Those exist. And I guess you can use hardware thread instead of logical core. I wouldn’t.
IN the end of the day, your OS sees it as 16 CPU’s (in my case).
I have also more than that amount of hours in DCS, and have experienced awful things there…
but never the stuttering that MSFS brings today.
So, as for today, there is nothing to relativize… DCS runs maxed out at 4k in a perfectly fluid manner,
(Solid 60 FPS syncing perfectly to the 60 HZ of my monitor) no stutters whatsoever, thus giving a VERY pleasant flight experience. Granted, with a lesser quality and far less scope of the landscape, but with far superior quality and complexity of the airplanes and their aerodynamics. That is what a flight simulator worth of its name should be in my humble opinion. Not the stuttering mess full of eye candy, flamingos and giraffes that is MSFS in its current state.
3 Likes
I have time in both DCS and FS2020.
They are both great in different ways and can’t really be directly compared because they have a different scope and give a different experience. Just like you can’t really compare the VR experience of either of them with the better VR performance of IL2 Sturmovik or even Aerofly FS2 which runs great but has limited scenery (imo).
A more relevant discussion would be to compare the performance of FS2020 with X-Plane 11 or P3d. But let’s not go down that path again please since that’s been done time and again crisp and golden!
Just my take on this for what it’s worth 
2 Likes
I disagree. Both are flight simulators, (at least MSFS wishes to be).
What I am comparing here is the graphics engine.
DCS is fluid, MSFS is not.
3 Likes
Then we’ll agree to disagree.
I concur with your analysis. I thought the same the other day: DOOM (DOS version) is fluid on my Win10 machine, Quake RTX is not. 
3 Likes
The “main thread” is like a distribution center keeping track of all the tasks being performed. Hopefully, the main thread is “lightweight”, not performing complex calculations. Windows manages CPU assignment, priorities, memory allocation, and resources needed by the “threads” dispatched by the main thread.
There is always a bottleneck by something during every program execution. Optimization and tuning reduces as much as possible the impact of a bottleneck. Who would care if the main thread was a bottleneck if we have 100+ FPS? Also, optimizing a program to eliminate the main thread bottleneck means that whatever was in second place becomes the limiting factor. Upgrading the CPU may make the GPU the limiting factor. Because of all the different monitors, GPUs, CPUs, memory sizes, disk configurations, and peripherals there is not one optimal set of performance and graphics settings for everyone.
3 Likes
Well thanks for your comment… I have the luck that a good half a dozen games (Assasins Creed Oddissey and Valhalla, Red Dead Redemption 2, Mafia 1 new, Jedi fallen Order, etc. all run flawlessly fluid maxed out at 4K. And much more importantly, so does DCS. But MSFS simply does not, no matter hwat I do.
3 Likes
a horse simulator
1 Like
Yes, I concur.
DOOM (DOS) version is a lot more fluid on my rig too than MSFS 2020. I can’t understand it. I can only presume that there is a lot more optimisation to be done by Asobo before we reach similar performance levels.
3 Likes
A photorealistic game… Wich runs FLUID at 60 fps, just,
like, and much more importantly, DCS.
Also completely agree! They keep releasing new features while the very BASIC and MOST IMPORTANT issue, the lack of fluid movement, is not resolved.
4 Likes
this problem is solved by just setting where to departure, and leave arrival empty, everything is fine, the fps is good now and gpu can have a much higher utilisation.what a terrible bug!!!
Makes no difference… SSSSSSSTUUUUUUters no matter what…
1 Like
Maybe changing your keyboard would be a good starting point
5 Likes
Hi everyone,
So i have read through and played catchup with so many comments and it seems no further along to getting reliable decent performance?
Very frustrating. I had given up with the sim and probably won’t get back into it just yet as its just not fun.
1 Like
Like everything else in life, it depends who you talk to.
Some people think the performance is good, others not so. My own personally take is that the 2d performance is really good (much better than X-Plane 11) but that the VR experience although not bad still needs quite a bit more optimisation and refinement
2 Likes
Could the fact that the CPU seems to be the limiting factor in performance be not about it’s ability to do graphical math but the fact that a simulation that is based on real time data being downloaded from the internet to decide what to draw, puts additional strain on that CPU to handle that task, something a game is not going to have to deal with? What happens to that CPU when there is some interruption in that networked data? How does the CPU deal with that? I’d think that is a huge programming burden considering all that you’re loading up for tasks.
So here’s what I’m talking about. Let’s just assume these steps happen in your computer to create a frame.
-
I somehow doubt that flight sim is grabbing just a single frame worth of photogrammetric data from the Asobo servers. The request for that packet most likely contains information about your physical location, the amount of zoom in your view, time of day, season, the direction you are traveling, your speed (in case it wants to cache a few seconds ahead of your current path), your orientation. That back and forth is interfacing with all the drivers and hardware that give you internet connectivity, checks for dropouts. Remember that in all of this part there is a natural latency just based on what’s between you and those servers. (Try jamming music some time between you and someone located 6000 miles away. Your sound, no matter how good your hardware rig, will not be exactly in synch just becomes of the speed of light). Some people have much more direct and closer access to servers and will have better results than someone distant or someone who’s link to those servers has multiple hops to get there. Caching can obviously help with some of this but also realize that any cache is also continually being updated based on where you’re flying. None of that task is being done by your GPU.
-
The CPU is also handling all the basic GIS tasks that must be done for a sim, understanding the terrain map that is viewable and keeping track of all the file handling as to which texture goes over what hill and valley. It must decide which objects it can see and must be accessed along with basic information about all of them. Your GPU can’t help with that housekeeping part.
-
Interrupts on your CPU are also parsing through all the controls hooked up to your computer, looking for mouse, keyboard, rudder pedal, yoke, controller changes that could completely alter the info that you are receiving. Your GPU helps not one bit in this task.
-
The CPU is also processing the sound and music, any real world ATC and traffic you’ve chose, real world weather or simply the generation of all those things.
-
I think people forget that while all this is going on Windows is still running. Gamers tend to strip as much functionality as they can while running games and sims but you can only turn so many things off. CPU cycles are dealing with all of it. Tons of those functions also deal with the network as well adding to latency.
-
If all the info was received that was asked for, the CPU then needs to essentially compose the info into a basic graphical construct. This involves floating point math functions that form the instructions for the GPU to actually draw the 3D graphics. It has to pass once again all that info about light sources, object structure, textures, vertices. In a way your GPU has the easy part if this info coming into it is complete. Its tasks are pretty much constant. For some given input the frame gets rendered exactly the same each time. There are no variables. The speed and architecture of the graphics card pretty much follows along with its price.
So yes all of you out there with killer rigs that run games at 120 FPS are frustrated with anything other than blistering speed in flight sim but we are asking our CPU’s to do the near impossible to have all that above stuff happen 60 times per second. Those games essentially have the world they represent pre-programmed. In a sim getting info dynamically, one tiny blip in any of those tasks and the CPU is falling behind and won’t get the info to your GPU fast enough. That’s simply physics.
We all should certainly challenge Asobo to continually improve things but always do so with the realization that we’re pushing things to the limit.
2 Likes
and of course, if you look at these forums, members are also demanding those other features be added. I have lots of flights where I have very fluid movement and my rig is nowhere near top of the line. I’ve seen improvements in many of the areas I fly over. Some of the big cities with 3000 buildings slow things down a bit of course but I had a flight the other day at sunset in the Grand Canyon with rainstorms and lightning that was just stunning and perfect. One of the most beautiful experiences I ever had on a computer game or sim. I think tons of people are enjoying themselves on the sim just fine and Asobo is trying to balance that dynamic.
Very funny…