Video cards

[RatBeer]

I got a new computer recently and it didnt come with the greatest GFX card (intel HD graphics) so im looking to upgrade. Ive had my eye on the GT630 2GB mainly because its a fairly good price and seems like a half decent card. I was curious as to how good the card is. I mainly play KSP and will probably buy the DAYZ standalone when it comes out so how well do you think it would perform running these games. Cheers

[CalculusWarrior]

I've heard that KSP doesn't use the graphics card to its full potential, so you don't need an extraordinarily high quality one. (I think I'm using a similar graphics card to that)

However, I'm not a computer hardware expert by any means, so I could be totally wrong.

[Schweehog]

Not saying it would be best for your situation, but you might want to just check out the AMD Radeon 7870 HD HIS before you make a decision.

[leax256]

At this current time just about any gpu will handle ksp, the intel ones might be pushing it. most of the processing is done on a single cpu core and this is the limiting factor. given time this should change and the gpu could eventually become the bottlekneck(limiting factor).

[RatBeer]

At this current time just about any gpu will handle ksp, the intel ones might be pushing it. most of the processing is done on a single cpu core and this is the limiting factor. given time this should change and the gpu could eventually become the bottlekneck(limiting factor).

well i just figured it was and issue with the graphics card because i have and i5 3470 and it runs really nice with a 350+ part ship but when ever i look at the terrain on kerbin under about 160,000M the FPS drops significantly.

[CalculusWarrior]

well i just figured it was and issue with the graphics card because i have and i5 3470 and it runs really nice with a 350+ part ship but when ever i look at the terrain on kerbin under about 160,000M the FPS drops significantly.

That's what happens to me as well, but I have put both the rendering and the terrain detail sliders to their lowest settings and they work fine.

[RatBeer]

That's what happens to me as well, but I have put both the rendering and the terrain detail sliders to their lowest settings and they work fine.

yes i should have mentioned that this happens even when the settings are at their lowest. However i would like a new card just to play on reasonable settings

[Reavermyst]

I'd say go for it if you got the cash for it. Just know that the game won't use the card's full potential due to engine limitations. But on the bright side you'll find a use for the rest of that potential in other titles!

[RatBeer]

I'd say go for it if you got the cash for it. Just know that the game won't use the card's full potential due to engine limitations. But on the bright side you'll find a use for the rest of that potential in other titles!

true, id be pretty happy with just 30 fps on like medium settings, but yeh like you said it will be useful in other games too

[SalmonellaDingDong]

630 sucks. That's something that would be put in a laptop. Buy a real card like a 670, which is affordable and will play whatever you want.

[RatBeer]

630 sucks. That's something that would be put in a laptop. Buy a real card like a 670, which is affordable and will play whatever you want.

too bad they're like 4-5 times the price. That would be way out of my price range

[_Aramchek_]

What is your price range?

The 630 is kind of dull, and if you say what your range is I can try to find you the best deal for it.

[RatBeer]

What is your price range?

The 630 is kind of dull, and if you say what your range is I can try to find you the best deal for it.

that would be awesome. im looking at between $60 - $80. I have not seen a lot around that price apart from a gt 630 that was $60

[Leonov]

Unity, which is the Engine KSP is built on does not offload anything to your GPU.

If you are not doing any sort of gaming i do not advise investing in any GTX or Rhadeon HD Graphics card.

Edited May 27, 2013 by Leonov

[RatBeer]

Unity, which is the Engine KSP is ran off of does not offload to your GPU whatsoever.

If you are not doing any sort of gaming i do not advise investing in any GTX or Rhadeon HD Graphics card.

So are you saying a low end card would be fine to use?

[WhiteWeasel]

So are you saying a low end card would be fine to use?

I think he's saying the game does not use a graphics card at all.

[SalmonellaDingDong]

that would be awesome. im looking at between $60 - $80. I have not seen a lot around that price apart from a gt 630 that was $60

You're not going to get a video card for that. not one that is worth having, at least. Get more money.

Also, I get plenty of GPU usage when in the editor. Saying Unity doesn't use a GPU is inaccurate.

[RatBeer]

I think he's saying the game does not use a graphics card at all.

So its the CPU thats giving me the low frame rates?

[doggie015]

The editor makes use of the GPU but while the simulation is running your CPU is the main bottleneck. It's like FSX in that it is more reliant on CPU than GPU. I am running an nVidia GeForce GT 330M on a laptop with a 1st-gen i7 and 4GB of RAM and I can run it just fine (Some stuttering with 300+ part ships on launchpad and below 15-20km on kerbin on the way up but otherwise fine).

[_Aramchek_]

So are you saying a low end card would be fine to use?

It doesn't take a lot for KSP, no.

If you want to get a vid card, for the money you've got, the best deal I've seen is an amd 6670, there's a sapphire one that's got 1gb of ddr5 memory and that would give you the best bang for your dollar in that price range. I can send you a link to it if you'd like?

[RatBeer]

I can send you a link to it if you'd like?

i would appreciate that

[jfjohnny5]

At this current time just about any gpu will handle ksp, the intel ones might be pushing it. most of the processing is done on a single cpu core and this is the limiting factor. given time this should change and the gpu could eventually become the bottlekneck(limiting factor).

Given time this could change. Unfortunately a lot of the performance issues we see are due to limitations of the Unity engine, namely the fact that it runs a single core, and that it doesn't offload physics to the GPU. Even more unfortunate is that the folks behind Unity have said that being "cutting edge" isn't a top priority for them - since so many of their customers are creating lighter, mobile friendly games.

[RatBeer]

The editor makes use of the GPU but while the simulation is running your CPU is the main bottleneck. It's like FSX in that it is more reliant on CPU than GPU. I am running an nVidia GeForce GT 330M on a laptop with a 1st-gen i7 and 4GB of RAM and I can run it just fine (Some stuttering with 300+ part ships on launchpad and below 15-20km on kerbin on the way up but otherwise fine).

It just puzzles me what could be causing the lag, even with just a 3 part rocket i get pretty bad FPS on take off whenever i look towards the horizon on the lowest settings and im running it on an i5 3470 like i said earlier. Surely an i5 is powerful enough to run KSP. This is why i believe its GPU but hey im definitely no computer genius

[_Aramchek_]

Your cpu should do ok, if you're feeling brave you could try some light overclocking.

[RatBeer]

Your cpu should do ok, if you're feeling brave you could try some light overclocking.

Maybe but ive only had the PC for a few weeks and i have no knowledge on overclocking so it could be a bit dangerous haha. I don't want to damage it in anyway