Super computer?

[Guest Brody_Peffley]

I was wondering if 4 computers all the same specs. hooked up to a program that makes a network between the computers like a super computer. If it would help with fps. or even allow more parts. I was just imaging using the worlds most powerfulest supercomputer and playing kerbalspaceprogram on it

And is it even possible for ksp to be able to use a super computer? since my understandings is they divide the work.

[Peter KG6LSE]

Its not ...... Unless you blow a huge wad of money on fiber channel or 10Gigibit LAN

See the real reason to use * clusters * is to render Long hollywood films and do things that are long term like renders and physics sims *not the KSP kind * .

infact I had 8 computers as a cluster back in the 2000s to do renders with Bryce and transcode with Final cut Pro and POOCH .

Real time things like games are the last thing you want to run on a cluster .

BeoWoulf is one and apple QAdmin is another .

I dont think KSP can divvy up the tasks ,

With today's Hex core PCs you dont NEED a supercomputer ..

I know Ill be flaimed for this ...... but the new mac pro is a HECK of a non consumer computer .

If I rememer right its 6 GB of Video ram shared with 2 GPUs . its not a game rig but if you are gonna Blow cash on 4 PCs that are worthy of a cluster . then you can afford the mac and just run Win 7 on it . Like I do for my games. I use the mac side for * work *

I have the last ever old case one and it runs KSP like a boss...... I have YET to choke it .

One day I had KSP on one screen doing its thing and I played Portal 2 on the other .

both were just humming along well

Edited January 20, 2014 by Peter KG6LSE

[Guest Brody_Peffley]

Its not ...... Unless you blow a huge wad of money on fiber channel or 10Gigibit LAN

See the real reason to use * clusters * is to render Long hollywood films and do things that are long term like renders and physics sims *not the KSP kind * .

infact I had 8 computers as a cluster back in the 2000s to do renders with Bryce and transcode with Final cut Pro and POOCH .

Real time things like games are the last thing you want to run on a cluster .

BeoWoulf is one and apple QAdmin is another .

I dont think KSP can divvy up the tasks ,

With today's Hex core PCs you dont NEED a supercomputer ..

I know Ill be flaimed for this ...... but the new mac pro is a HECK of a non consumer computer .

If I rememer right its 6 GB of Video ram shared with 2 GPUs . its not a game rig but if you are gonna Blow cash on 4 PCs that are worthy of a cluster . then you can afford the mac and just run Win 7 on it . Like I do for my games. I use the mac side for * work *

I have the last ever old case one and it runs KSP like a boss...... I have YET to choke it .

I just feel bad for this guys lag..

the largest plane in ksp..

Well I was just wondering. Was going to spend money on a cluster to do molecue simulations.

[Agent86]

Just call IBM and ask to borrow their Roadrunner.

[Guest Brody_Peffley]

Just call IBM and ask to borrow their Roadrunner.

don't want to pay for there electricity bill...

[Peter KG6LSE]

for real science clusters are good !

[Tripzter]

KSP cant use multiple cores like other programs.

[Bean]

If the KSP physics could use more than a single core you'd get up to a (Insert core count here)x boost to performance. Then and only then would making a cluster even remotely make sense, as most PCs these days are in effect, clusters (Having more than 1 CPU/thread)