Computer Performance in KSP

[Rarity]

[email protected]

16GB Corsair Vengeance Pro 2000MHz 10-10-10-27

MSI R9-270X Gaming 4GB both clock and memory OC'd

Intel 520 120GB SSD

similar to what Minerman30 reported;

Preformance:

1-700 parts: just fine

700-1000 parts: okay

1000-1500: laggy

1500-beyond: slideshow

PS: This reminds me of Amloris (on these forums), who has an AMD octacore processor (or 2 quad core don't remember) and has a custom built ethanol-based refrigerating cooling system. His processor(s) are OC'd to 5GHz and cooled to something like -20 degrees celsius... Just sharing this cuz it's the most extreme system I've ever heard of. Not like eight cores help at all when playing KSP.

At -20 celsius, there's no reason other than power usage keeping him from going higher than 5GHz. Of course, an AMD octacore at 5GHz literally uses as much power as a decent graphics card under load so it's understandable, but if you're gonna go through the trouble to keep it that cold, and spend that much money, it'd help to actually get your money's worth of performance out of it.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Rarity

[Blaster]

@turkwinif: You have APU graphics, the GPU is part of the CPU on the AMD A-Series. Now, GPU and system performance can improve overall if you can upgrade the RAM from the dismal DDR3 1333 to DDR3 1866. Higher speeds are hard to get and don't make much a difference after 1866 speeds.

But most notably, moar RAM is always a solution.

[CaptainGiblets]

Well that's why it sucks, the performance is always bad, it's slow, like 10 fps all the time

@ Captain Giblets:

Wow, sorry to say that but my iPad mini outperforms that easily (to be fair it is the new one with A7 SoC, the fastest ARM mobile processor on the market right now). How is the KSP performance? It should be hardly playable right? Man I feel sorta sorry for you...

@Pds314:

To what stats did u upgrade it? And if you didn't upgrade your CPU, you're still gonna have a bad time i suspect. Minecraft is quite CPU intensive compared to what it looks like (not exactly sure why). I suspect horrible 32-bit Java code...

Edited February 20, 2014 by CaptainGiblets

[_Aramchek_]

These people saying 500 parts is ok doesn't make sense, mine at 500 is some what laggy and mines a i7 3770k at 4.5ghz

I'm fine up till around 700 parts, and I hardcore hate slowdown so we're talking never under 30 fps usually higher, on an 3550k@ 4.5..not sure why you're having problems?

[steffen_anywhere]

@ CaptainGiblets: And you still play? Great dedication...

@ Rarity:

Now please correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not sure about this, but I thought that The relationship between Clock Speed and actual useful processing power (whatever that might be i.e. Floating point or other) have a logarithmic relationship and therefore overclocking beyond some point will not actually have much effect and only the power consumption will increase exponentially as always.

That might be the reason...

Edited February 20, 2014 by steffen_anywhere

[_Aramchek_]

@ CaptainGiblets: And you still play? Great dedication...

@ Rarity:

Now please correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not sure about this, but I thought that The relationship between Clock Speed and actual useful processing power (whatever that might be i.e. Floating point or other) have a logarithmic relationship and therefore overclocking beyond some point will not actually have much effect and only the power consumption will increase exponentially as always.

That might be the reason...

Nope, but heat and electron migration can rob performance/degrade parts.

Personally though, that person could have spent a lot less and just got almost any intel cpu and been better off.

[steffen_anywhere]

Ok I understand now... And yes, I wouldn't go with AMD for a computer like that. Intel however doesn't offer octacores for desktop. In fact, they don't offer them at all.