It has to do with absolutely everything else the game has to do, which is still a lot. But again, none of that has to do with physics. Maybe there are even optimizations to still have, and the CPU requirements can stay as is.
#Kerbal space program 2 system requirements full#
In that case, the AMD min spec can remain pretty much the same, and Intel's go up only a little bit for the full release. Hopefully the above is something that Intercept can make use of the threading for. The core physics was always supposed to be just a little heavier than the originals, but with some optimizations to compensate for it. Things like running 1M time warp with your engines firing for an interstellar transfer, while there are dozens of other ships and satellites buzzing about, and several colonies doing their thing. I still have concerns about the CPU, but they have mostly to do with all the things that aren't the core physics simulation. In its current state, I expect KSP2 to run better than KSP for the same size rocket on the same CPU. If these things were fixed, we expect CPU requirements to be fairly manageable. In addition, a lot of the KSP's performance problems with larger ships had nothing to do with physics. We know that Unity's PhysX did receive a few optimizations in the past few years, so we expect it to run a little better out of the box, and if Intercept switched to Havok it's an even better improvement on top of that. Think about KSP requirements to run a "reasonably sized" rocket. Why? KSP2 does continuous collisions, but other than that, the physics load is about the same. Is it possible that CPU requirements will increase as EA advanced? Then why are the CPU requirements so low? Even with multithreading we should expect higher loads for physics calculations.
0 kommentar(er)
