I wanted to see how KSP worked on my new computer. Using Dmagics 600 part test rocket

[pslytely psycho]

Hi all! I ran across this thread in the forums, decided I would participate and downloaded Dmagics AMAZING 600 part 'test ship.' (Ha! TORTURE SHIP OF DEATH......) Now I haven't tried to do his benchmark yet, just need to learn how to do more than just turn FRAPS 'on' first. But I did think of a little experiment to see A: what my computer would do with it. and B: monitor the stuff behind the scenes to see how my computer was actually handling it in terms of heat, processor load, and memory load.

Dmagics great CPU benchmarking thread is here:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/42877-CPU-Performance-Database?highlight=benchmark

I did add MechJeb and set it up to auto stage and strait up acent, just because I was running it so many times in a row testing things. Now since it ran pretty well as just a quick test, (16 fps launch, 40 by stage 5 ) with no mod at all, I updated all of my mods, and then ran his rocket exactly opposite of what the benchmark requires. The reason being I wanted lag. Dmagics test is designed to get past the worst causes of 'background' lag, like looking up to avoid seeing Kerbin. Great advice for a test. I wanted to see how it would work more in a real life environment. When I launch I look around and of course some of the best views are the worst lag. So I intentionally looked at the sun across the ocean to induce lag. Because that is how I tend to play. So I tried to pick the spot with the worst fps for each shot.

I also set the physics slider all the way right, turned off AA and Vsync, maxxed out graphics, ran at 1360 x 768, with full scatter, 40 on shadows and light sources. And ran with the lights on during launch. (goodbye at least one fps...)

The system specifics for those interested should be here:

http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Pslytely-Psycho/saved/3YfU

I ran these tests mostly for my own amusement. But learned a few things.

1. KSP actually looks smooth at 11 fps! I figure it is the relatively simple graphics, KSP barely wakes up my GPU. But when I panned around with the camera, it looked good and was fully playable! Before I started FRAPS I guessed it was at least 20 or so fps. Was I shocked to see the actual number. (My old computer hit the 2 fps at about 400 parts....!)

2. KSP multithreads my 8 cores very well. Only the physics appear to be a bottleneck, and the CPU was sharing time between core 01 and core 05. These were the only two cores that consistently hit 75% and never at the same time. KSP topped out using 20% of my processor at the most. So there is a lot of overhead when Unity gets PhysX to multithread.

3. Rbray89s Clouds and city lights forced him to create the Active Texture Management (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/59005) and it works so well. Without it I have a memory crash before they all load. With it I maxxed out at just 2.9 GB. Kudos to Rbray89!

4. I opted not to use the stock cooler with the chip, I am amazed at how cool this setup runs. 2 1/2 hours of SiSoft Sandra only heated it up to 149F. And that is Overclocked from 3.5 GHz to 4.3 GHz. About as far as I'm willing to go without water cooling. (My old Acer Aspire quad core laptop idled at 130F and KSP made it hit 165F on a regular basis, and when the fans would start to get dirty, KSP would start acting very poorly and sure enough...180F.

5. The ARM update fixed sooooo many things. So much more stable and smooth.

Like I said, I did this for my own amusement, but thought those of you who are into building might find it interesting.

And yeah, I know, Intels chips are a lot faster per core, but a lot harder on my wallet. I was limited to $700. I only went over by $11, so I am still married. If I would of gotten what I wanted however, that may not of been the case.

" 'sposions are the sprinkles on your ice cream sundae...."

Javascript is disabled. View full album

As far as the FPS goes, I waited to take a screenshot until the number was stable. Example, I hit 20fps around stage 10 but it didn't stay above 20 until stage7.

Last and not least I gave KSP some public reps here: http://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=14/04/03/1428212

and here: http://pipedot.org/story/2014-04-02/kerbal-space-program

Peace out!

"Fly recklessly! You only live 100,000,000 times!" - Jeb

Edited April 5, 2014 by pslytely psycho

[hildegain]

I don't want to come across as being rude here, just trying to be logical.

"5. The ARM update fixed sooooo many things. So much more stable and smooth. "

Yep, I saw improvements too, happy with that!

"I know, Intels chips are a lot faster per core, but a lot harder on my wallet. I was limited to $700. I only went over by $11"

Well you did pretty well for your budget I'd say. I actually got an intel system for similar pricing here in the UK but I got my hardware in bundles and deals

KSP looks smooth at 11? Not really. 11 fps can only ever look smoother than it is if there is some frame blending or lack of pixel detail to discern frames. 11 fps is especially not smooth when panning a camera. Of course if you're used to getting less than 11 in a given situation, it may feel smoother.

Also if KSP never pushes your CPU beyond 20% then it can't be multithreading your 8 cores well (being picky). If KSP could multithread well at all, you would expect to see a higher % overall and not a hard cap at 20%.

Unity can make use of multiple cores but it doesn't do well at tasking threads to multiple cores. I get the same usage as you do if I have hyperthreading switched on, which halves my performance and yet is still beyond acceptable. So yeah, your chip may be lacking single thread performance but it will maintain good frames for pretty much any game you play and for 700$ did rather well.

Gotta say I do like the 260x GPU too, not expensive and by no means weak.

Hope you enjoy your new build

[pslytely psycho]

I don't take it as rude. Constructive criticism and hands on is how I learn best.

As far as smooth goes, I was shocked at the framerate reported by FRAPS. I ran the rocket manually the first time, before I decided to MJ it for easy repeat, and I had no issues with control at all. It looked like about 20. (I don't know how accurate FRAPS is when viewed onscreen). I would make a video if I knew how. Not a tech, so maybe this sounds dumber than I think. Is there any chance the video card is doubling up frames or some such, I seem to remember an article from years ago involving persistence of vision studies or some such to use lower framerates to reduce internet traffic....or maybe it was BS?

Got a windfall from the taxman, so I ordered a 270x. I goofed when I ordered the 260x and got the 1GB card. Skyrims HD textures take 1.5 and the mods I want to use on GTA IV roll in about 1.8. So I can't use it like I wanted too.

"Also if KSP never pushes your CPU beyond 20% then it can't be multithreading your 8 cores well (being picky). If KSP could multithread well at all, you would expect to see a higher % overall and not a hard cap at 20%."

Just seemed to be the overall average for all cores. I didn't watch that too specifically, I did watch what was happening though on the Coretemp screen, It was reasonably easy to see the 1 and 4 core swapping the physics load (for cooling?) When the load passed the core would drop to 1.5GHz, for a moment before jumping back to 4.3 and ramping back up to 75%. Of course these are merely observations and guesses as I know hardware ok, but not really much about how things are handled in the background. I know just idleing windows only runs about 1%, my old computer ran about 20% just to do that. To a sound guy, it looks to me like I have a lot of overhead to play with when the game gets fully optimized and Unity gets fully featured.

Also there are several threads on here stating in effect that KSP doesn't multithread at all. It was plainly obvious that KSP does, but Physics only one, and I think the load manager was swapping its threads and not KSP. (I could of course, just have no idea what I'm looking at. A very plausible thing!)

Edited April 5, 2014 by pslytely psycho

[Red Iron Crown]

KSP is multithreaded and always has been. It's just that the single physics thread so dominates the others in resource requirements that it behaves very similarly to a single threaded application.

I'm more of an Intel/nVidia guy, but that's a great system for that price point, well done.

[pslytely psycho]

KSP is multithreaded and always has been. It's just that the single physics thread so dominates the others in resource requirements that it behaves very similarly to a single threaded application.

I'm more of an Intel/nVidia guy, but that's a great system for that price point, well done.

In all honesty, I had not built a new system in over 8 years. I went to pre made laptops when I started driving truck. I got a ton of advice from the forum and especially from Dmagics who pointed me to the CPU thread. I revised it like 20 times. This forum has been great to me.

THANKS TO ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR HELP!