It is acceptable.
My T LoD is 4, O LoD is 9.
It doesn’t matter to me.
I don’t care about FPS or performance.
Graphics are great (detail and color).
Flight is responsive and smooth.
MSFS is not a First Person Shooter.
As expected, this is your main issue. Terrain LOD at 400 is tanking your mainthread performance on a 9900k and causing VRAM usage to exceed hardware limits, further lowering performance. Object LOD above 200 is rather pointless, as you’re quickly approaching diminishing returns on what can be perceived as increased visual quality.
MSFS isn’t a first person shooter, but it also doesn’t mean performance below 20 should be ideal.
1 Like
My main issue is my brain.
I perceive increased visual quality at 4K Ultra, TAA, DX12, T LoD =4 and O LoD = 9.
Flight is smooth.
So, why not.
I have even flown the CJ4 at FPS = 9 and was content.
Stutters start at around FPS=7.
Wait, you’re having smooth flights with a FPS of 9? That doesn’t make sense. Even back using FSX if FPS went below 20 or 15 it was rather noticeable. Below 12 or 10 sucked. I’m a bit confused with what you mean by TLOD being 4 and OLOD 9. Are you saying you’ve maxed everything out are that you’ve dropped everything to almost 0? So TLOD 4 = 400 and OLOD 9 = 90, or what?
In my experience, once you’re airborne and start getting away from airports or areas of dense objects, most people get max FPS. That’s assuming you’re not using a heavy resource aircraft like PMDG. If you maxed everything out and tried flying into JFK or Chicago, I doubt it’d be a smooth flight. Would be curious to know where you’re doing these flights. If it’s just satellite imagery and simple airfields in the middle of nowhere, sure. But anything more than that seems suspect.
2 Likes
Most people would agree with you. If my sim got down below 10 fps, I would end the flight.
Yes, terrain LOD = 400 and object LOD = 900. Object LOD can be manually set to 900 in the User.cfg file, even though the max possible in the UI is 200.
Got it thanks. Yeah with everything maxed out and getting FPS 9 and calling it smooth, no idea. Unless you are in full zoom mode and only staring at the flight instruments or flying in the middle of nowhere. Oh well, if it works for him and he’s happy, that’s what matters.
Okay relax…
My apology. I did not think when wrote: T Lod=4, O Lod=9.
I edit my UserCfg.opt file to change the LoDs.
In it, 4 = 400 and 9= 900. <----------------------
And then keep the UserCfg.opt file set to “Read Only”.
MSFS can’t change it and any Graphics Options. Only myself.
As in changes to the Options screen in MSFS will change them.
But when you exit MSFS, the options change back to as specified in the UserCfg.opt file when you start MSFS again.
{Graphics
Version 1.1.0
Preset Custom
{Texture
MaxAnisotropy 16
Quality 0
}
{SuperSampling
SuperSampling 3
}
{Terrain
LoDFactor 4.000000
}
{OffscreenTerrainPreCaching
Enabled 1
Quality 3
}
{ObjectsLoD
LoDFactor 9.000000
}
Looking at those values of 4.0 and 9.0, you might be doing more harm than good which is why you are probably stuck with really bad FPS. Unless you have advanced computer knowledge I wouldn’t go tinkering with the MSFS .cfg. Better to just set the settings in game. Not sure what you’re trying to accomplish.
2 Likes
-
Read the reply right above.
4=400 & 9=900 -
Stuck with “Bad FPS”. Nope.
Any FPS above 10 is good for me.
Usually average around FPS=25 for 4K, Ultra, TAA, DX12
I fly the CJ4 at 3000 feet max and enjoy the scenery.
Sometimes the C172 1000 but mostly CJ4.
Also the B747, A310, A320
Graphics are great.
Flight is smooth.
Turn (bank), climb, descend, VFR, IFR/ILS, takeoff, land
Slew at up to 4 clicks.
Real Time On-line Traffic
Live Weather
No stutters.
Plane is very responsive.
I think you’re misunderstanding the post. He’s making the same points I was trying to make - you are running MSFS far beyond what your system is capable of, and significantly reducing performance at the cost of a marginal visual quality increase. Simply lowering terrain LOD to 200 or 100 and lowering object LOD back to 200 will significantly improve your performance by reducing mainthread frame time and lowering excessive VRAM usage.
Trying to a prove a point that your system can handle these settings and anything above 10 fps is acceptable performance will rightly catch a lot of ire from the majority of users.
3 Likes
So you, not myself, know what my system is capable of?
I wonder how you know that.
I’m not trying to prove anything. Just stating my facts.
Why would I catch a lot of ire from the majority of users?
I don’t care what they have their systems configured at.
Why should they care what mine are.
Terrain LOD at 400 will absolutely hammer the mainthread on a 9900K, and likely one of the main reasons for poor performance. Setting a high terrain LOD will also hammer the current 13th gen Intel and Zen 4, so expecting a 5-year-old processor to adequately handle this is a steep hill to climb. In addition, you’re currently using more VRAM than available on your Arc 770. When GPU VRAM is exceeded, the difference is offloaded on system RAM, imposing a significant latency penalty - this is not an ideal situation to be in.
This isn’t meant to be critical of your hardware - I’m merely trying to point out that you are currently running MSFS in a way that clearly exceeds what your hardware is capable of.
As I said if it works for you and you’re happy so be it. But to purposefully drive your system to the redline like that, you’ll end up needing a new computer pretty soon. I can’t imagine what your temps are like let alone having your fans at full blast the entire time.
Here’s a comparison video at different FPS: 1, 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, and 144
1: Time to throw the computer out the window
5: If I had no other option and it was the only way play the game then I guess I could live with it.
10: Looks decent enough but you can still catch a lot of the lag. The longer you play it the more you notice it. Remember that the eye interprets imagery and smoothness at 30 FPS.
15: Better than 10 but still enough lag to be an annoyance.
30: The eyes natural setting. Everything is smooth at what you could call “real time”.
Anything over than 30 is pointless to critique because it’s just more of what 30 gives you. Even at 25 which is your average, which is quite poor considering your hardware, is enough to notice a lag and sometimes things will turn into a slide show, anyone long term would want to seek out ways to at least get to the 30 mark.
1 Like
9900K
CPU Speed = 4.2 Ghz
RAM = 3600
HWINFO
9900K Temps
Motherboard Temps
ARC A7700 LE GPU Temps
I can’t hear the fans without FS2020 running.
With FS2020, I can hear them a little. But they are not loud.
Appreciate the detailed info. Are those values with the game running? I’m not a guru on knowing what temps are good or bad. You may just have the one in a million computer that has the golden parts for all I know. Right now with my game running at LAX with weather, live traffic (far above what Asobo currently offers), addon scenery, and the 787, I’m running CPU at about 80 C and GPU at about 65 with my fans whirring. This is also with TLOD and OLOD both at 50. I’m averaging 30 FPS. If I tried the settings you have I would no doubt overheat and crash my laptop but not before hitting an out of memory message most likely. This is with an OMEN HP16 AMD Ryzen 7 8 core processor at 3.19 mhz that averages 4.2 mhz and 16GB of ram with an RX6650M 8GB graphics card along with a subpar cooling pad.
What can I say.
I fly and it is great.
I cannot perceive that my hardware is uncapable.
Looks great.
Flies great.
Temps are great.
Smooth flight.
No stutters.
Not VR.
1 Like
Do you have any videos from your previous flights? I’m genuinely curious.
Your performance dropped down to 10 fps right at the 8:50 minute and the massive stutters caused you to completely miss the runway.
There’s no way you’re convincing me this type of performance is acceptable. You might be fine with 10 fps, but the stutters are massive and significant - all signs of a massively overloaded mainthread.
1 Like
Would be too stuttery for me.
It guess you run a low resolution (1080p at best) so there is already a lot of image quality that got lost.
As most others said: Lower your LOD because you won’t see any decrease in visual quality but your system will most propably achieve 30 fps and be much mores smooth. It isn’t right now.
If you want better visual quality: Lower your LOD and raise your render scaling to 150 or even 200 if the system (GFX card) can handle it.
Thanks for the video. I noticed both airports are stock. So that helps in the optimization department. Also it looks like you have weather turned off as there are currently clouds around the area so that would knock you down a FPS or 2. I know when recording it can make the video appear jittery or that there are stutters so I’m sure things may look a bit more fluid on your end but even still there seems to be some stutters without. I can’t see how only having around 12-17 wouldn’t cause them. The cockpit looks about as it should be. I’m also guessing you have most of the area cached so that takes off some pressure. I would have thought the quality of the scenery would have looked better for having everything maxed out. It sounds like the settings of 4.0 and 9.0 aren’t being registered correctly. What would happen if you change them to their correct values of 400 and 900? All in all, it looks pretty flyable. But with adding in weather or any type of addon airports, you’d need to sacrifice something, as I don’t think your computer would be able to handle anything more.