Woah... I just cranked KSP up to something like 60 FPS.

[Starwhip]

In the config file, I went and tweaked the resolution values. Like the title says, I now get insane framerates. My monitor is normally 1366 x 768, I'm running the game at 1024 x 576, at half-res, and with no anti-alising or V-sync. Terrain scatters are up to 50%, I now want to try 100%. And high-graphics. I don't know what graphics setting I'm on right now.

So if any of you want quick framerate boosts, this seems to be the way to go. Just get your monitor resolution and give KSP values that are 3/4 your normal res.

[Rainbowtrout]

Seems like a good idea, but I prefer high quality... What to do?

[Tex]

My computer's getting old, but I can normally run at 180fps. I normally go down to about 40 whilst recording with Fraps, and sometimes I get lag spikes during recordings that go as low as 1fps :<

It doesn't happen much anymore, but it used to be a big problem.

[sal_vager]

This is only effective in fullscreen mode really, and you can use antialiasing to improve the image, if in windowed mode all you get is a smaller screen.

[Starwhip]

These are my computer's graphics specs:

Physical Memory: 3.979 GB

Min Graphics Memory: 64 MB

Max Graphics Memory: 1.696 GB

Processor: Intel64 Family 6 Model 42 Stepping 7

Processor Speed: 2294 MHz

[cantab]

Hmmm. I had the opposite, reducing resolution gave negligible performance improvements. Then again, 60 fps is complete wishful thinking for my system.

[Red Iron Crown]

Physics is the limiting factor on my system. My mission timer is always yellow.

[_Aramchek_]

Seems like a good idea, but I prefer high quality... What to do?

Get an i5 K series cpu, any one will do it.

[boxman]

In the config file, I went and tweaked the resolution values. Like the title says, I now get insane framerates. My monitor is normally 1366 x 768, I'm running the game at 1024 x 576, at half-res, and with no anti-alising or V-sync. Terrain scatters are up to 50%, I now want to try 100%. And high-graphics. I don't know what graphics setting I'm on right now.

So if any of you want quick framerate boosts, this seems to be the way to go. Just get your monitor resolution and give KSP values that are 3/4 your normal res.

This will only help if you have a very low end GPU. Most framerate issues with KSP are due to large parts counts and this trick will sadly not do much of anything then.

But still nice tip for those with a low end GPU.

[magnemoe]

Get an i5 K series cpu, any one will do it.

Overclocked i7 is better.

Now to compensate have Whackjob send you some of his craft files.

[technicalfool]

I have a CRT. What native resolution?

Actually I normally run the game in a window at 1280x1024 while the desktop is at 1600x1200. Good for doing other things at the same time. My graphics card is more than good enough. My CPU on the other hand, well, let's just say I can't wait for physics improvements.

And yes, turning off FSAA will always relieve a massive amount of stress from your GPU. 2x FSAA means "render the game in 2560x2048 then shrink to 1280x1024". 8x FSAA is pretty ridiculous.

Edited May 27, 2014 by technicalfool

[Commissioner Tadpole]

Doesn't really work for me.

I know this becasue I use 1024x576 all the time and my framerate is always low.

[_Aramchek_]

Overclocked i7 is better.

Now to compensate have Whackjob send you some of his craft files.

An overclocked i5 is cheaper, and as fast as an i7 in this game, and in most other actual games too.

Benchmarks aside, the difference is practically nothing.

[KerbMav]

I do not know how much FPS I have, and I do not really care - I am just curious why 1 Kerbal second takes 2-5 seconds in game if graphics are a matter of GPU and not CPU ... it is usually better at Mun than in LKO, same ship so same part count.

[Skorpychan]

I run it at max settings. As long as my computer is able to cool, everything runs fine.

[magnemoe]

An overclocked i5 is cheaper, and as fast as an i7 in this game, and in most other actual games too.

Benchmarks aside, the difference is practically nothing.

You are probably right as the game only use one core hard.

[Nedal]

I do not know how much FPS I have, and I do not really care - I am just curious why 1 Kerbal second takes 2-5 seconds in game if graphics are a matter of GPU and not CPU ... it is usually better at Mun than in LKO, same ship so same part count.

Because when your fps drops below 30 it slows down time to compensate.

Fps drop can be either gpu or cpu related. For most with a dedicated half modern graphics card, it's part count/cpu related.

[Majorjim!]

Physics is the limiting factor on my system. My mission timer is always yellow.

This shouldn't happen mate. Try fiddling with the physics time slider. It may help.

MJ

[Red Iron Crown]

This shouldn't happen mate. Try fiddling with the physics time slider. It may help.

I was exaggerating a little bit, when the ship is 20 parts or less the timer can go green. Anything more complex is painfully slow. I've never messed with the physics slider, I'll have to experiment a bit with it to see if the situation improves.

The PC I play on is quite old and underpowered by today's standards (Core2Duo 2.0GHz, 128MB NVS135M GPU) so I don't really expect great performance from it.

[Nedal]

Ouch.. hehe

The physics slider can help with making things take less real time, they'll just be more choppy. I haven't messed with it a whole lot but I hear turning it down too low can cause physics problems with larger ships causing spontaneous unplanned disassembly.

[Pwnstarr]

I have a CRT. What native resolution?

Actually I normally run the game in a window at 1280x1024 while the desktop is at 1600x1200. Good for doing other things at the same time. My graphics card is more than good enough. My CPU on the other hand, well, let's just say I can't wait for physics improvements.

And yes, turning off FSAA will always relieve a massive amount of stress from your GPU. 2x FSAA means "render the game in 2560x2048 then shrink to 1280x1024". 8x FSAA is pretty ridiculous.

Interesting. I will try turning off FSAA later.

An overclocked i5 is cheaper, and as fast as an i7 in this game, and in most other actual games too.

Benchmarks aside, the difference is practically nothing.

I have an i5 760, thought about upgrading to a i7 4770K, but would I see a substantial improvement with a newer i5 K series (i.e. 4670K)? It's not too bad, I start lagging slightly with part numbers in the mid 100s. I'm launching ~300 part ships at laggy but workable fps though. With visual mods. GPU is a 1 GB Geforce 560 TI, starting to show its age but I'm pretty sure it's not the bottleneck.

[ApostleThirteen]

For those who have physics time problems, try adjusting the physics delta time bar under the debris bar in the settings menu, turn it all the way to the left, click apply, turn it all the way to the right, click apply again, WHAM, back to normal frame rates.

[Red Iron Crown]

Er, couldn't you just slide it all the way right and click apply? What does sliding all the way left and applying it first do?

[Javster]

Duna really lags for me for some reason.

[cesarcurado]

As someone running onboard graphics, my processor is "ok" for the physics calculations (could still be a lot better though), but for actual graphical rendering...

It lacks, a lot.

So I typically run all low with half texture quality and native resolution (my monitor's resolution is 1366x768).

It is playable, but could be better...