Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Update 1.105 Hype-Rage Train (Speculation Thread)

Discussion in 'General' started by TehGM, Oct 15, 2015.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. ATalkingRock Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    396
    I've found on most computers, regardless of the build, all run space engineers similarly. Many ships and/or asteroids causing fps windows of like 20-30fps.
     
  2. TheDuke540 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    201
    I wouldn't consider that a high end computer. Anyway, I get about 70 - 80 fps regardless of asteroids or ships.
     
  3. SirLANsalot Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    280
    No.

    The people that complain about low FPS are people running AMD/ATI builds. Primarily ATI cards and not Nvidia.
    Just look at each of the "I have low FPS, pls help" threads. Most of them (not all) are running ATI Cards or AMD onbord Cards.

    The issue mainly lies with how big people build there ships/stations. Quite often they build TOO big for the game, and there computer, to currently handle and it bogs down. I have an old dreadnought I had been working on a long time ago that I abandoned because the game cannot handle that massive of a ship, yet. When the game reaches release or even beta where better bug fixing and polygon cutting happen I might try and rebuild that ship.
    This still happens even today in Minecraft with massive builds, but at least the game CAN handle large builds, it just might take some time for the game to load all the chunks.

    For reference:
    Intel i7 3930k 6 core 3.2 ghz
    16GB 2133 DDR3 ram
    2x 980 GTX's

    I get 60 frames most of the time, and only when massive major builds show up on my screen does it drop to the 30's.
    Oh and I run the game at 3840x2160 (4k).
     
  4. Mix-martes86 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,110
    AMD is not so bad when you get proper pieces (that is, you're on a very slim budget, and still know what you're doing). I'd have preferred Intel/nVidia for absolute top performance, but I'm not rich. My rig:

    AMD FX Series FX-8350 4.0Ghz 8X Black Edition
    AMD Sapphire R9 270X Dual-X 2GB GDDR5
    2 modules Kingston HyperX Blu DDR3 1600 PC3-12800 4GB CL9 (8 GB total)
    Kingston SV200S364G SSD drive for OS, plus 2 additional 500 GB and a 1 TB Western Digital SATA disks.
    Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit with Service Pack 1.


    I get good framerates when I'm not doing impossible stuff like crashing planets and such. ;) That's counting that I usually have things like AA on and I always run native at 1920*1080 (meaning there's room for improvement).
    And other games run much much better. Battlefield 4, Dragon Age Inquisition, ArmA3, FarCry... all run even better than SE does.

    So, no, people using on-board cards do NOT count as using ATI, they count as using crap. Like people wondering why Starcraft 2 won't run (with at least 100 units per team) on their shitty school laptops.

    Cheers
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. TheDuke540 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    201
    Most of the time you're probably right. However, the R9 295x is still the one to beat right now as far as price to performance ratio IMHO. My buddy picked one up for ~$600 and it's a beast!
    The Intel CPUs are still the leaders of the pack, though.
     
  6. ATalkingRock Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    396
    Okay sorry, but I've experienced fps issues on my nvidia computer as well as a couple of my friends'. I think my implication was even beastly computers will bog down due to incomplete optimization which is understandable in an alpha.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Braxbro Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    637
    While this is true, I have no problem having around 40-50, sometimes even 70 FPS.
     
  8. Dreokor Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,606
    Huh? What does that has to do with anything....you missed my point entirely or you quoted the wrong person.

    Read more carefully next time.
     
  9. Scorpion00021 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,411
    Agree. I'm looking to get an i7 soon(ish), but I'm currently rocking an AMD 1100T (Phenom II, 6 core, 3.3GHz), a GTX 970, 16GB ram, and Windows 10 for OS. Its been running SE quite well for its age (the mobo, processor, and RAM are like 4-5 years old). At the time the processor was less than $300, where the top of the line i7 was well over $1000. While I understand the benefits of the Intel processor, it was simply out of my budget at the time. The 1100T really was a solid choice. Its stood up to the gaming test of time. I've been playing Space Engineers since pre-steam release, War Thunder (fabulous game), Skyrim, Elder Scrolls Online (quite dull), GTA5, Kerbal Space Program, and Rome 2 all on the highest graphic settings near-flawlessly. And I'll be playing Fallout 4 on release day :) I figure in the next couple years I'll do what I normally do.. gut the pc, trn its innards into a server(or donate it to someone in need), keep what I want and rebuild.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Dragonspride Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    460
    Yea I quoted the wrong person, lol. My bad, it was one up from you.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Darmanator Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    99
    Well I'm just...
    Saying.
    That my computer is only 2 1/2 years old and a high end gaming laptop that cost me $1200. And that maybe instead of blind defense people could admit that the alpha has serious performance issues.
     
  12. Dreokor Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,606
    I'm not attacking you nor "blind defending" anyone, It was just a comment, point being that quality doesnt equal performance and an example of it.
     
  13. Sinbad Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,788
    I just had a thought:
    every single block and voxel texture in the game is a placeholder. these planets look pretty... pretty. what if they intend to make the entire game this pretty? those of us whose computers don't melt will have a lot to look at.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  14. chrisb Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,460
    It would be nice to think there are still lots of placeholders in-game. If that is the case, then we are certainly in for a treat, come the actual blocks. But there again, the game looks pretty good as it stands. But it needs compound blocks and a few various interior blocks for fitting out our ships. But there's plenty of time I suppose, for all that.
     
  15. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,857
    Well they have already started replacing some of the blocks (small ship cockpit, beacon, spotlight, warhead)
     
  16. chrisb Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,460
    Yeah I know, and these do look good, so it does seem to point to the remaining blocks getting a facelift, at some stage, which would be nice.
     
  17. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,857
    It would be sad if the game kept looking as it does now IMO. Too bland. I've always considered it placeholder graphics.
     
  18. Sinbad Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,788
    I think the re done blocks were to test how high rez textures looked in dx11. so theychose a few different blocks to try them ot on. we got transperancy with the beacon, concave texture meshs with warheads, and large reflective surfaces (and the fancy new interior) from the cockpit.
     
  19. MisterSwift Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    367
    Am I the only one who likes the art direction of the old blocks? The whole minimalist aesthetic, with solid flat surfaces and sharp non-rounded corners and edges etc.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  20. Thermonuklear Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    615
    I was just going to say the same thing. I love the sharp, no-frills style we have now. Very verbose and informal. Not saying new graphics would suck though. The new beacon looks very nice.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  21. chrisb Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,460
    I actually wouldn't mind too much if the blocks were left more or less how they are, with a few exceptions. However, more variety would be better, even basic furniture or equipment type blocks. Although I suppose SE wasn't aimed at that side of thing anyway. More at the engineering side (obviously). But as the game has grown into more than just engineering, then I feel they could widen the variety of the blocks available a little. Upgrades to blocks is very nice and something to look forward too, should it come. But given the choice, I myself, would prefer to have several different blocks aimed more at interiors, than upgrading the current selection.

    But either way, its a pc game and player made content is sort of 'part and parcel' of a good sandbox game. Its a big part of why I play sandbox games, so if the interiors can only be done using player made content, then so be it. I'm all for players doing what they like with the game. It will give the game legs to withstand the future for some time ahead, without player content, it would likely fade much sooner after a few years. Whereas with the content, the game will be around for a decade or more (probably & hopefully).
     
  22. PsicoPato Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,097
    When you see it...
    [​IMG]
    You will shit bricks.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  23. Trozzo Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    108
    LOOOOL!!!
     
  24. j0sh1ng Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    123
  25. Caesar15 2 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    45
    A 970 and a 4th generation i5 isn't high end?
     
  26. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,857
    No, they were no tests. These were legitimate replacements. Their graphics person said somewhere that it takes up to a work week to update just a single block for one person. So I'm guessing when they decided to go all-in on the planets they put the updating on the back-burner.

    http://forums.keenswh.com/posts/1286795766/ <- Finally a post I could actually find the source for!!! :)
     
    • Like Like x 3
  27. dirtyredz Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    208
    Ive got a high end computer and still experience fps drops when looking at asteroids and large stations/ships

    Asus Rampage 4 Extreme
    Intel i7-3820 @ 3.60GHz
    4 Cores
    8 Threads
    32 GB Ram
    GeForce GTX 780 Ti
    SSD
    Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit
     
  28. TehGM Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    321
    Oh, we showing off specs now?
    Well, I have only 2 years gaming laptop cause am poor.
    Well, it's good and cost a quite, but had to collect a quite bit.

    i7 4700QM
    GTX 765M
    8GB RAM
    Win 8.1

    Worth noting that I have all parts changeable, unlike in most laptops. But that gives me not much, cause I can't afford new ones anyway. :(
    Time to get some time in my uni for a job. Lel.
     
  29. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,857
    Yep. And you possibly will until late beta/release.
     
  30. XilentDude Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    78
    Holy crap
    [​IMG]
    I wonder how will the wall of justice look next Thursday.
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.