Interesting, at times my FPS is dropping below 30 ands thats when I’ve started noticing it, even at 200, same settings as pre SU6.
I have been keeping an eye on those too, its all bit frustrating. I’ve treid photogrammetry off but doesn’t make much difference for me sadly. Maybe lower LOD is the way to go but that leaves us in a worse situation than before, visually
Running an i9 11900k paired with a RTX 3090. Which setting would you recommend not being set to ultra? Always looking for a little extra performance. Thanks
The only setting that will really make a difference are the lod sliders.
All the others are neglibe. Especially with your hardware.
There are still things that aren’t making sense to me.
-
Why does my 10700 seem to spread the load across threads much better than your 10700K?
-
Your GPU is not at 100% and you’re running at 1440p Ultra, so your CPU is definitely limiting. That really shouldn’t be the case, even with DX11 not being the greatest at CPU loading. See my screenshots linked in my post.
-
You’re getting ~45 fps at 1440p Ultra and an RTX 3080. I get ~44fps at 1440p mostly high/ultra with a couple medium, and I “only” have a GTX 1080.
I’m not ready to say “That’s just the way it works” based on these questions. Now, that doesn’t mean I know what’s wrong, and I’m not an expert in how MSFS utilizes resources vs. how your PC is configured, but there’s performance being left on the table somewhere in the chain.
Maybe I’ll recheck mine again. I can’t remember if my screenshots were with SU5 or SU6.
1 Like
Yes I agree and this what is driving me mad. I feel like there should be more performance but as I never really monitored before SU6 I’m not sure what the numbers were beforehand.
GPU usage drops even further at cruise as does FPS and I can feel that it’s not as smooth.
Those screenshots were taken at EGPH runway 6 in the FBW experimental. Maybe you could compare and see what you get at default Ultra settings.
Thanks for the reply👍
Here are two screenshots from just now. This is in the 0.8.0 FBW dev version (not experimental) on the runway you referenced. Live weather/time. AI traffic (low density). Photogrammetry ON.
First screenshot is my standard custom settings. Mostly high/ultra with a few mediums. I was getting 40fps in this case:
Next screenshot is after I set graphics to Ultra. My fps went down to 30.
My CPU was similar between them. I had 5 threads primarily being used.
In both cases my GTX 1080 was fully capped.
Just one side-note. Having developer mode running makes a difference on CPU load. I was more likely to have one of those 5 threads at 100% (with the other 4 about the same as they were). So these screenshots are from when I had dev mode turned off.
1 Like
What do you mean locked at medium? I’ve had it set to ultra as long as we’ve had this option (SU5?)
SU5 added the caching feature, but there was no setting for it; everybody always had medium, which caused lots of (IMO entirely legitimate) complaints about stutter with camera motion. WU6 added the ability to change the setting between low and ultra.
With it set to Ultra, the CPU requirement increases by a fair amount from SU5 (or later with the Medium setting), especially with high LOD settings. Having both Ultra and a high LOD is very resource intensive.
Right, thanks for the clarification.
I’ve had it set to ultra since WU6 then. Probably the combination of that and LOD400 just hammers my CPU too hard. I have no issue going back to LOD200, it doesn’t bother me enough to give up smoothness for. With cache at ultra and LOD200 my CPU can pretty much keep up at 60fps most of the time when I fly, so that’s fine I guess.
I wish we could lock fps at any number, I could live with 40 or 50 fps on my G-sync display, but 30 is just too jerky, and 60 is right at the limit as the sim sits right now.
With your specs it’s probably not worth it or necessary. As said they won’t make a huge difference, majority of ultra settings don’t give much better or a noticeable difference in quality compared to high.
1 Like
Thanks for doing that. I guess that sort of scales with the FPS I am seeing, except your CPU usage over the 5 cores seems a lot more logical compared to mine being maxed out on one….
Yeah… Maybe try with your overclock removed? Just run stock CPU settings and see if the cores are more balanced?
Just conjecture on my part as I don’t know how favored cores are utilized, but if you have one core that is significantly better when overclocked, maybe the thread scheduler ignores your other threads?
If you want to go really crazy and if you can find out which core that is, you could disable it (maybe in BIOS) and run with the others and see what the load profile is.
I know now we’re getting weird…
1 Like
I see…thank you
It’s worth a shot, I’ll give it a go and see what happens!
You can lock at any number with third-party software. I think the NVIDIA Control panel can as well but I haven’t tried it; I use Rivatuner Statistics Server for this (though I don’t use it to lock low, I lock at 162 fps for input lag reasons in other games).
If you do install RTSS, add MSFS to the list by clicking the green Add button, then simply typing in “FlightSimulator.exe” and clicking “Open”. Do not navigate to the path where the file is located as you will only get an access denied error when selecting it; RTSS only needs the filename.
1 Like
Have you tried this?
Why doesn’t it use all cores/threads equally? I have 6 cores and 12 threads, it’d be nice to see them all equally utilized.
Disable virtualization in the BIOS to begin with…
Then 45 fps in the A32NX isn’t bad anyway.