Is my memory speed making KSP slow?

[THX1138]

Sometimes my game processes things extremely slowly, particularly when I press Ctrl + Z to undo a change to a large rocket or when launching a large rocket (I mean many, many pieces - I'm playing career mode and have to use many crappy parts to get a decent amount of fuel to the moon so I can hop around the "biomes" there).

I check on my processor and GPU usage and neither are at maximum. I have 2 GB memory listed as "free" in Windows (KSP itself uses 2.5 GB). Does this mean that my memory speed is what is limiting the speed of KSP?

I understand that the calculations involved in modelling a 500-part rocket will take a long time but the Ctrl + Z lag doesn't make much sense to me.

My specs are:

OS: Win 7 64-bit

Mainboard: Gigabyte GA 790FXTA-UD5

CPU: AMD Phenom II 965 X4

RAM: OCZ Black Ed 2x2GB DDR3-1600 + Corsair 2x2GB DDR3-1600*

Graphics: 2 x Crossfired Sapphire HD 5770 1GB GDDR5

*

OCZ OCZ3BE1600C8LV2G 2GB DIMM DDR3 PC3-8500U DDR3-1066 (7-7-7-16 4-26-8-4)

Corsair CMX4GX3M2A1600C8 2GB DIMM DDR3 PC3-12800U DDR3-1600 (9-9-9-24 5-34-10-5)

[Taki117]

KSP is limited to 32bits at the moment, meaning it can't use more than 4GB of RAM. I am also decently positive that it only uses a single processor core (for the same reason). And I know that KSP physics is single threaded anyway (which is why part count lag is an issue). The reason CTRL + Z tends to take a while is because KSP has to retrieve the parts from their last known state, which could take a while.

Instead of building huge rockets to explore the man, why not make short hops to the different biomes on Kerb in? Also EVA reports are biome specific, so while in orbit around Kerb in you could pick up some extra science that way too.

[Epthelyn]

Instead of building huge rockets to explore the man, why not make short hops to the different biomes on Kerb in? Also EVA reports are biome specific, so while in orbit around Kerb in you could pick up some extra science that way too.

The Mun provides vastly more science than Kerbin does.

-----

Your RAM is not holding back the game; if it was you'd be using 3GB with none to spare. Undoing large sections of rockets will take a while for the reason Taki said; there's a lot of it and the game needs to reload from a previous state. With regards to loading a rocket on the pad, the parts need to be rendered and physics initialized. The single core physics processing doesn't help there.

[content removed - Reason: I don't even...]

Edited July 1, 2014 by Epthelyn

[THX1138]

KSP is limited to 32bits at the moment, meaning it can't use more than 4GB of RAM. I am also decently positive that it only uses a single processor core (for the same reason). And I know that KSP physics is single threaded anyway (which is why part count lag is an issue). The reason CTRL + Z tends to take a while is because KSP has to retrieve the parts from their last known state, which could take a while.

Instead of building huge rockets to explore the man, why not make short hops to the different biomes on Kerb in? Also EVA reports are biome specific, so while in orbit around Kerb in you could pick up some extra science that way too.

Aww crap, would that 32-bit limitation be a really big thing to fix (as in we can forget about it happening any time soon)?

Indeed it's not worth the effort to explore Kerbin for 12 science credits! I don't get out of bed for less than 200.

The Mun provides vastly more science than Kerbin does.

-----

Your RAM is not holding back the game; if it was you'd be using 3GB with none to spare. Undoing large sections of rockets will take a while for the reason Taki said; there's a lot of it and the game needs to reload from a previous state. With regards to loading a rocket on the pad, the parts need to be rendered and physics initialized. The single core physics processing doesn't help there.

Perhaps you should focus on optimising your rocket construction. To maximise the one-trip science gain all you need is a pod, a science lab, the 7 or 8 experiments and a means to move around. The relatively low gravity makes the wonderfully efficient LV-N "nukes" perfect for this task and 3 or 4 is enough to lift most moderately sized vehicles at a reasonable rate; you won't need a particularly large amount of fuel and you'll have adequate power to hop between biomes without taking all day to do so

7/8 science experiments? Nukes? Yeah, right. I'm still having to strap together about 50 S1 SRB KD25Ks to get out of the atmosphere and I only have a thermometer, barometer (useless at this stage), goo and a junior science module. I don't have nuclear anything. I do have a multitude of parts that look different but have the exact same damn specs.

How did you get all that without having already been to all the moon "biomes"?

Edited July 1, 2014 by THX1138

[Epthelyn]

7/8 science experiments? Nukes? Yeah, right. I'm still having to strap together about 50 S1 SRB KD25Ks to get out of the atmosphere and I only have a thermometer, barometer (useless at this stage), goo and a junior science module. I don't have nuclear anything. I do have a multitude of parts that look different but have the exact same damn specs.

How did you get all that without having already been to all the moon "biomes"?

Yeah...that was stupid.

Still, a single trip to the Mun (a flyby, even) will grant you enough science points to unlock the LV-909 and that's more than enough to hop around biomes with a relatively small amount of fuel.

A thermometer, barometer, goo capsule and science pod don't take as many parts to transport as you seem to think they do either, even with duplicates.

Edited July 1, 2014 by Epthelyn

[cantab]

The next release is expected to have 64-bit support. This will do very little for the stock game, but it means using multiple memory-intensive mods will be possible without having to reduce texture resolution.

And to re-iterate, KSP's performance is in most cases limited by your single core CPU performance. So if your CPU load is at around 30% say, well that may mean KSP is maxing out a core. There's also some anecdotal reports of the game having issues with AMD chips that make them underperform.

I likewise find Undo in the VAB hangs the game for several seconds. My system's not dissimilar to yours, though rather lower specced with a Phenom II X3 710 and 4GB of DDR2 memory.

[THX1138]

I have the LV-909 but I'm using the Poodle. You might be super efficient on a ration of fuel but until I develop more skill in landing efficiency, I need a lot.

Incidentally, when I alt + tab back into KSP and then out again, I can see in Task Manager that all my cores are being used. It's now using 3.5 GB memory and when I said "free" memory earlier, I meant available. Now it's just 1.2 GB available.

[Wallace]

as soon as you can get into orbit, use a polar orbit round Kerbin to bag EVA's in every biome, that should give you enough science to get decent parts for a Mun flyby where you can do the same, then you should have plenty of parts to make a decent lander without needing 500 parts to launch it.

Hopping about on Minmus is easier than the Mun though.

[Laie]

Sometimes my game processes things extremely slowly, particularly when I press Ctrl + Z to undo a change to a large rocket or when launching a large rocket (I mean many, many pieces - I'm playing career mode and have to use many crappy parts to get a decent amount of fuel to the moon so I can hop around the "biomes" there).

Same here, though my rig has a slightly better CPU and *much* more RAM. Your hardware is not to blame.

The Mun provides vastly more science than Kerbin does.

That thread about "how fast can you complete the tech-tree, in kerbin time" made me restart a campaign. Far and away the quickest start, both my own time and in-game, is to make *small* hops. Runway, launchpad, KSC, shores & water are right at your doorstep, plus grassland nearby. You don't need a tricked-out craft and also don't need to redesign it for every launch. The doorstep missions take only one minute to play out, in points per time (your time!) they're unbeatable. Even if you have to go through the motions *again* after unlocking the goo container.

You don't have to tick off every biome on Kerbin. But milking the easy ones for all they got is definitely worthwhile. Once you make it to orbit, be sure to also visit the ice caps (easy mission, more points than ordinary Kerbin biomes). That should pay for all 45-point technologies -- FLT-800 tanks and struts, among others.

[cr055H41rz]

I recommend upgrading to 8 gb ram

using more than 90% causes significantly noticeable slowdown

[cr055H41rz]

Aww crap, would that 32-bit limitation be a really big thing to fix (as in we can forget about it happening any time soon)?

Short answer, no. I'm thinking that Unity is the primary limiter for that.

[Claw]

Aww crap, would that 32-bit limitation be a really big thing to fix (as in we can forget about it happening any time soon)?

64-bit is due out in the next update. Please be prepared for bugginess. As has been mentioned, memory is probably not your problem unless you are running a lot of mods.

How did you get all that without having already been to all the moon "biomes"?

Many people suggest visiting Minimus first, because it requires the same skills as Mun, but is a lot easier and more forgiving.

I have the LV-909 but I'm using the Poodle. You might be super efficient on a ration of fuel but until I develop more skill in landing efficiency, I need a lot.

If you need it, do it!

Incidentally, when I alt + tab back into KSP and then out again, I can see in Task Manager that all my cores are being used. It's now using 3.5 GB memory and when I said "free" memory earlier, I meant available. Now it's just 1.2 GB available.

KSP is still single threaded. Which means it really only uses one core at a time. However, the operating system will push the KSP process around on the cores so the task manager makes it appear as if the coreas are all being used at a lower rate. It's just disguising the single thread.