Discussion: Patch Version 1.14.6.0

Hi Lincoln, Thank for your reply. You are right. But I did not change by myself from C to H. My original installation was in H. But when this update triggered, it was showing the installation destination is within C… Then I have pointed to H. Later on, I have cancelled the update and manually located the ‘package’ folder in the original installed folder in H and then it recalculated it was close 158 MB at the end. My question is, why the update was pointing me to install in C instead of it’s original folder? Now all good. Thanks.

1 Like

Its not full ultra its a mix of custom settings between high and ultra… To be honest on the settings before patch city’s that have a large density with buildings (like NYC and London) i would get about 30 fps or more it ran fine. Plus its scaled down from 4k its like 3.5k lol… it think its at 70-80 rendering scale. Plus running full scale 2k maxed out made no difference in FPS to what settings i am running now before the latest patch…that’s one of the reasons I bumped it up to 4k

I agree with you FS 2020 is a beast to run…But before the last 2 patches I no issues 11+ hour flights with no CTD’s or hang ups. I’ve been running the same Overclock settings since day one launch… temps are fine 60c or lower on the cpu and the 2080 super sits at 65-70c. I should clarify better I run a mixture of ultra and high settings on 4k that’s scaled down to about 70-80 on the rendering. Its pretty much like running 3K-3.5K lol and i also tried 1440p and no Overclocks still have the CTD’s. I am going to do more testing today but i dont really feel like redownloading 120+ gbs again it would be my 2nd time reinstalling FS 2020 and as per ram I actually going to a 64gb setup just got to order it from Newegg

At times like this, I would like to see ship traffic live

I have similar specs…i9-10900k, 2080super 64gb

Ultra with textures at 100, not 200. Locked at 30 with vsynch on. Drops below 30 a little over cities. With terrain at 200, its 15 over cities. That is a lot worse than pre-SU3. But the new patch has made it at least playable.

I switched in spring 2020. For laptops Intel CPU are still better, but on PC Intel is just expensive. My experience: overclocking with AMD is (too) easy, my mainboard does it by default. But you may step back a little. My 3300X CPU runs official 3.8GHz, runs successful every benchmark at 4.3 GHz but for MSFS 2020 4.1 GHz is max. Beyond that I get CTDs.
By the way, current best price/performance value is AMD 2600.

If I land in a remote airport with no air or ground traffic, performance is consistent and Ok for my setup.

I did not change my settings or setup since MSFS release.

Now if I land at a semi busy default airport with air and ground traffic (i.e: intl airport) as I get closer the airport stutters and pauses make the approach and landing impossible. Performance stabilizes after I stop on the runway.

Not sure if it’s related to traffic but that’s the only difference between both tests / airports.

Landing at this airport used to be Ok before the latest updates with the same settings.

Also since the previous updates, MSFS keeps running even if I close it. I need to go to Task Manager and click on End Task.

yeah indeed, at least bit better with the patch but not how it used to be, at least Asobo is aware of that and they admitted that they couldn’t fix all the performance issues

yep indeed. I really think Intel is just overpriced for what you get. However, we shall the see the real test when DX12 is out. With DX11 is always capping the CPU.

These patches that keep nerfing the visuals of the sim in order to solve the performance problems they created in previous updates are completely unacceptable.

When I first got the sim, I was blown away, it looked superb, trees, and buildings, and textures at detail from a distance, trees as far away as I could see (with a fix downloaded), every flight was a wow moment. Then performance issues started coming in and people started complaining. Now I don’t get any wows it just doesn’t look anywhere near as good, trees only round the airplane, buildings just look like blocks, and the larger buildings stick out so much as grey blocks until you get close, the textures in the distance look all blurred.

OK great I now get 60+ fps everywhere, but I don’t want 60+ fps, I want the sim to look as good as it used to, and I want to be able to alter my settings to make it look amazing as long as I have 30 fps. I have everything on ULTRA and it just isn’t as good as it used to be, the visuals have absolutely been nerfed to give people more performance. Not acceptable in my opinion, feels like I’ve wasted so much money now and could have stuck with previous sims, the only thing msfs did better than those is visuals, and that is just getting worse and worse with every update. So disappointing.

3 Likes

This is why I am using this driver:

(63) BEST NVIDIA DRIVER FOR VR? LET’S SETTLE THIS! - YouTube

I can’t say I have noticed any difference subjectively but I haven’t looked at fps in detail yet - so I’m just using this driver to see if the claim that it gives best performance in VR works for me.

My biggest problem which I still have despite a full 150GB reinstall the other day is long pauses. FPS is generally fine 30+ in central London cached with Orbx London pack, 60 fps in Scottish highlands. But every so often it just freezes for up to a minute. Does this in the menus too. Have posted on multiple threads and nobody has posted to say they have this problem. I have no idea how to fix it. People are talking about 64GB being optimal if your CPU is quick enough (I have i9-9900k o/cd to 5.2 GHz) but I really don’t know if that would help.

Still 100% GPU usage in the Menu’s

Which is dumb and horrible.

Yep I get that. And freezes (see my post above)

:rofl: no.Maybe it’s gone now

1 Like

Think there is a settings problem. 9900k is still a very capable cpu, much more potent than my outdated 8600k (4.9Ghz all core @ 1.175V, around 54 degrees Celsius under load). Anyway I can run all fine in VR/G2 with OXR100/TAA100 TLOD200, OLOD100, settings medium to ultra with about 24fps in airliners, 27fps in GA and around 30pfs with small aircraft without glass cockpits.

Comparable CPU’s (cores/threads/speed) should give almost equal results, maybe a frame more or less but no significant differences.

Of course I agree that Zen based CPU’s will probably get some advantages in the wake of the xbox port. We must see what this brings in practise.

Note to mention that I tried team red and for my life, I am healed. Good for benchmarks and heavy workload (CAD/3D Animation) but here, in the real world, we talk about unnoticeable differences. So if you sometime decide to throw away your 9900k don’t hesitate to send me a pm :slightly_smiling_face:

2 Likes

I’ll let you know. Though one thing that annoys me about Intel is the way they keep changing the sockets, though usually when I do a CPU upgrade I change the mobo to but it would be nice to have the option not to have to :slight_smile:

Wow with that rig you must be a bit ■■■■■■:(

After updating I had two CTDs before even getting into a flight. First time it occurred while MSFS was starting up after the update. After an update, I like to exit and restart. Then the second crash was about 5 minutes after starting up. I was not getting any CTDs before this update.

Update: After rebooting my PC, it’s running well now with no CTDs. I don’t reboot often so probably needed it. I’ve noticed a slight increase of FPS from lower 30s to mid 30s.

Looks incredible. Great job.

Be sure to throw up a BIG link to the build videos when you put them up!

I agree with that! I tried to downgrade from the latest Nvidia drivers to 457.30 with my 3090. It from fluid to really stuttering. Really bad