PC Specs vs. Number of bugs

[VlonaldKerman]

I've had an interesting experience with KSP 2. I started playing on my old PC which had a GTX 1070. I experienced tons of bugs- teleporting KSC, vehicles spontaneously assuming landed state while in orbit, kraken attacks, etc... loading a quicksave usually spawned a new bug, rather than solving one.

I've upgraded my PC to a top-of-the-line build: its a falcon northwest PC w/ RTX 4090, i9 13900KS, 64 GB VRAM, etc. I would say that not only is performance much better (duh) but I'm having way fewer game-breaking bugs. Still many bugs, but a quickload usually resolves things. I'm wondering, then, what other peoples experiences are.

I don't think I can make this poll correlate the responses to the two questions, but I'm nonetheless curious to see if there's a trend between higher-end gear and fewer bugs.

Software developers: is this possible? If so, why?

For the poll: Substantial bugs means bugs which would preclude you from finishing your mission, were it not for quickloads, or that did cause the mission to fail.

Edited March 11, 2023 by VlonaldKerman

[The Aziz]

Missions are not equal. I may encounter one bug on direct launch, transfer, landing and return, but I may encounter 8 when it involves wheels, docking ports, orbital rendezvous, large landing legs, wings, on a very similar mission. I'd say bug count is related to complexity of the craft.

[rjbvre]

I'm below spec (gtx970, i5 3570k, 16gb ram) and usually find that if a craft is buggy early on (extending legs causes rotation/breakage, staging messes up camera view) it will be buggy the entire mission, and reloading won't help those issues much. If it isn't having issues by the time I've circularized orbit around Kerbin and tested parts that deploy, it's usually fine going forward. 

When I start seeing those kind of bugs I just revert to VAB and either move around or replace the buggy parts and try again. This has saved me a lot of headache

 

 

 

 

 

 

[securityinstruts]

is a potato
i7-3770K
GTX 980
16GiB

With my SecondsPerFrame, not FPS at launch, I'm actually encountering the lowest amount of bugs due to actual playtime it takes me to get anywhere. Haven't actually met with the Kraken nor have I had any gamebreaking bugs but then again I'm building and controlling very small crafts as I play with a potato. Have build, launched, docked and separated crafts. Mostly LKO relay satellites and expanded that network to cover the Mun.

I have manually set the forces of docking ports, separators and fairing to really low. This might have an effect for not encountering Kraken/ship destroying bugs but who knows has it helped.

[Moons]

2 hours ago, VlonaldKerman said:

I've had an interesting experience with KSP 2. I started playing on my old PC which had a GTX 1070. I experienced tons of bugs- teleporting KSC, vehicles spontaneously assuming landed state while in orbit, kraken attacks, etc... loading a quicksave usually spawned a new bug, rather than solving one.

I've upgraded my PC to a top-of-the-line build: its a falcon northwest PC w/ RTX 4090, i9 13900KS, 64 GB VRAM, etc. I would say that not only is performance much better (duh) but I'm having way fewer game-breaking bugs. Still many bugs, but a quickload usually resolves things. I'm wondering, then, what other peoples experiences are.

I don't think I can make this poll correlate the responses to the two questions, but I'm nonetheless curious to see if there's a trend between higher-end gear and fewer bugs.

Software developers: is this possible? If so, why?

For the poll: Substantial bugs means bugs which would preclude you from finishing your mission, were it not for quickloads, or that did cause the mission to fail.

I doubt that its hardware. Was your last PC up to date - windows updates, hardware drivers etc.? Or maybe really old CPU that wasnt supported perfectly?

Edited March 11, 2023 by Moons

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

I'm finding plenty of bugs with a 3070. 

But I do think that there are people who mistake performance issues for bugs. 

Bugs are things like 'undocking blows up both ships' 

Performance issues are 'blocky graphics at coastlines' 

[InterstellarDrifter]

• 4090 aio cooled
• 12900ks aio cooled
• 32gb 5600mt/s

I have experienced pretty much every known bug, and probably more(A LOT), but I still play, though I'm starting to load up KSP1 more and more, lol. In fact its been KSP1 for the past few days. Interested to see what fixes come Thursday.

Edited March 13, 2023 by InterstellarDrifter

[cocoscacao]

High end PC doesn't mean less bugs. It means you get annoyed in high resolution.

[Rosten]

On 3/11/2023 at 5:59 AM, VlonaldKerman said:

Software developers: is this possible? If so, why?

Yes.  Race conditions are more likely on a potato.  A thread going through code that should have been mutexed has greater odds of getting preempted at a bad time on slow hardware as the Windows scheduler uses wall-clock time for time-slices, converting an exposure that might have been microseconds to milliseconds.  Other timing-related bugs can show up on potatoes when the order things occur in changes due to a slow HDD, memory stalls, less parallelism, etc..  And then there are all the workarounds only used near the minimum spec which no one on the development team uses so have seen less testing.

[magnemoe]

On 3/13/2023 at 11:14 AM, Rosten said:

Yes.  Race conditions are more likely on a potato.  A thread going through code that should have been mutexed has greater odds of getting preempted at a bad time on slow hardware as the Windows scheduler uses wall-clock time for time-slices, converting an exposure that might have been microseconds to milliseconds.  Other timing-related bugs can show up on potatoes when the order things occur in changes due to a slow HDD, memory stalls, less parallelism, etc..  And then there are all the workarounds only used near the minimum spec which no one on the development team uses so have seen less testing.

Pretty common for games to get more buggy if they are pressed to the limit. Lack of memory is the most obvious one, this was an major issue in 32 bit KSP 1, also an serious issue on the PS 3 as it had little memory. 
One weird race condition might be that you load environment and you load objects, you want the objects to be loaded before the environment and both before physic is applied. 
Had many rovers gotten their wheels stolen in KSP 1 and Elder scroll Oblivion had one there an Orc who would sell you an house might fall to his death because he loaded before an bridge. 

KSP 1 was pretty safe even with low frame rates, it was however loading issues with large surface bases. 
 

[Tazooka]

RTX 3060 (12GB)

i5-11600k

32GB DRR4 RAM @ 3600MHz

I get an average between 10 and 20 fps at 1440p on high settings and encounter so many bugs on a average, hour long mission