Do you think that microsoft will make FPS Friendly with the patch?
I have i9 10900k
Nvidea gtx 2080ti
32 gb RAM
1 tera ssd mk2
It works fine, but not everybody spend 3500 euros in a computer.
Microsoft should help people to have good frames without putting the sliders to low
In my case the use of the processor and the graphic card is very few. Dont understand why the game dont use all the power of processor and graphics card
Miguel
IMHO, it is a good thing to have software push hardware. It was definitely this way when FSX was released, and at the end of the day, it’s likely a good plan. You want software to push the envelope, which MSFS does. We can grow into MSFS in the months and years to come as we update our computers. Seems like the right approach. Yes, there is a downside since many will struggle… but that will always be the case.
Don’t expect improvements in optimization, it will stay as it is, just cosmetic changes like raytracing and more.
What are you suggesting Microsoft start sending pc components out for people with slow or old becoming obsolete hardware, if you want the latest games to run at high fps then you have to invest I already feel there is enough scope for an array of different machines as is.
But I don’t agree we can’t see any further improvements to fps or how smooth it plays in the next couple of updates atleast, as I personally feel it was brought out earlier than was intended.
Did you all miss the graphic they made of showing how much improvements they got in performance for the next patch this September?
Hello Miguel, my system is not as powerful as yours (Ryzen 7 3700x, Geforce RTX 2070, 32gb RAM, 500 gb SSD, dedicated exclusively for MSFS. I also have fiber-optic internet at 500 mb/s) and I run the game in high-end mode with 35-50 fps with occasional stuttering. I am very happy with the performance.
I have no doubt that MS and Asobo will tweak the sim and smooth things out over time, but one does have to pay attention to requirements and adjust expectations accordingly. With an RTX 2070, I cannot expect to crank everything up to ultra. If my internet speed is 40 mb/s, I’m not going to set photo-realistic scenery to max, even with a high-end CPU and graphics card. This sim is pushing the tech envelope and will be the flight-sim standard for at least the next 10 years.
So, if I can’t afford a high-end computer, then I have to be happy with low or medium settings until I can. Let’s be honest…this sim is not a life necessity. It is not food, water, shelter or love. It’s a luxury. No one has a “right” to play it. To those who can’t play it yet, I would say “save your pennies, sell some lemonade, mow a few more lawns, stop smoking or eating out for a year, and then get the computer you need to run MSFS. It will be all the more sweeter because you had to work hard for it.”
In another thread you stated you’re getting 45fps. You are not going to get nor do you need more than that on full ultra.
This is not a shooter game. 100fps is not necessary.
“Good” frames in a simulator is 30 if it is smooth an no stuttering. Many simmers lock their frames to this.
The goal should be to get stable FPS, no stuttering and no drops of FPS.
Some aircraft have room for optimization, like the A320. Some users have been able to tweak the refresh rate of the displays in order to increase the FPS. So they could always work on that.
Where is this at?
Here it is, from their September 3rd update: https://msfs-cdn.azureedge.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/FS-09.03.jpg
Miguel this is like a broken record. You’ve already posted about your own performance and in the analysis it was clear your system was underperforming by around 10-15 frames. So your system has issues you need to address.
I posted a YouTube video in one of your threads with some tips from JayzTwoCents which you and anybody else can follow so I do hope you sort these issues out. I have a very similar system and I can get a solid 45 fps in busy areas but I have a mixture of high and ultra settings - that’s ok.
A history lesson as well as Doug has already pointed out, every Microsoft title I can remember has already provided configuration beyond current systems, so if you can max a Microsoft Flight Simulator title on any rig at launch then it’s a sad day for simmers. This title is going to evolve so I’ll expect it to continue to push the latest technology as and when it gets released.
On your system you should be able to easily get a fantastic experience with good frames.
It dependes on where you measure
As we know performance for glass cockpits is being worked on, so I would say it’s better to wait and see what patch 2 delivers otherwise you could compromise the quality of the sim experience and/or corrupt the installation of the new patch if you start changing settings now.
Anyway what im talking is that microsoft should help people to have vetter frames. And more when we will begin to install new software over fs.
I run it in 4k
Ow in gibraltar with everything to ultra , in 4k plenty of planes inhave the following results
Ig you see the cpu is only working at 37 percent and nvidea between 70 and 80 percent
What i say is that microsoft should make the program to use more processor and more graphic card
If inchange froom ultra to high it is 4 franes more
It depends on where you fly, altitude etc
I realize that but you need to realize you are not going to get better at 4k ultra settings. I have a drastically lower spec compared and I have tweaked settings so I get 25-30 fps and it is smooth.
They will optimize sure but just saying they should concentrate on improving framerate is subjective. Many are fine with the frames they get and realize in order to get more they will eventually have to upgrade. Me i do not care if I get 100fps as long as I can play the sim smoothly and enjoy it.
As time goes on and the add features I’d rather have to upgrade my side then trying to implement more and more features on an old engine as some games nowadays
The most important is that fs2020 will take advantage of the processor and the graphic card
The same in the loading times
Why? Many games utilize one more than the other. No games will utilize both at 100%.
Disregarding fps for a moment, I think the amount of VRam you have is going to be a large factor in improving the stuttering, regardless of your CPU & GPU processing grunt. I have concerns here for anyone looking at the 3080 which appears to only have 10GB of Vram.
I was experimenting a bit earlier at the Charles De Gaulle airport in France which is a real test of your hardware.
I’m running a 3700X, 32GB 3600Mhz DDR4, 2070 super with 8GB Vram, and at 1400p with a mix of high and Ultra settings in game. V-Sync on & limited to 40 fps.
In most areas I can maintain a nice smooth 40fps with that setup, but at the Charles de Gaulle airport it drops to about 30 with the occasional 1 sec stutter, especially during take off and looking out the side window at the airport buildings.
I was monitoring my Ram usage, Vram usage ,CPU & GPU processing % as I was heading towards the Les Bourget airport which is not far away from the Charles de Gaulle (forgive me if my spelling is incorrect there)
Average CPU usage was about 50-60%, GPU core was running at 80%, Ram was about 19GB and VRam was maxed out the whole time from takeoff.
As you get near Les bourget it obviously has to load in more detail from that area and there’s no room to fit it in, so I guess it dumps from Vram what is not currently in view and loads in what’s ahead of you (substantial stuttering as it shuffles data in & out).
Then when the stutter has settled and the fps returns to about 40fps the Vram is still at 100% with the new data. This is fine until you decide you want to look behind or to the side or turn the plane where it now has to shuffle data into vram to accomodate the new view (more stutter). Rinse repeat on that as you do 360’s around that area. Once you move a few miles away from that high detail area my Vram usage dropped to about 70% and I was back to 40fps constantly with no stuttering.
If was trying to run it at 4K and with everything on Ultra it’s obviously going to need a lot more than the 8GB of Vram I have.
I’m guessing it’s going to want a lot more than the 10GB available on the 3080 offering too, if you are expecting to be able to run that on 4K ultra.
