- Sep 24, 2025
- 59
- 88
Stickied as this is useful information for the developers right now.
Performance / Specs Collection & Comparisons
- Thread starter Kiwi Shark
- Start date
Hi,running solar system,here's what i have so far.
Specs & Settings
Scenario & Performance
Specs & Settings
| CPU | i7-8700k @ 5.0ghz |
| GPU / VRAM | RTX 4070 Super / 12GB |
| RAM | 32GB DDR4 3600 |
| Display resolution | 1920x1080p windowed |
| KSA version | v2025.11.4.2791 |
| Visual settings | Shadows: 8K Textures: Unlimited Other: Defaults |
Scenario & Performance
| Scenario | FPS |
|---|---|
| Gem7 orbiting Earth at 250km looking down at the surface | 140-160 |
| Map view above Earth looking at the planet | 180-195 |
| Gem7 splashed down on Earth looking at the horizon | |
| Gem7 orbiting Luna at 12km looking down at the surface | 220-240 |
| Gem7 landed on Luna looking at the horizon | |
| Gem7 orbiting Jupiter at 45,000km looking at the planet | 100-115 |
| Map view over Jupiter zoomed out to see the full orbits of all moons | 170-180 |
Kiwi Shark
Member
- Oct 10, 2025
- 133
- 140
Here's another pass on my own machine with the current version using the same settings as before.
Specs & Settings
Scenario & Performance
Only a small sample this time because in general I noticed a significant decrease in performance versus v2025.10.6.2584. Thankfully the game open without any hiccups at max graphics with only the 10GB of VRAM but the game is eating about 90% of that on its own to do so. I might try re-installing the older version to double check my numbers.
Specs & Settings
| CPU | i5-10600K |
| GPU / VRAM | RTX 3080 / 10GB |
| RAM | 32GB DDR4 3600 |
| Display resolution | 1920x1080p |
| KSA version | v2025.11.4.2791 |
| Visual settings | Shadows: 16k Textures: Unlimited Other: Defaults & Fur quality set to low |
Scenario & Performance
| Scenario | FPS |
|---|---|
| Rocket orbiting Earth at 120km looking down at the surface | 28-31 |
| Map view above Earth looking at the planet | 37-41 |
| Rocket orbiting Jupiter at 2261km looking at the planet | 27-32 |
| Map view over Jupiter zoomed out to see the full orbits of all moons | 69-74 |
Only a small sample this time because in general I noticed a significant decrease in performance versus v2025.10.6.2584. Thankfully the game open without any hiccups at max graphics with only the 10GB of VRAM but the game is eating about 90% of that on its own to do so. I might try re-installing the older version to double check my numbers.
Last edited:
A quick test of my laptop setup.
Using Solar system.
Specs & Settings
Scenario & Performance
This part is with the RTX 4060 undervolted to the min I can set it which clocks at 1770 MHz and capped at 0.7 volts. It uses 35-45 watts of power.
This is the part with RTX 4060 overclocked. Clocks at 2640 MHz max and uses max 100 watts of power in some areas.
Notes
Using Solar system.
Specs & Settings
| OS | Windows 11 Pro 25H2 |
| CPU | Intel Core I7 12650H |
| GPU / VRAM | RTX 4060 Laptop / 8 GB |
| RAM | 32 GB DDR4 3200MHz |
| Display Resolution | 1920x1080 @ 165Hz |
| KSA Version | v2025.11.4.2781 |
| Visual Settings | Shadows: 4k Textures: 4k Borderless Others: Default |
Scenario & Performance
This part is with the RTX 4060 undervolted to the min I can set it which clocks at 1770 MHz and capped at 0.7 volts. It uses 35-45 watts of power.
| Scenario | FPS |
|---|---|
| Rocket orbiting Earth at 207km looking down at surface | 59-64 |
| Map view above earth looking at the planet | 120-126 |
| Rocket Splashdown on Earth looking at the horizon | 65-68 |
| Rocket orbiting Jupiter at 2200 km looking down at the clouds | 38-42 |
This is the part with RTX 4060 overclocked. Clocks at 2640 MHz max and uses max 100 watts of power in some areas.
| Scenario | FPS |
|---|---|
| Rocket orbiting Earth at 207km looking down at surface | 59-64 (No difference as undervolt interestingly but uses 1.5x more power) |
| Map view above earth looking at the planet | 165 (Vsync) |
| Rocket Splashdown on Earth looking at the horizon | 85-90 (Uses almost 3x more power) |
| Rocket orbiting Jupiter at 2200 km looking down at the clouds | 55-58 (Also uses almost 3x more power) |
Notes
- Based on my analysis, the water and clouds seem to consume the most GPU usage, though I can't understand why there is no difference in FPS at LEO even with overclocking or undervolting.
- Warping in orbit doesn't have any FPS impact, even at the fastest warp speed (x7,776,000). In my opinion, that’s crazy considering the physics calculations are still active.
- Warping in water is a different case, though. Since the craft bounces up and down on the waves, it gets laggier up to 30x speed. However, at 120x and more, physics are no longer calculated, and the FPS returns to normal.
- Performance on the water may vary depending on your location and the direction you are looking.
- The iGPU is bypassed using an external monitor connected directly at my RTX 4060.
- The visual settings are at the limit of what the VRAM can handle. If I were to increase any of them, it would offload to my RAM, and the FPS to drop drastically.
- Overclock/Undervolt settings and FPS readings were monitored using MSI Afterburner with RivaTuner Statistics Server.
Last edited:
cpu ryzen 5800x
ram 32 gb ddr4 3600
gpu 7900xt
vram 20 gb
resolution 4k
version v2025.11.4.2791
textures 4k
shadows 8k
fps 130hz in earth-moon system, got as low as 35 landing on titan. those clouds. both with full solar system loaded.
think that 20 gigs of vram is helping me a lot. game is rock solid stable.
ram 32 gb ddr4 3600
gpu 7900xt
vram 20 gb
resolution 4k
version v2025.11.4.2791
textures 4k
shadows 8k
fps 130hz in earth-moon system, got as low as 35 landing on titan. those clouds. both with full solar system loaded.
think that 20 gigs of vram is helping me a lot. game is rock solid stable.
Similar threads
- Suggestion
