think that in a rocket sim, optimizing calculations relating to fuel flow would provide downstream benefits and free up room for more complicated, advanced processes down the line. I'm an idiot when it comes to game dev so I may be completely wrong, but it seems weird that a system this integral is as un-optimized as it is, even in this early build of the game.

Also... is this the special message from Intercept that the KSP twitter account mentioned yesterday?

[MiffedStarfish]

12 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

You probably didn't mean to come across the way you did. I'm just saying there was probably a better way to phrase what you said 

No, I did mean to come across like that.

[Grenartia]

This is good update, that quells a lot of my concerns, and hopefully those of other people.

[Baleine]

I like the fact that you reacted to the concerns of the community. Hope we will hear from you and your teammates on a regular basis (more on a weekly basis than on a quarterly basis )

[Jarin]

Hey, I have the minimum specs now. Also actually responding between preview and launch raises my hopes for general communication significantly. I can be less "grumpy old gamer" today.

[Baleine]

11 minutes ago, MiffedStarfish said:

No, I did mean to come across like that.

Trolls will be trolls

[KerbalOnKerbin]

I'm really glad that y'all are clearing up this drama around the specs. I'm getting a new system that meets most of the requirements for Reccomended in 3 days but ill still play the game on my current potato. I'm used to low framerates, so I would say that no matter what, these specs are good.

[N9 Gaming]

Thanks for the update! At least starting out I'll keep this in mind and make vehicles with as few engines as possible, simple enough

[Kerbart]

Would it be an idea to opt in for some kind of profiler (perhaps as a mod)? Not everyone is paranoid and I'm sure there are many players who have no problem with the game "phoning home" to tell where the processor is spending its precious time.

Yes, I have no clue what I'm talking abut, feel free to blast me if it doesn't work that way. Just offering some suggestions here.

[Jarin]

Just now, Kerbart said:

Would it be an idea to opt in for some kind of profiler (perhaps as a mod)? Not everyone is paranoid and I'm sure there are many players who have no problem with the game "phoning home" to tell where the processor is spending its precious time.

Yes, I have no clue what I'm talking abut, feel free to blast me if it doesn't work that way. Just offering some suggestions here.

Plenty of software works that way. Seems like it could be useful here, though it might also add to overhead issues.

[Krzeszny]

GTX 1070 Ti in minimum specs is still too high, but could be ok during EA. There's a lot of room for improvement.

The performance of large crafts could be significantly improved by adding the option to enable "simplified internal physics" which would disable joint flexing whenever the player wants. I've never really understood the point in flexing. In KSP 1 there's the mod Kerbal Joint Reinforcement Next and I was hoping for KSP 2 physics to be more rigid without struts, but that's just a personal thing.

[NovaSuper]

*tries out the early access*

news reporter 5 hours later: "Local man starts a house fire, reason is suspected to be a PC explosion."

[Stephensan]

1 hour ago, Nerdy_Mike said:

KSP2 Performance
 

Hey Kerbonauts, KSP Community Lead Michael Loreno here. I’ve connected with multiple teams within Intercept after ingesting feedback from the community and I’d like to address some of the concerns that are circulating regarding KSP 2 performance and min spec.

First and foremost, we need to apologize for how the initial rollout of the hardware specs communication went. It was confusing and distressful for many of you, and we’re here to provide clarity.

TLDR:

The game is certainly playable on machines below our min spec, but because no two people play the game exactly the same way (and because a physics sandbox game of this kind creates literally limitless potential for players to build anything and go anywhere), it’s very challenging to predict the experience that any particular player will have on day 1. We’ve chosen to be conservative for the time being, in order to manage player expectations. We will update these spec recommendations as the game evolves.

Below is an updated graphic for recommended hardware specs:

I’d like to provide some details here about how we arrived at those specs and what we’re currently doing to improve them.

To address those who are worried that this spec will never change: KSP2’s performance is not set in stone. The game is undergoing continuous optimization, and performance will improve over the course of Early Access. We’ll do our best to communicate when future updates contain meaningful performance improvements, so watch this space.

Our determination of minimum and recommended specs for day 1 is based on our best understanding of what machinery will provide the best experience across the widest possible range of gameplay scenarios.

In general, every feature goes through the following steps:

1. Get it working
2. Get it stable
3. Get it performant
4. Get it moddable

As you may have already gathered, different features are living in different stages on this list right now. We’re confident that the game is now fun and full-featured enough to share with the public, but we are entering Early Access with the expectation that the community understands that this is a game in active development. That means that some features may be present in non-optimized forms in order to unblock other features or areas of gameplay that we want people to be able to experience today. Over the course of Early Access, you will see many features make their way from step 1 through step 4.

Here’s what our engineers are working on right now to improve performance during Early Access:

1. Terrain optimization. The current terrain implementation meets our main goal of displaying multiple octaves of detail at all altitudes, and across multiple biome types. We are now hard at work on a deep overhaul of this system that will not only further improve terrain fidelity and variety, but that will do so more efficiently.
2. Fuel flow/Resource System optimization. Some of you may have noticed that adding a high number of engines noticeably impacts framerate. This has to do with CPU-intensive fuel flow and Delta-V update calculations that are exacerbated when multiple engines are pulling from a common fuel source. The current system is both working and stable, but there is clearly room for performance improvement. We are re-evaluating this system to improve its scalability.

As we move forward into Early Access, we expect to receive lots of feedback from our players, not only about the overall quality of their play experiences, but about whether their goals are being served by our game as it runs on their hardware. This input will give us a much better picture of how we’re tracking relative to the needs of our community.
 

With that, keep sending over the feedback, and thanks for helping us make this game as great as it can be!

please, in the name of everything kerbin, please add FSR and DLSS before release.. please i beg for the community.

[snkiz]

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

Much cheaper. That's what this means.

I ran out of reactions, so.. Yes!

[Grenartia]

Out of curiosity, does an i5 4460 @ 3.2 GHz count as better, worse, or equivalent compared to the i5 6400 @ 2.7, for the purposes of these specs?

[LameLefty]

Look, if the physics engine is still essentially single-threaded like KSP1, it doesn’t matter how fancy your GPU is, because we’re all going to be thread-locked by the physics.  It will look gorgeous with all the processing effects, but we’ll still be single-digit FPS launching a 250 part colony core module.

Now, if they’re leveraging CUDA cores or the AMD equivalent to assist with the physics, great! Then GPU-up, friends. 

I guess we’ll all see tomorrow morning. 

[Giulio S]

2 hours ago, MiffedStarfish said:

didn't say what framerates the requirements were for

The Devs said that it is really hard to predict what kind of performance you might find. This is because unlike other games, KSP2 is open world: you can make a 10 parts vehicle and fly it around the space centre, or you can build a 2000 parts vehicle and send it to Jool. You may also fly in an atmosphere or not, calculate multiple trajectories modified by many bodies etc..

It is therefore very hard to predict the frame rates you will obtain.

 

[Giulio S]

I am so glad that you want to make this moddable since the beginning. Truly shows that unlike other corporations you really show love for your community. Good job on the updates, continue to be marvellous!

[Jarin]

29 minutes ago, Krzeszny said:

GTX 1070 Ti in minimum specs is still too high, but could be ok during EA. There's a lot of room for improvement.

I'd like lower, of course. But while the 1070Ti is a good card, it's also what... a seven year old one?

But yeah, like others are saying, so much will depend on physics bottlenecks, I guess.

[Klapaucius]

A question for PC experts:

 

I am below in some places and far above in others.

I have a GTX 1060 at 6 GB so am slightly underspec with a 1070ti which has 8

I also have an I7 and 32 GB ram and a lot of disk space.  The PC was set up for video editing and was the best compromise on performance and affordabilty. It is also 3-4 years old now I think.

 

So, how much does exceeding in one area balance out (if at all) in other areas. My understanding is that KSP1 relied heavily on CPU processing but did not take advantage of multiple cores.  I'm assuming KSP2 is going to be better at using the whole system? Pardon my ignorance if I am making incorrect assumptions or asking the wrong questions.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 hour ago, AtomicTech said:

forum kraken!

saw that too; kudos!

10 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

A question for PC experts:

 

I am below in some places and far above in others.

I have a GTX 1060 at 6 GB so am slightly underspec with a 1070ti which has 8

I also have an I7 and 32 GB ram and a lot of disk space.  The PC was set up for video editing and was the best compromise on performance and affordabilty. It is also 3-4 years old now I think.

 

So, how much does exceeding in one area balance out (if at all) in other areas. My understanding is that KSP1 relied heavily on CPU processing but did not take advantage of multiple cores.  I'm assuming KSP2 is going to be better at using the whole system? Pardon my ignorance if I am making incorrect assumptions or asking the wrong questions.

No one knows, nor will know until tomorrow.  Generally speaking there is some benefit to having at least one spec above the minimum.

My guess is that if you keep your part count reasonable (and pay attention to the number of engines, given what was written in the OP) you should have a pretty decent experience.  Presumes you're playing on 1080p.

[Zeek05]

2 hours ago, Nerdy_Mike said:

Below is an updated graphic for recommended hardware specs:

 

This is great, but (and this is just my opinion) it seems unnecessary for the recommended specs to require a 3080 just to render the game in 1440. Call me crazy, but I have played a lot more GPU intense games on both my RX 480 and my laptops 2060TI. I get it’s in early access though, but I would hate for most of the playerbase to get locked behind a very limited GPU requirement in order to enjoy the game to the fullest.

Perhaps a ‘very low’ graphics setting is in order?