You have 64 GB mem installed and that’s used by everybody who want to use it.
System or program. Otherwise you can count your virtual memory also.
that’s what I said, but on the benchmark it shows 62 because 2gb are reserved by the sistem, bios, etc
Fly with MSFS2020 and enjoy. 
Wait until Asobo fix there Beta sim and come back later.
I use MSFS2024 as a Beta test program. 
1 Like
Yeah, I was so into trying to get 2024 up to speed I forgot what was the standard. I am trying to squeeze out 30 FPS in 2024 and I get 60 in 2020 out of the box.
They have serious problems here.
2 Likes
If you fly airliners this is the performance you can expect if you have a PC that exactly matches the “Recommended” segment in the system requirements. All settings are “Default”, nothing has been changed in the settings. How they can label this as a “Hardware Limitation” is really beyond me since Asobo themselves made the system requirements. I understand why people are voting this as the most pressing issue right now. The experience is far from enjoyable or smooth. (Edit: This is LaGuardia with the A321)
9 Likes
Well i tried without any software on a new system, 1 monitor, 2 monitors. GPU alone, GPU + iGPU. With and without new chipset drivers, audio devices disabled and enabled. I basically tried everything from bare system to software running. It doesn’t make any difference.
The only thing that decides how much VRAM MSFS uses is MSFS, especially with DX12.
Also today it kind of works again while the usage is still very high on low settings. But how can it be that yesterday it was way worse? Does it somehow have to do with online services?
1 Like
More frustration today. Add on LOWW to add on LSZH in the Fenix A321. Textures on medium, no ray traced shadows, buildings on medium, grasses and tress low. 3080ti w/ DLSS and Framegen. TLOD at 75 lmao. Ran out of vram on landing, had bad stutters on approach. I can do this in 2020 on high/ultra in the same setting with no problems. Sucks.
3 Likes
I have tested VRam management by loading a buzzy environment on London Heathrow. Taxi around this environment loads up my VRam to almost the max. capacity of my RTX 4070 super card.
After i stopped the aircraft and shut it down, i pan down my camera to only the seat of the pilots chair. I wait a few minutes but Vram use stays high. That is in my opinion not a normal dynamic VRam Management, because VRam memory management has to release unused memory to free up space.
Dynamic loading
Dynamic loading is a technique in which assets, such as textures, models and audio, are loaded into VRAM only when they are needed and unloaded when they are no longer in use. In open-world games or large environments, it is not practical to load all assets into VRAM at the same time due to memory limitations. Instead, dynamic loading allows the game or application to load assets as the player moves through the game world or encounters new elements. This approach optimises VRAM usage, ensuring that only the necessary assets are in memory at any given time, reducing overall memory overhead.
Memory management
Memory management is the efficient allocation and partitioning of memory resources on a graphics card to ensure optimal VRAM usage and consistent GPU access to data needed for rendering. Memory management techniques track how much VRAM is currently in use, which data is actively needed by the GPU and which data can be safely released to free up space. Memory management also includes strategies such as prioritising critical assets, swapping data between VRAM and system RAM where necessary, and using cache systems to reduce latencies in data access. Effective memory management ensures smoother performance, reduces load times and prevents graphics failures caused by VRAM depletion.
Asobo has something to do!
7 Likes
We really have no insight into how the sim engine manages VRAM. As I noted waaay back up-thread somewhere, I compared another modern AAA-release game’s VRAM usage and found that game’s VRAM usage to be nearly static. On my system, the new Indiana Jones game allocates approximately 15.8GB of VRAM to itself and that amount remains steady, plus or minus 100MB or so, for however many hours I’ve run the game at any one time, through numerous scene changes and plenty of dynamic action and lighting situations.
As the old saying goes, there’s more than one way to skin a cat. Or in this case, manage VRAM in a videogame engine. For me, the sim’s VRAM usage isn’t nearly as constant and almost-unchanging as I see in the new Indiana Jones game, but I also don’t experience the VRAM overload some are experiencing. For me, the sim seems to load up what it wants (anywhere from 10.5 - 14GB or so), then releases some VRAM as it idles while I prep the aircraft or sightsee around an airport, and then usage varies as expected throughout a flight.
It seems to me what Asobo should focus on is figuring out how and why some systems don’t release memory as needed to make room for new graphical elements, textures, shaders, whatever. Once they know WHY it’s occurring, they can prevent it. Personally, I am becoming convinced that downloaded/streamed textures and shader data can become corrupted and then “poison” VRAM such that the game engine can’t purge it properly without completely quitting and restarting the sim. But that is admittedly just a wild-*** guess (aka a WAG). Hopefully Asobo’s telemetry is telling them more than we know on our end.
1 Like
same issue here, 4080 SUPER and it’s unusable on 4K when 2020 was actually really good with same settings (i use medium texture btw), btw Asobo for the system requirements looks like you were targeting 1080p in simmers community xD 12GB VRAM, when in reality if you want a chance for 4k you need 20GB Vram at least
1 Like
Regarding Indiana Jones:
- there are a finite number of game scenes
- you only appear in one scene at a time
So VRAM mananagement is easy. Shut the stage curtains, shuffle the scenery, open the curtains!
But rendering complex airports and cities at different distances and heights in one global scene that must seamlessly move is very hard.
3 Likes
I’m playing at 4K with upwards of 70 fps with Ultra settings, TAA with frame generation and 30% render scaling. Mainly playing career flying the Caravan. I have a RTX 4070 Ti Super with 16GB VRAM and 32GB of system memory.
I haven’t really had performance issues. Mainly my issues are with aircraft bugs, mission bugs and the occasional CTD, plus the Garmin auto-pilot has issues reacting too slowly and too aggressively. The auto-pilot issues tend to cause severe oscillations on primarily the yaw axis and also on the pitch axis that can take minutes to die down.
Should had bought a 4090, instead you bought a 4080 super that you know Nvidia has heavily gimped on VRAM. 16GB on a 4080 super is simply criminal.
1 Like
again, seems like someone needs to be reminded about the system requirements from MSobo:
Min Spec: 4GB VRAM
Recommended Spec: 8GB VRAM
Ideal Spec: 12GB VRAM
12 Likes
I hope you aren’t replying about my post, because I couldn’t care less about the system requirements. I have no doubt that everyone here is familiar with the system requirements.
What I care about is providing enough information about my setup to maybe help someone with a similar setup get the sim working adequately for them until Asobo can address the performance issues.
Reminding people about the system requirements isn’t really helping. I’m quite certain they already know.
No, I was aiming at people who say stuff like 16 gb is not enough, like the guy that replied right above me.
In your case though, what do you mean about 30% render scaling? DLSS or just the render scale?
3 Likes
I wasn’t sure just how relevant it was for TAA, but the setting is not disabled with TAA so I didn’t want to leave it out in case it makes a difference. Presumably it renders the scene at a lower resolution than full 4K and then upscales it.
Whatever it’s doing, I generally get framerates in the 70s in career with these settings. I’m not even sure how it ended up at 30.
I can tell you that it seems to make a very big difference for me. At 100 I get 20 fps, at 50 I get around 40 fps, and at only 30 I get almost 80 fps.
1 Like
I just notice something that seemed odd…
I have a full screen resolution of 3840x2160, render scaling of 50 (I changed it after the above screenshot) and a rendering resolution of 3840x2160 matching my full screen resolution.
However, I just saw a screenshot of someone with a full screen resolution of 2560x1440, render scaling of 100 and a rendering resolution of 2560x1440 matching their full screen resolution.
I was under the impression that render scaling was a percentage of your full screen resolution so 100 would mean rendering at 100% of your full screen resolution size.
This begs the question, why does my rendering resolution match my full screen resolution at only 50 instead of 100?
Update: Found the reason. I had manually updated UserCfg.opt and set SecondaryScaling to 2.0. Changing it back to 1.0 fixed it and now a render scaling of 100 matches my full screen resolution.
Can you tell me what performance test you were running?
If you’re using 4K with 30% render scaling you’re actually not using 4K but running the sim only bit above FHD resolution. It’s not 4K if render scaling is not at 100%.
No question why you doesn’t have performance issues but - and that’s the point - with the configurations Asobo suggested for the sim it seems only about half of the resolution is achievable. With such measures the current state of the sim is not usable in 4K on any existing system if you ever fly into something busier and more complex than a small regional airport.
If you start tweaking your settings to 30-50% of the real resolution you’re not using the real resolution.
3 Likes