Good performance? Bad performance? What are your specs?

Some people are reporting really good performance. Some people report awful performance. Perhaps we should compile our system specs, and see if there’s a pattern? Please describe the nature of the performance as well (stuttering is different to low FPS - some people get really smooth gameplay interrupted with stutters!).

Please post up:
CPU
GPU (model and RAM)
RAM
Installed on an SSD or conventional HD?
Do you have multiple monitors?
Do you use third party addons?
Does this machine have/has it had an older FS game installed on it?
Performance data from Developer Mode FPS counter*:
What FPS do you get and in what situation?
If you get stutters, how bad are they, and when do they happen?
What does it say the FPS is limited by?
How much system memory and GPU memory is the game using?

For me:

  • Intel i5 7600K @ 4.5ghz
  • nVidia GTX 1060 with 6GB of memory
  • 32GB system memory
  • Runs on an SSD
  • Single monitor
  • No addons
  • Used to have FSX installed, no current installation or third party apps
  • Irrespective of settings, maxes out at 25FPS ground, 50FPS in the air
  • Stutters are extremely bad after the simulator loads, then at random every few seconds or so after that, with the FPS counter showing 200-700ms delays.
  • Limited by MainThread most of the time. Stutters can show up with Limited by MainThread, GPU, or Manipulator.
  • The game is using 11GB/32GB system RAM, and 3/6GB GPU RAM

*Enable developer mode in General Options → Developer, then when in game, you should see a new menu bar right at the top of your window. Go to the Options menu right at the top of your window, and select Display FPS.

2 Likes

One thing you want people to report is their current resolution. This is key because lowering it can net you better fps overall at the cost of image quality, natch.

The following is at 720 wide, all settings at Low or Off.

Ryzen 3 2300
AMD RX570 4GB
16 GB RAM
OS on separate SSD, FS on 2nd SSD, Map Cache on HDD
Single Monitor
No Addons
No previous version of FS installed
Developer Mode reports 50 fps but I can’t see variances on ground-external when starting a flight
Steam Overlay reports 20-30 fps on ground, bad stutters on certain times in flight and during takeoff down to single digits, AMD Radeon utility reports I’m getting an average of about 50 fps. I have the fps capped to 60.
Developer says I’m limited by Mainthread most of the time, can’t really read the other text, it switches too fast.
System RAM is 50-55 percent consumed. I’ll have to check GPU RAM in flight.

EDITED TO ADD:

I finally downloaded most of Manhattan NYC (what I call the Tourist flight - from mid-town down to Governor’s Island and Lady Liberty) - launched from LaGuardia across the river.

This is what I consider worst-case scenario - 1,000 AGL in a C172 over the river, across Harlem, bisect Central Park, cut down the West Side over the water, in-between Governor’s Island and the Statue, circle Lady Liberty, head back up over the Battery - go in-between the skyscrapers there, back up Central Park and end the flight somewhere in Yonkers/Mt. Vernon.

The good news, high 20s to low 30s average, some stutters I suspect are related to the GPU (I’d probably do better with an 8GB card), yes there were still the single-digits and low teens stutters - notably when the Flight loads and the pan starts over the airport (I start at the active to save some time) and then down to your A/C. Some other stutters - some I suspect may have to do with distance rendering.

I have multiple map overlays cached - large LQ covering Queens all the way over into Jersey, MQ pieces covering most of lower and mid-Manhattan, and then some HQ segments to get the dense city segments, the bridges etc.

I suspect this performance would be much much worse without the map cache. I tried two flights and followed the same flight path noted above - one with Internet Connectivity ON and one OFF - to eliminate the possibility that the program would somehow prefer to download scenery and ignore my map cache. I saw slightly better performance with Internet Connectivity OFF, but not enough to eliminate the possibility that it was simply reasonable fps variance since I’m roughly hand-flying the route and can’t guarantee identical pathing, speeds, etc.

Regarding the map cache, it’s on an HDD. I think I’d get better performance out of an SSD, but I’m short on space for SSDs in my system. I’m saving the space on my gaming NVME for game executables, as there’s still 1-2 more games I’m looking to install when they release later this quarter.

So there you have it, not particularly extensive or scientific, but to be fair, Manhattan NYC was what I considered my worst-case scenario in graphical load, and to be fair, FS 2020 didn’t do too badly, knowing my rig is minimum spec in most cases.

Did the city look terrible - eh - at 1,000 AGL, the smaller non-skyscraper segments didn’t look too bad. Up close, the big recognizable buildings looked terrible - block, pixellated, low-rendered. But that’s exactly my Global GFX settings, so I can’t gripe about that. At higher altitudes, not bad. Note - this is an HQ map, but your GFX settings still get a vote on how things look. I’ll try to turn it up a little and see what the impact is later, but if you want to see just how bad (or good) things are, I’d try the above route. Try it first without a map cache and see what impacts streaming the scenery are - since NYC is a worst case and is one of the Photogrammerty cities.

Another thing that matters is which stock airplane you run test with.For example different results for me between Boeing 747 and Cesna 152. Also cockpit view or external view give different results.

My system is as follows:
Intel i7 9700K
Nvidia 1070
32Gb Ram
Installed on SSD 250Gb
System on 1Tb M.2 NVMe
Run on single monitor 1920 x 1080
No addons
Xplane 11 installed on different disc
FPS Boeing 747 30-40 FPS Limited by main thread and GPU, CPU Mem 9950, GPU Mem 3435
FPS Cesna 152 60FPS Limited by GPU Mem CPU 10187, GPU 2109

As with other Flight sims the promo videos look great but thats the whole point to sell the new MFS 2020
I for one would love to know the spec of the PC’s used in making the promo ads.

Just a sideline but what do others think of the Developer tool used for FOS and other CPU/GPU info, thought microsoft could have made a more presentable/clearer app?

Almost same specs here.
RX 570
Ryzen 5 3400g
8gb RAM
1366x768
High preset - 30 FPS
Medium - 35 FPS
Low - 40 FPS
Really enfuriating stutters. In stable flights goes from 40 to 25 FPS.
Takeoff and landing are a challange, since the FPS alternates between 10 to 30 FPS. I really hope they fix this

Hi I’m not very techy so what’s a " map overlay cached " mean? Sorry if this is a dumb question.

Not a dumb question - check the Guides Section of the Forum for a primer on how to download the maps of the areas you prefer to fly in.

What this does is presumably increase performance by having the maps and scenery in your flight fed from your PC instead of streaming from MS over the Internet as you’re flying. It also saves on your data consumption rates assuming your Internet Service Provider caps your household to a certain amount of data per billing period (most plans do, but most of us never really hit that limit as causal users).

For testing purposes, it would also allow you a consistent baseline of scenery files that you could rely upon over and over - you could gradually turn on graphical improvement settings to see how scenery settings impact your frame rate performance. Certainly I’ll try that with my “worst case” scenario, which is a low-level tour over New York City and all it’s skyscrapers.

i7 9700kf
rtx2070
32gm ram
40-60 fps
high 1440p
around big cities and airport about 20-40 fps

i7 9700
RTX 2080 Ti 11Gb
RAM 32Gb
Installed on C: 1Tb SSD

Running full 4K, Getting 30 - 40+ fps depending on location at high - ultra settings
No stutters
This is a recent new build computer; hasn’t yet been corrupted by the multitude of performance sucking parasitic processes that seem to accumulate. Wish someone could figure out how to fix that … I never have.

Here’s Edinburgh, real weather this evening. Overall I’m very happy with performance.

One thing to add … my CPU and GPU are liquid cooled; elsewhere some folks have said they thing they’re suffering from processor overheating. For what it’s worth.

MSI GL65-SFK Laptop
i7-10750H (6c/12t)
32GB DDR4 @ 2933Mhz
500GB nVME SSD
RTX 2070 8GB (115W)

Running at 1080P on mostly High settings with textures and terrain vectors on Ultra. I’m getting 20-30 FPS over very large and dense cities like LA. Getting 30+ FPS over less dense major cities. Over 40+ FPS in rural areas. There are random little stutters/hang-ups every now and again but nothing too major.

i7 8700k
1080 ti
16gb 2400mhz RAM
Sata SSD

Running 4K medium and averaging 40-45 fps with maybe one hiccup every 10-15 minutes, sometimes none.

I may do more RAM. Unless I go VR there’s no reason for me to upgrade the GPU which I wasn’t expecting but in developer mode all of the limitations are GPU rather CPU.

Thanks I’ll try Guides Section.

The reason for your stuttering is little RAM, put more 8. Sorry my english.

i7-9700k
64 GB RAM
RTX-2080
4TB HDD

Running 1080p at high gets me 50-60 fps mosf of the time, less in some situations.

I wonder if the reduced performance for me is a result of putting all the data on my big hard disk drive. I think it’s only 7200 RPM. My OS is on a separate SSD, but that drive is almost full. I should probably pick up a new SSD and migrate MSFS to that.

Cessenas are very light on performance. Try 747-A320, cockpit view probably gives you 20 fps. Something is wrong with the airliners and how they handle their avionics.

980Ti at 1.5
2600K at stock
HDD
16GB DDR3
Settings on high end and some stuff on ultra. (volumetric clouds, textures, stuff that are related to gpu)
GA airplanes give me 30-35 fps depending on area with limited by GPU and 99% GPU usage.
Airliners give me 15-25 fps depending on ground or air, with limited by mainthread and Coherent GT something like that. and this doesn’t depend on settings, low or ultra or high end or medium, it’s the same. 15-25 fps with 50% cpu and gpu usage.
Temps are normal.
The sim is awesome. it’s clearly a new platform and it’s nice.
But there are some flaws, at this current stage only beginners are enjoying the sim. the autopilot on the airliners are so bad, it struggles to maintain altitude and speed. that’s a very basic thing. engines are WAY overpowered, i can climb with 8k feet/min with 748. :smiley:

Yeah - drops it a bit … external getting 25-30fps, cockpit 30+fps…

Looks like you’re getting about the same as me. Looking at the forums, there are some folks with absolute top end machines that are dying. Sounds like something in the sim is very sensitive to what else the machine is doing - I’m just guessing. I’m a humble mech eng and don’t even pretend to understand the mysteries of bits and bytes :wink:

Hopefully we will see some performance optimization ovber next few months. That’s been pretty usual with sims in the past!

1 Like

Mine has been smooth so far with 3700x and 5700xt and 32 gig ram (4000) asrock mb x570 2tb nvme ssd. No noticeable issues others have reported. Running mostly ultra (2 settings turned 1 notch down) and dual 1440p monitors (All pop outs on 2nd). Avg 45fps.
I really think this sim pronounces the bandwidth of systems instead of raw power of gpu or cpu or cores. Architecture is everything. If you’re running a 2080 super but running a cpu, hdd or mem that is lower in total bandwidth it is going to suffer.
When I built this one last year instead of focusing on total best I could get gpu which in the past has worked mostly, I focused on best total BW between mem, cpu, gpu and ssd because I read an article somewhere that next gen games will really take advantage of total systems. Seems to be optimal for FS2020 so far. It really does utilize every single system and if they can’t communicate effectively with each other it is going to slow everything down.
I think the days of jamming a high end gpu into a system with mid range other parts (guilty) is on r he way out. Just my opinion of course.

1 Like

Just did some more testing. 6gb RAM (counting system usage too) used at max in a photogrammetry city. I really don’t care that I have to fly at 20 FPS when landing, I just don’t want the game turning into a slide show everytime I try to do it.
CPU and GPU usage drops severely in these “spikes”, don’t know if that has something to do.

Hi, I am a bit frustrated, my PC runs, doesn’t matter if in Low, Medium, High or Ultra with a max of 8 - 12 FPS. Also doesn’t an issue if A320 or C172, and also the area, airport. It’s the same if I am in NY , EDDF or LOWG.
I have also tried a lot of settings, I found on YouTube.
Maybe can someone help.
Specs:
I7 7700 3.60 GHz
Supermicro X11SSZ-QF
24 GB RAM
NVIDIA GTX 1080. 8 GB Driver is the newest from Nvidia 17th August
MSFS2020 is installed alone on a SSD 500 GB

Maybe some of you have an Idea how to get better FPS

Thanks

Intel i5-8600k
Nvidia gtx-1060ti 6gb
16giga ddr4 ram
500 gb ssd
1920*1080
vanilla(no mods) fs2020

My test 2000 feet altitude with cessna over london:
low preset: 60 fps
medium:40 fps
high:30-35 fps
ultra:5-10 fps unplayable :joy:
High altitude +10 fps.

I flying with high settings. 70-75% cpu and 90-95% gpu usage.
Sorry my english :sweat_smile:

1 Like

Well your motherboard is not really designed for gaming. The chipset it uses was designed for the business sector so it is not going to have the same performance as a high end gaming MB. Not saying that is the only reason but it is definitely part of it i would say.