Extremely low performance with low usage

Before someone tells me “Ohhhh this simulator is the new crisis your not gonna get more FPS”, my components are literally idling, and changing graphics settings has zero effect on the FPS, the Low and Ultra preset give literally the same FPS.

I am getting absolutely horrible frames for the components I have and the opening task manager shows as my CPU is idling at about 20-25% with CHROME taking up most of that 20% and my GPU at 5%. I have an RTX3070, Ryzen 5 3600x and 16GB @ 3600 ram. I have seen people with 2060s getting more performance than me.

I was looking through threads and came across ones detailing how the sim only uses one core, when I look at my cores the load looks about equal with none pegged at 100% leaving me super confused on the issue. When I contacted Asobo I got the copy-paste response which is in their FAQ which I had already gone through (i think i did all of it atleast)

I’m just baffled and am looking for some assistance as I just want to enjoy having the feeling of flight while we are all in this horrible pandemic, thanks in advance!

and again :joy:

Check it:

and again :joy:

Have you increased the windows virtual memory setting ?

One example of the existing threads about:

Literally, the most useless response, for one I don’t have CTDs, 16GB of ram is plenty even for this sim I sit at around 10/16gb ram usage when on the simulator. Two, I don’t even have integrated graphics so MSFS can only use my GPU I’m not stupid.

Even with Graphics_1, keep in mind I’m not just running MFS2020, I am doing other stuff aswell.

“and again :joy:

and you see in your new posted image:
it is not true

“Even with”, yes I was using 3d but other than that my issue still stands, partial usage low frames.

Edit: forgot the and again :joy:

this, what you now mentioned, is another thing and you created a new topic for which currently already " a lot" exists, where you had can join.

I just gave you hints about that your “numbers about your system load” are not correct because wrong interpretation of Taskmanager and about the recommendation for users with 16Gig RAM.

Look man, I appreciate the help but the hostile responses acting like you know everything is not okay and really annoyed me.

No, I literally just showed you a screenshot of me in MSFS with only partial system load, even with chrome and other stuff open.

Reccomended spec is 16GB, it doesn’t even max out ram uses so your either delusional or confused.

Okay and? This forum exists so people can create posts about their issues, I saw the other one, found it crowded and felt my post would be overlooked hence this one.

and again :joy:


it is your first post in this forum and you are stressed if you get helpfully hints… ?

and no… What you think why the voting button exist and how a voting-system should works fine if each user might think he can create for absolut same existing topic again and again a new one ?
That kills the voting system and moderators have a lot of work to merge the same topics together.

But… I came off-topic…

Good look with your analysis.

More specifically what kind of performance are you getting? Extremely low doesn’t really say a whole lot.

If you’re in the A320 you should know it’s the CPU heaviest plane (except perhaps the 787 which I don’t have), and if you’re near big airports that also adds to the issue, and the A32NX mod also costs several frames extra if you use it.

If your framerate in such circumstances is 25-30 fps that’s to be expected. If it’s often below 20-24 then something’s probably wrong however.

A few things to try:

  • Start a flight in the Cessna 152 mid-over the atlantic ocean with no traffic/multiplayer and no clouds and check your framerate. Should be at least in the 50s or so assuming 1080p or 1440p.
  • Do the same in the A320. Probably something like 35-40 here (if not using the A32NX mod).

Are your framerates around there or far worse? If far worse then something’s probably wrong.

1 Like

Please stay on-topic without the bickering.

1 Like

Thanks for the actual constructive post, very much appreciated.

I am receiving 25-30 with the 32nx, I will be trying your suggestion to use the 152 over the atlantic and see what happens. The thing that baffles is me is the fact that I am getting the same fps on low and ultra preset and people with lower end specs get significantly more stable and higher fps with the ultra preset, it just really confusing. I will let you know when I do the test you mentioned.

Sorry, just got a bit annoyed.

1 Like

If the 152 case is much better then you’re most likely just CPU limited (despite what task manager is showing). It’s the CPU-lightest plane in my experience, while the A32NX is the most CPU intensive.

I’m not sure exactly why task manager rarely shows any core maxed out, but threads can jump between cores very quickly; quickly enough that it could be the main cause that it looks spread out even though single-core performance is the limiting factor.

Also, if you haven’t already, you can enable the developer tools in-game and look in the new menu at the top, you can get a FPS graph. It also tells you what’s currently limiting you – “Limited by MainThread” means you’re CPU limited.

1 Like

I’m pinned at what I set as max frames in the 152 over the Atlantic. With the A32nx over the Atlantic, I am getting 40-41 on the ultra preset, it does say limited by main thread most times but it also jumps between that and something else so quickly that I can’t tell what it is, looking at task manager all threads look at the exact same however that as you say could just be the sim only taking one core screwing over AMD systems unfortunately. However, what continues to confuse me is the lack of frame rate change between low and ultra presets.

There isn’t a huge deal of difference in CPU load between low and ultra, so if you’re CPU limited they don’t matter much. They would matter a lot if you were GPU limited however.
AFAIK the two detail sliders along with glass cockpit refresh rate are the main CPU-intensive settings.

Unfortunately no CPU is really spared from this either. I have a Ryzen 5800X (current single-thread performance king, tied with the other 5000-series) and while my numbers are slightly better than yours, the difference isn’t huge. It did however double my worst-case FPS from my Ryzen 1700 prior to the VR update dropping me down 20 fps that I’ve yet to regain.
Intel aren’t really better off either judging by comparison benchmarks from various review sites.

1 Like

I have glass cockpit on low and the detail sliders are 200 for terrain, and 100 for object detail.

Your frames for this setting sound about right to be honest. I get slightly more frames than you on a slightly weaker system but I have that slider at 75. For one example.

The sim is not fully optimised yet, the devs have said it, it’s also widely commented on on here. But until the perf patches over the next few months I would just turn off the FPS counter and forget about it.

Could of things I have commonly read is that people get more stable frames on medium and high glass cockpit refresh and 32gb RAM.

Also consider what other apps you have open. I notice a significant decrease in frames just having OBS open for example, even when not encoding, despite it only having <5% usage.

1 Like

Thank you, looking for these optimizations to come soon, its not the 40fps, its the dips to like 2fps and freezing thats ■■■■■■■ me off.

This is quite a useful thread on optimisation and getting a more stable FPS, well worth a read - My 2070 SUPER 4K settings and suggestions - episode 2


I will add that the sim will in fact use almost 20gb ram if available maybe its possible things are holding back because of the ram usage. Even so it should definitely run higher than 4 or 5% on the GPU.

Is the power settings in nvidia control panel set to maximum performance?