Performance

[odd dew]

i don't imagine the devs here may've been entirely familiar with how costly having such complex models was, but i suppose we might see some optimizations if they've drawn the same conclusions as the community

i suppose there's always something to learn about developing but whether they take action is also another thing, which i'm trusting they do

[leaden fog]

It's primarily the planets as the framerate rises dramatically when you are away from any planet, or on the map, and clearly the graphics settings have negligible effects because they don't appear to control any of the planet rendering where the main issue lies.
All of these problems are about half-baked shaders and geometry, and NOT about people's GPUs. I've worked 7 years on Unity projects and having a terrain and a couple of buildings, even with insane polygon counts, dozens of materials and a bunch of post-processing effects, shouldn't tank even a 5 year old GPU to sub 15 fps. Hell that kind of scene you can even get running on mobiles.
I ran CP2077 on 2k on ultra on this rig... to get something running as molassess you have to be doing something insanely excessive or plain wrong.

[odd dew]

i wasn't here for this but i was told ksp1 was also sort of a mess on launch too

[leaden fog]

this is EA not a launch, problems are to be expected

but honestly they could have just put a placeholder planet rendering to let us test the game if they knew their fancy planet shaders are under a total overhaul...

[worldly relic]

I get ptsd everytime i see edgrerunners stuff ;-;

[winter drift]

Gyus i averaging(sorry can't spell it) 20 fps on my 1060 3gb. I've done a succesful mission to the mun. Only thing i had to do is to set PhisiX priority to CPU

[broken epoch]

Just because a game is new, doesn't mean it shouldn't be criticized. Not to mention the price tag, in its current state it's not worth 50 euro, it's worth more like 5, if that. I'm sorry but when they give it the AAA treatment, doesn't matter how many bugs they warn people about, the game should at LEAST be able to run

[leaden fog]

I'm literally agreeing with you, I never said it shouldn't be criticized... read carefully.

[broken epoch]

Fair enough, my bad then

But I have seen people that are defending its current state, which just boggles the mind

[leaden fog]

Its just people calling it a "launch" when its not a launch, is simply wrong. It's Early Access to a project in the middle of development. Should it have this hot mess of performance issue that half of people can't even run it on first day? No it should not. They should have delayed, or should have put a placeholder system, or at least should have been extremely clear about how bad the perf. was.

But as it often is in game dev I'm sure this is yet another case of executive meddling, and the devs worked their asses off to meet a deadline, but suits in PR and marketing refused to move the date or communicate the issues...

[broken epoch]

Honestly the main thing that pisses me off is the specs they gave pre-release. The ones where they were apparently """"conservative"""" with

Like there is not a single universe where that is true

[tribal mantle]

it even runs badly on 4080s, which are significantly above the recommended spec

[jovial light]

How did you set that priority

[fading pewter]

(for nvidia) Control Panel -> 3D Settings -> Configure Surround, Physx -> Physx Settings -> CPU

[winter drift]

in the NIVIDIA control panel under PhisX and set that to CPU

[jovial light]

I’ll try that

[fading pewter]

shame you cant do it per application

my steam is gone 🤔

[jovial light]

Ok i doubt that your setting the Nvida PysX to CPU had anything to do with KSP 2 because I don't even have that option

[fading pewter]

send a screenshot of your control panel, its there for me

[jovial light]

I have an AMD GPU, but on my old install of windows I had an nvida phys X control app even through I had an AMD GPU, some game I think installed it. but on this fresh install with basically only steam and KSP 2 I don't have it

[fading pewter]

it wont work if you only have an amd gpu

nvidia control panel is for controlling nvidia stuff

i tried the option, didnt really change my fps by much

[jovial light]

I know again even with an AMD gpu on my old install of windows I had a Nvida PysX control app for some game that used PhysX. I don't have that so obviously KSP 2 didn't require it. So im saying that PhysX has nothing to do with KSP 2

[fading pewter]

oh thats cause i set it to gpu lmao let me try again

[fading pewter]

how do you know ksp2 doesnt use physx?

[jovial light]

I reinstalled winodws recently but on my old install a I had an Nvida PhysX control panel thing. I assume some game installed it because it used phys X. On this fresh in stall I only have KSP 2 installed and it didn't add the PhysX thing. Theirfor I assume that ksp 2 does not use phys x

[fading pewter]

thats not how any of that works

i dont have a vulkan control panel, doesnt mean i cant use vulkan lol

[full locust]

The game barely uses my computers resources when under load and I have pretty much spec for spec the recommended hardware except a newer CPU by 1 gen. I expect massive bottleneck improvements will come and I’m sure the devs are well aware

[fading pewter]

whats your vram usage?

[fading pewter]

doesnt make any difference

[full locust]

Pretty low, like 4 or 5 G

[fading pewter]

i dont even have 4 or 5g vram lol

[full locust]

Not enough to pull much power at all

Usually if a game is chugging, my car is going to be heading up like a space heater, but in this case, it’s barely even being used at all so I figure with time improvements will come and lower cards will do much much better

There’s no way they’re filling up my friend buffer on a 3080 in a 1080 P setting

And the CPU isn’t even generating enough heat to make the fans hit the curve

Which tells me the game engine has some massive bottleneck somewhere

But if that’s the case, it means that I’m sure their doves are aware and working on it

Features before optimization, etc.

[round seal]

Apparently, the Delta V calculations are bugged, and it tanks the frametime, well see if when they fix the spaghetti code in these two things, it improves

[supple jasper]

Even with my 3080 ti I have to expect 15 fps while flying, it's definitely the game engine cause my GPU and CPU are not close to being used 100% and it's running so slow

[stark shoal]

where did you get that screenshot from?

[round seal]

Steam

It's also in the forums, let me find a link

I think that this it is

https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/212254-ksp2-performance-update/

[stark shoal]

Ah yeah i see it, Thanks!

[tame nexus]

Lil fix

[full locust]

Or use struts you maniac 🤣

[tame nexus]

Performance

[full locust]

I was building an interstellar vehicle last night and it was noodling all over the place lol

Decouplers on engines are just not strong enough to support XL parts lol

[bronze tinsel]

is there something like this but for terrain detail distances?

[weak compass]

i seem to be getting stable 60 fps
notably after moving the game to my faster hard drive
maybe that could be a solution for people? the game is bigger then KSP so alot of people might've installed it on bigger slower drives

3600X, 16gb ram, 1650 super

[bold harness]

I installed games like Elden Ring and Halo infinite on this very drive and they ran perfectly fine. This isnt due to drives this is just poor optimisation.
I mean some of the poly counts on models are insane from what Ive seen

[azure scroll]

elden ring and halo infinite aren't simulating real life orbital mechanics in real time

rocket science has that stigma for a reason

[bold harness]

Ok so ksp 1 max settings with a bunch of visual mods, runs really well. The game needs optimising, simulating orbital mechanics doesnt inherently mean your game will run bad.

[weak compass]

probably because they're better optimized for slower drives?

optimization can effect specific hardware

[bold harness]

Yea so optimization is the problem, you agree

[full locust]

“Optimization” is really vague and doesn’t really describe the issue. It always comes last in the development process, that’s no surprise. But it appears as though there’s some major bottlenecks in the render pipeline, which should improve quickly.

[weak compass]

when was i saying it wasnt a problem

i was talking about what fixed it, for myself

[wintry arrow]

#1079130678047805452 message

Anyone else try this?

[azure scroll]

ksp 1 also has basically zero foliage and is a step 15 years back in graphics, a very basic particle system, essentially low/zero shadows by modern standards, doesn't have a real water texture, a very obvious low scale texture tile for each planet and was designed when nvidia hadn't released the 10 series yet. of course it performs well on modern cards

and that's still with noticeable visual bugs like terrain tearing and frame stutters

it's simply a very ambitious game

[bold harness]

I know that, but the way you worded it sounded like you said that simulating orbital mechanics inherently makes things laggy

If that wasnt what you meant, I apologize

[azure scroll]

no, that part is just a software engineering/physicist nightmare but able to be simulated

[azure scroll]

absolutely no worries

[bold harness]

Ok something I just realized, ksp 2 is defaulted to windowed, when I changed it to fullscreen it ran much better

[leaden fog]

That has nothing to do with hard drives. You don't have to read and write a million files to disk to do that, its all math. Texture streaming or audio streaming would require lots of reading from disk but thats not what's happening here.

[hasty adder]

I don't understand

[lyric jetty]

I've noticed that general performance issues come with procedural wings -- even in VAB end up with 1 FPS lows when panning around. Game assets look a little blurry at 1440p

To report my overall performance: avg about 50-60 fps, sometimes up into 100 depending on craft, location, etc. 1440p (upscaling to 4k), max preset. Hope this helps.

Ryzen 9 5900X, RTX 4080, 64GB of RAM at 3600Mhz

[surreal meteor]

You can find my specs really higher in this thread but I juste wanted to say that with my little config. I get the same numbers of FPS in High or Low (6fps looking at Kerbin, 20-30fps looking at the sky). So the lag is really CPU based...

[safe birch]

idk if it's true because i have quite overspec cpu (ryzen 7 2700x) and looking at the ground still makes extreme fps drop

[round seal]

Neither KSP 2

It's not N body, even Principia on ksp runs better

[surreal meteor]

Same but I get the same friend looking at Kerbin in High (with Cloud and ocean) and in low (around 6 fps)

[ember current]

I have a laptop with a 2060 but when around the space center, on low settings i get ~10fps!!! sometimes its up to 20 but thats only for a few seconds. when im on the mun, its perfectly smooth. There obviously needs to be some optimisation around the KSC.

[split otter]

Sadly I'm afraid it's like ksp 1, it doesn't matter how good the pc is it's just a poorly optimized game.

[lethal jasper]

I am certain it will get a lot better in the future but for now, you are right

[split otter]

I hope it does get better

[raven whale]

I’d say buy it now play it later it’s cheaper now than it will be in future so after they add stuff and fix the performance

[south merlin]

Wait a week or until the first major patch comes out and fixes all of the low-hanging and worst bugs

[fading pewter]

surely

[full locust]

Well I’ve left a bunch of modules in orbit that need to be undocked and redocked when they do lol

[teal hearth]

I really like the part where the game uses 100% of my GPU in a blank VAB screen, but then use less and less GPU as more parts get added. I don't know how in the world they managed to do that, but its terrible. Very disappointing, but hopefully they fix the major roadblocks soon.

[south merlin]

Following weeks

[keen knoll]

I have the same predicament but it would be nice for the game to have less glitiches

[pure stone]

Just for statistics.

i7 8700
RTX 3070ti
32GB RAM 2400MHz
SSD WD Green

25-30fps without any craft\rocket in KSC view.
15-20fps when fly jet.
6-10fps when launch rocket with 170 parts.
Meantime CPU load at 30-40%, GPU - 25-30%, 18GB free RAM, SSD does literally nothing.
This is sad.

[wide ravine]

Same here.
RTX 3060Ti, i7 10700F, 32GB RAM, fast SSD.

150 part vehicle is like 2fps with 30% CPU load, 35% GPU load and 20GB of ram used while playing on minimum details.

[hasty adder]

Statistics also:

Computer Information:
Manufacturer: ASUS
Form Factor: Desktop

Processor Information:
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 16-Core Processor OC 4.1ghz Base 4.65ghz Boost on custom water loop

Operating System Version:
Windows 10 (64 bit)

Video Card:
EVGA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti FTW 3
Driver: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
Driver Version: 31.0.15.2849
DirectX Driver Version: 31.0.15.2849
Driver Date: 2 2 2023
Desktop Color Depth: 32 bits per pixel
Monitor Refresh Rate: 164 Hz
DirectX Card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
Number of Monitors: 3
Primary Display Resolution: 1920 x 1080
Desktop Resolution: 6660 x 2321
Primary Display Size: 27.48" x 15.47" (31.54" diag)
69.8cm x 39.3cm (80.1cm diag)
Primary Bus: PCI Express 16x
Primary VRAM: 12287 MB

Memory:
RAM: 32673 MB

Experience:
On a fresh file I get about 45~55 fps on launch with sub 50 part vessels (maybe down to 35 in clouds). I built a space station with multiple launches making it around 250~300 parts with 12-15 fps. Tried to dock a large interplanetary ship of ~150 parts but the closer I got the more I lose frames. Got to 200 meters and went under 4 fps. The whole time my cpu was about 10% and gpu was 15%. When I pause the simulation the gpu hits 80%.

[kind wigeon]

With AMD ryzen 5 2600, 32g ram and 3060ti not ok, lag in takeoff 5fps
But with ryzen 5 5600x It's ok..40-50fps...
Maybe It's the L2 cash(16->32) that changes everything?🤔

[wild plinth]

if they just fix the terrain then fps will likely improve by 2-3x

[icy lantern]

i can confirm this is the most laggy thing on the game

[wild plinth]

Literally drops from 120fps to less than 30fps just from this

[fading pewter]

Anyone want to explain what is going on in this image for the average buffoon (me)

[wild plinth]

Drawing the planets is taking up 60-80% of the total frame time if you are looking at the planet

@fading pewter

[fading pewter]

Is the big ol' bar the total frame time and the big yellow guy(s?) the drawing

[wild plinth]

the width of the bar corresponds to the time taken on that element and the height of the bar represents the number of vertices

in this case those two render targets alone take over 20ms

[fading pewter]

And the yellow and green colours represent?

[fleet pawn]

i have an 3070 and I get 25 fps after turning off hyperthreading in the bios

[wild plinth]

(this is not "bad hardware" by any means, 11700k, 32gb ram, 1080ti, game installed on nvme ssd)

[wild plinth]

yellow just means selected

[fading pewter]

Oh ok

Thanks for explanation

[night nacelle]

Can tell just by what some of the bugs are they don't have a dev on the team with much real-world experience. The input bubbling issue alone proves that lol

[severe sparrow]

is a Lenovo Ideapad S340 strong enough to run ksp 2 cos i cant play ksp 2 for some reason

[wild plinth]

No, it doesnt meet any of the requirements

[lethal jasper]

Could this be fixed by splitting the planets up into small chunks and then do some lod magic to reduce the numer of vertecies/tris?

Not an expert lol

[night nacelle]

Could cut the calls in half just by occluding the side of the planet you can't see (I haven't looked to see if they are or not)

Use LOD to scale the mesh up/down as well. Since they using heightmap data doing so would pretty simple to do

[dull lava]

If you ask me this is a beefy game that needs a beefy PC, a bit of optimization would be good but at the point where the graphics would be low enough to run on every PC, you just made ksp 1 again

[night nacelle]

tbf, this games graphics aren't even top of the line for 6 years ago

[signal harbor]

me too

[kindred abyss]

I get the same on a 1050ti...

[thin crystal]

same with R 5600h and RTX 3070 but it's an early acces, dont forgot it

[lethal jasper]

I am almost certain that they already do that, also the thing with the occlosion. I believe occlosion is already built into unity, though I have not yet looked into that. Also they can just reduce the mesh quality so much, before the planet stops beeing a sphere, but surface details can certainly be smoothed to get a mesh with less vertecies/tris.

My original suggestion was to seperate every celestial body in chunks, maybe even hundreds, Then you could dynamicly interchange lod models per chunk and also better control occlusion, therefore massivly reducing the mesh size needed to be rendered

Sebastian Lague demonstrated that concept in his series about his geography game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLqXFF8mlEU

He also had the issue of rendering an entire planet with very highly detailed surface features and that is how he solved it

[lethal jasper]

May I ask what program that is and how you extracted the files from ksp2?

[wild plinth]

There are no files extracted here, this is simply the intel graphics frame analyzer

In general, the greater area on the screen covered with a planet surface, the worse the performance gets

For context, this is the frame that is being drawn. There isn't massive numbers of parts or tons of stuff going on on the screen. Just a normal-sized rocket launching

@lethal jasper

[lethal jasper]

Though at that distance the level of detail should be really low, shouldn't it

[wild plinth]

You would think so, especially with the blockiness that is clearly visible in the coastlines

[lethal jasper]

I'm digging through the files currently, let's see if I can find something usefull, but keep in mind I am pretty much a beginner lol

[lethal jasper]

Yeah somewhere in their planet rendering system they really messed up

[lethal jasper]

There are a surprising ammount of meshes of furniture

Oh my god, I can actually access the code? There are files of type monobehaviour

[wintry arrow]

Dude you are making me all excited, hoping someone fixes this themselves, good work! Keep looking! xD

[wild plinth]

please see the above

[lethal jasper]

Okay as far as I understand it the monobehaviours I find only point somewhere else, so they pretty much get us nowhere at this point. What I am searching for is the code responsible for the plantes and how they are displayed, but I need to keep looking

[wild plinth]

no thats ok, its not immediately clear upon first viewing the channel

[night nacelle]

Yeah, I've done a lot of work with procedural meshes before. I'm in agreement that doing LOD on them should be pretty easy given that the planets are all just heightmap driven and not a more complicated system.

[lethal jasper]

Can confirm that there is some sort of mod manager in the files

Also stuff for colonies and multiplayer, but we already knew that

I have not yet understood what causes the unoptimized plantes, but I found some stuff about science mode:
First of all, the techtree is divided into 3 categories: Progression, New Tools and Quality of Life

Keep in mind that I might be misinterpreting stuff but I thought I'd just keep you guys updated on what I find

It looks like it will still work based on science points: public Property<int> ScienceCost;

Nodes in the tech-tree can also be hidden as far as it seems. So they would be invisible. But why though

[wintry arrow]

Might be so you cant see too far into the future of tech, because if you did, there wouldnt be any reason to build only 1 tech advancement ahead, to mimmick realistic progress maybe?

[lethal jasper]

Any smart person here have an idea where the actual data of the tech-tree nodes would be saved? The code referes to techData which is type Technology
I should probably get what that means but I had like 2 hours of sleep last night lol

[lethal jasper]

Sounds reasonable

[wild plinth]

Nodes can be hidden in KSP 1

[lethal jasper]

Really? I never knew about that

I found some sort of benchmark tool. Not exactly sure what it does but it seems to move some object (perhaps the camera)

    {
      if (index < 0 || index >= this.Count)
        return;
      this.nodes[index].latitude = state.latitude;
      this.nodes[index].longitude = state.longitude;
      this.nodes[index].altitude = state.altitude;
      this.nodes[index].heading = state.heading;
      this.nodes[index].pitch = state.pitch;
      this.nodes[index].speedMultiplier = state.speedMultiplier;
    }```

Oh my god, they are working on a replay tool

It's all there, hiding ui, cinematic camera, stuff like that

[wild plinth]

replay tool would be nice

[lethal jasper]

Absolutely

Okay, I need a smart person here. I got a code named PlanetViewer. Could this be the one responsible for rendering the plantes and doing stuff like lod. The code is way out of my league so I have a hard time understanding what the code actaully does

Looks like there are code snippets that are triggered when switching to the KSC midflight

It can also...show a kerbal for scale??

Prob some sort of debug function

Found support for lights on a logitech keyboard

Found support for decals

Possibly found support for footprints

[wintry arrow]

All these unfinished features... hoping they focus on fixing performance first and all the issues xD

[lethal jasper]

Looks like you can get an overview of all your delivery routes from some sort of colony manager window. You can see the status of the delivery routes, namely: Ready to launch, Proceeding to destination, returning to origin and paused

Found the error message for when you try to set up a delivery route, without having finished that flight yourself: "Invalid delivery route", "This flight must be complete before it can be turned into a delivery route."

I'm gonna go to bed but feel free to ask me what you want to know about unrelesaed content and i will try to find it tomorrow

[fading pewter]

Appreciate the stuff you are finding but maybe #1078772679374549154 isn't the place for it

[lethal jasper]

Yeah you are right

[wintry arrow]

but tbh i dont see a better place to have this posted in, unless getting it buried in general or something

[lethal jasper]

Maye I'll do a youtube video on it or something like that

[fading pewter]

People were posting stuff in #🔹ksp2_modding before

[wild plinth]

I keep seeing notifications for this channel but no messages

[visual dew]

any idea on how they could optimize it?

[full locust]

Render pipeline is just kinda half baked right now. Performance improvements will come

[fading pewter]

#🔹ksp2_modding message someone said this

[gray swift]

@lethal jasper they're using a combination of lod chunks and tesselation, demonstrably. Its not clear where their issue is but the implementation you propose is not only obviously being used here, but it is a default part of every game engine since Dx11 came out around 2010. Nothing new.

Sebastian Lague does do a great breakdown though, Ill give ya that

[hasty coyote]

.

[queen blaze]

Bruh, this is a clear indication of: you need a better PC.

I just bought one bc my GTX 1050 wasn’t powerful enough anymore.
I built a PC to last approximately 5 years (before any replacements) for only 1.171k AUD. Now if you lot are gonna complain like I did - don’t expect the world to change just because you all fell behind. Skill issue.

[lethal jasper]

Oh yeah let me just pull some money out of my ass and buy a new pc

[queen blaze]

You have no idea how much hell I went through.

[lethal jasper]

And I don't care

[queen blaze]

Copium issue.

[lethal jasper]

My point is that you shouldn't need a 4080 to get 40 fps max

[queen blaze]

You wanted to play, that’s the real price.

I don’t mind 15fps, I grew up with 15fps.

[lethal jasper]

I wouldn't mind 15 fps

I mind 2 fps though

[queen blaze]

RX6600 sapphire Pulse. Cheap solution for PC.

You can’t ask for the performance to be lowered for a game that claimed high performance.

Try to see it from the Dev’s point of view.

[lethal jasper]

I can, because there are many optimizations that need to be done and the devs aknowleged that

[queen blaze]

Agreed, but once interstellar comes out, we are only gonna end up right back here.

[lethal jasper]

I dont think so. I think the devs can manage to improve the performance massivly even with interstellar

[queen blaze]

It’s like running cities skylines at max in the background after that.

We shall see.

We shall see.

[vagrant socket]

Relevant to this discussion! https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/214806-developer-insights-18-graphics-of-early-access-ksp2/

[sage pilot]

So the answer I gained from this is that they have done as much major graphical optimizations as possible with the current terrain system

And that better performance would come out of the new binary tree table and the new renderer

[tame nexus]

Yeah pure foundation needs to be redone to get acceptable results.

@dusty breach would appreciate it if u connect with Gameslinx and give him insights, to deliver great results.

[whole lantern]

My personal theory is that the performance is more CPU based as long as the GPU has the specs to run it

My 3060 gives me on my main machine a lot more fps than when I put it in my secondary

The only difference is the CPU with the 5800X3D performing like 3 times better than the 3600 in the other PC

[fallow osprey]

I'm sorry you feel that way. EA is not an all encompassing standard for game release state. EA covers pre-alpha, alpha, and betas. This game's in alpha. The reason your fps is horrible has nothing to do with how good your system as a whole is. It's how good a single core in your processor is right now. The reason people have mixed fps results is because of that core and how good it is eing the bottleneck. My assumption is that it is constrained to a single core to really nail down cpu optimization before opening it up. So yes it is very much in basic optimization phase as adding features and optimization work are not mutually exclusive tasks for a 30 man dev team