Hi Devs please could you add a 45 FPS cap in options because 30 FPS is too slow and 60 is actually unreachable for most decent hardware.
I think that 45 FPS would be a fair compromise between quality and fluidity.
1 Like
This is probably a fairly low-priority thing for them to implement, so I wouldn’t expect it soon.
You can get the same effect with other software, though, such as the NVIDIA Control Panel or Rivatuner Statistics Server.
I’d recommend setting it for MSFS only and not on the global settings tab as they show, however.
5 Likes
I’m not sure about this, but: asking the GPU to lower the fps just allows it to throw away frames before they are rendered to the display. This puts less demand on the GPU for that function. However, use of the GPU cores for calculation, done by FS, is not avoided.
Telling FS to lower the fps, on the other hand, allows FS to do certain functions less often, both GPU and CPU activities. Hence, it seems to me, setting fps is more appropriately done by FS than by the GPU.
1 Like
I’m not sure of the technical reasons for it but I use V-Sync On and frame rate in game set to 20 fps which actually gives me 40 fps. This gives me very smooth performance in almost all areas and keeps my GPU from running at full speed all the time.
If I try using the NVidia control panel to limit it to 40fps I get the same 40 fps but with more stuttering.
So I think you may be right, using the in-game limiter is the better option.
I get ~20 fps with vsync on and framerate limited to 30. If I up the frame rate to 60, I get anywhere from 30-50 fps. Vsync has some issues I think.
2 Likes
I see the same results
Personally I want 40 because I normally get 45-50. 40 makes headtracking notably smoother than 30.
What we really need is a slider. The Nvidia control panels FPS limiter works at limiting frames but it seemed to work differently to the in-game limiter. I might try experimenting with it again.
1 Like
As a workaround, if you have an Nvidia GPU, you can set a FPS limit in the Nvidia Contro Panel under “3D settings”. You can set any FPS from 20 or higher.
Apparently it doesn’t work for a lot of people, but it works great for me. It actually works a little too well.
I mainly did this because the included FPS limit with VSYNC was actually dropping a lot of frames and stuttering.
You sure were right about that weren’t you.
If you want smooth 45 FPS then try a custom display refresh rate of 45 or 90 Hz, and set the vsync setting accordingly. (The vsync setting is actually 100/50/33 % of refresh rate)
Yep, it can cause micro-stuttering, which some people using it either doesn’t notice or doesn’t realize.
If you had a 120 Hz screen and set vsync to 33% then that would be 40 FPS.
All the external FPS limiters do is specify a wait instruction. Your CPU and GPU just wait and then display. Simple as that. (it is technically more complicated, but not in any significant way). I must credit you for thinking 45 FPS would be a good idea as you would think it would provide a balance between fluidity and good FPS. This is not likely to occur as it will result in every 2nd frame being displayed twice (with vsync) or tearing to occur every other frame. It could be argued that 45FPS is the worst possible FPS to achieve with a display that is 60 hz, rather than somewhere between 30 (slow) and 60 (perfect).
Think of it this way: 31 FPS would result in an frame skip once a second, 59 fps would also have a stutter every second. 45 FPS would have 30 skips per second. In the end it is subjective though. Try rivatuner, see what it looks like and I suspect you will decide it looks terrible. Many displays can be configured for 48 or 50Hz (expecially TVs/monitors sold in Europe), perhaps that’s achievable for you?
1 Like