KSP still not optimized for RAM

[gilflo]

I got 24Go RAM on my 2,8GHZ core i5 iMac and KSP only use 4 Go.

As soon as I build and try big ships, more than 700 pieces, too many tries between VAB and launch make the small wheel on the screen turn and turn for minutes, so that I prefer male KSP quit and restart it.

[draeath]

*cough* In other words, it's a 32-bit executable, so It is subject to a ~ 3.5gb addressable memory limitation. This has nothing to do with optimization (though optimizing things - something that should really not be done early in development (and KSP is on 0.23 right now) would delay being impacted by it.)

This might help you.

[Xetalim]

Remember that KSP is still alpha, there are still a lot of things to be optimized.

KSP is an indie game, it is not published by a big company like EA.

EA has the money to optimize things(even though they do not)

[gilflo]

Thanks, I also notice KSP is optimized in 32 bits and my computer is optimized for 64 bits.

[gilflo]

Remember that KSP is still alpha, there are still a lot of things to be optimized.

KSP is an indie game, it is not published by a big company like EA.

EA has the money to optimize things(even though they do not)

I know you are right!

[AlamoVampire]

This game is only optimized for 32 bit hence the 4gb+- limit on ram.

[draeath]

"op·ti·mize - verb: make the best or most effective use of (a situation, opportunity, or resource)."

Wrong word choice

Did you see my link here? This may solve the problem for you. Grab the 'experimental-basic' package and give it a try. You should notice little-to-no quality difference, but a huge RAM usage difference. Less RAM used means you can push things further before hitting that magical 3.5gb wall.

[gilflo]

Yes, thank's, i am going to try it

[gilflo]

You just put the BoulderCo folder in the Game data folder?

[MR4Y]

*cough* In other words, it's a 32-bit executable, so It is subject to a ~ 3.5gb addressable memory limitation. This has nothing to do with optimization (though optimizing things - something that should really not be done early in development (and KSP is on 0.23 right now) would delay being impacted by it.)

This might help you.

the 3.5 GB limit only applies to Windows. Linux and BSD based systems(like OSX) see 4 GB of RAM maximum for x86 apps.

[gilflo]

So, would it be profitable on OSX?

[LORDPrometheus]

No its the same no matter the platform and stop demanding 64 bit since unity 64bit works as well as submarine screen doors. the devs would add 64 bit functionality in a second if they had the choice but it's out of their control

[vexx32]

I'm gonna move this to Development Discussion, because it has no place in Support & Bugs (of which it is decidedly neither).

[AlamoVampire]

They will give us 64 bit IF/WHEN it becomes plausible. Till then be happy you can play it and stop channeling Whackjob lol

[vexx32]

Anyone channeling Whackjob probably wouldn't mind. The guy is probably used to KSP's Seconds Per Frame mode by now. xD

[Captain Sierra]

Gah. Shame that the game has come so far on such a s****y engine. It's so developed now it would be easily 6 months to 2 years to develop a custom engine for KSP, which it sorely needs. But, when this project started, all of squad was new to the scene, so coding an entirely new engine from scratch was out of the cards back then, and it still is just for different reasons.

[Guest Brody_Peffley]

Gah. Shame that the game has come so far on such a s****y engine. It's so developed now it would be easily 6 months to 2 years to develop a custom engine for KSP, which it sorely needs. But, when this project started, all of squad was new to the scene, so coding an entirely new engine from scratch was out of the cards back then, and it still is just for different reasons.

It would take alot longer than 2 years. Squad is a small team. And they don't get paid. For what there doing now they need more respect towards them. It takes gigantic teams over 2 years to develp a engine that works properly. And is easy to use and is upgradable and is customized. Yes a new engine would help. But that would also get very hectic it since if squad were to switch now. We could be waiting over 4 years for the next update.

[6.forty]

They will give us 64 bit IF/WHEN it becomes plausible. Till then be happy you can play it and stop channeling Whackjob lol

Some of us already have KSP in 64bit flavor, and it works quite well. While I don't necessarily like it using 5GB+ RAM, it is nice that it can handle it without issue. Performance is no better, but it's no worse either.

Gah. Shame that the game has come so far on such a s****y engine. It's so developed now it would be easily 6 months to 2 years to develop a custom engine for KSP, which it sorely needs. But, when this project started, all of squad was new to the scene, so coding an entirely new engine from scratch was out of the cards back then, and it still is just for different reasons.

It being so developed now would make it much, much harder for Squad to roll their own engine unless they just scrapped most, if not all, of the code they already have. Even just moving to a different already developed engine would take a massive amount of work. Duke Nukem Forever is a wonderful example of why you don't change engines midway; sadly George Broussard never got that memo.

[OrbitusII]

Gah. Shame that the game has come so far on such a s****y engine. It's so developed now it would be easily 6 months to 2 years to develop a custom engine for KSP, which it sorely needs. But, when this project started, all of squad was new to the scene, so coding an entirely new engine from scratch was out of the cards back then, and it still is just for different reasons.

Have you tried to develop a game engine? It's quite a long, tedious task, especially for something as sophisticated as Unity. Do you know of any game engine besides Unity that can natively export to Mac, Windows, Linux, iOS, Android, Windows Phone and Web Players, costs a mere $1500 for two professional licenses (they also have a free version with minimal restrictions) and can use the C#, Javascript, or Boo languages (Unity's coding is actually based off of these and not directly linked, but you get my point) for coding? I sure as heck don't. Unity has made things like Slender, Surgeon Simulator, Bad Piggies, Battlestar Galactica Online, and a whole slew of other games. The only restrictions right now are an older version of PhysX (2.8 or thereabouts) and KSP's issues with 64-bit on systems besides Linux (from my experience, 64-bit builds work fine on almost any 64-bit system).

Developing a custom game engine would not only take a long time, much longer than finishing and optimizing KSP right now, but would more likely than not prevent thousands of people who are already heavily invested in the game from playing it until the new engine can export to all systems or a port is complete. Would it be neat? Yeah! I think it'd be awesome if there was a "Squad Game Engine!" Would it be practical and worthwhile? Nope, unless you want to wait 10 years for KSP to start development... again.

I don't want to shoot down the idea of Squad developing a proprietary game engine, but it won't be practical for a while. I forget who said this (I think it was Damion Rayne, the old CM), but "if you want to make a game engine, make a game engine. If you want to make a game, make a game."

[vexx32]

It would take alot longer than 2 years. Squad is a small team. And they don't get paid. For what there doing now they need more respect towards them. It takes gigantic teams over 2 years to develp a engine that works properly. And is easy to use and is upgradable and is customized. Yes a new engine would help. But that would also get very hectic it since if squad were to switch now. We could be waiting over 4 years for the next update.

"Don't get paid"? Where on earth did you get that idea? They're not giving KSP away for free, so yes, they are​ getting paid.