Show me plenty of i9/3090ti people complaining about the same issues Xbox users are having…we’ll wait.
This is also another false generalization you can’t back up with any solid facts.
1 Like
This was the case w/ the 2070 Super I had, but since the 3080Ti went in no weather ever comes close to threatening Vsync to 30fps which is my preferred setting given this hardware. I’m CPU limited when not configured optimally, and that is addressed by dialing back Terrain-LOD as needed and by doing so can go in and out of any airport in any weather in any plane I use which includes the B78X, AS CRJ700, and at some point the PMDG 737-800.
For someone who’s been a PC simmer for 20 years, where do you come up with such broad generalizations?
I have an i9 and 3090 and you can check my post history to see I’ve had issues since SU9, specifically having to reduce my Terrain LOD to 150 and disable AI traffic to get back to the performance I had in SU8. Granted, I am flying in VR though.
This game has always been hard to run for myriad reasons.
Hmm…Just curious. Do you have multiplayer turned on? I haven’t used it in months, but when I consider why some have issues and some don’t, that’s one of the things that makes me wonder. For those with it, I’d imagine your rigs have to render your flight as well as the jets and spaceships flying at crazy speeds around you. Without that extra work, would things be smoother? I fly with it off and I use the Aerosoft live traffic mod instead. I’ve found my experience to be much better since the change and purchase.
1 Like
No, never used multiplayer, too antisocial for that haha.
If it’s still daylight outside when I get to sim I will use live weather, but if I don’t get to fly until it’s dark I’ll use few clouds preset and set it for the afternoon.
I usually use AI traffic with high variety, although having to scale it back since SU9.
Clouds in live weather seem to be quite impactful.
My feeling is its due to the extra weather/prop simulations they added in SU9 putting more pressure on the main thread. They probably arent’ worried about it because they think the port to DirectX12 will resolve it, so it’s just a temporary frustration. At least, that’s what my glass half full perspective is.
Regarding you using Aerosoft Live traffic, I wonder if because that’s a third party add on, it uses a different core and so your not hitting the main thread so hard?
1 Like
There’s a simmer that posts great vids on graphics settings for the sim. I followed his instructions to the letter and have my NVIDIA settings customized for MSFS like this. There’s something about the Clamp setting that helps with stutters. I’m still trying to understand it all.
1 Like
I have it on clamp as well, I think it does help in VR. Overall, I’ve been really happy with my performance the last few months, it’s just dipped relative to SU8 with SU9.
I would love to know from someobody knowledeable whether third party add ons like Aerosoft Live traffic help becuase they run on a different core, and that for those of us with more than 8 cores we can boost our performance by buying third party add ons to manage tasks that the main thread then doesn’t have to?
In that way, Aerosoft Live Traffic would be totally worth it to me, as I’d essentially be buying a cheap performance upgrade.
I have no idea if this is true however or just my simplistic understanding of how this might work.
It would be great if Mbucchia or Captain Lucky could comment.
1 Like
Deleted, may not contribute to the thread. Cheers.
Wasn’t aimed at the OP, but my post was clumsily written
1 Like
Yes, 100% SU5 reduced the graphical quality of the sim, especially clouds and draw distances.
Such a shame and slightly sickening when you are flying and remember and see old screenshots of how good it used to look before SU5.
It still makes me sad.
5 Likes
Earlier this year, I was still playing MSFS on a GTX 970 rig that a modern Xbox would run circles around.
And I’m sitting here reading this thread about how MSFS is gimped because consoles. I for one am grateful that Asobo cared to optimize the sim to be playable on lower end PCs such as mine (lower end than the consoles you guys are arguing about right now) rather than chasing the top 1%.
Now that I have a 12gb 3080 in my system, I can easily run full Ultra settings at 3440x1440 with room to spare, but I still think that Asobo is making the right decision bringing flight sim to the mainstream via Xbox, and all the low-end optimization that comes with it. The sheer boost to the player base and marketability is the reason we have a flight sim of this caliber in the first place (which was clearly Microsoft’s goal since day 1), and with the increased popularity comes greater incentive for third-party developers to bring us high quality content at competitive prices. And even competing sims like X-Plane now have every reason to bring their absolute A-game with XP12.
Based on the wide reaching Steam hardware surveys, the vast majority of people have rigs that perform closer to my old one than my new one. And I’m glad that all of those players still have the capability to run MSFS, which even at low settings looks better than anything that came before it. And even with my fancy new monster computer, I still think that it’s worth a little bit of cloud quality to ensure that as many people as possible can enjoy this wonderful flight sim.
But you could have just run lower settings?
All the changes achieved exactly that and forcing those who could already run ultra to have it degraded.
You speak as if it were that simple.
Do you really think that Asobo would willingly change core visual systems if they could’ve otherwise just left pre SU5 Ultra settings alone while still optimizing for low-end / console?
Oh, joy. More of the “xbox bad” crowd.
5 Likes
Assuming for a moment it was deliberate, you could do it a couple of ways.
Improve performance at the lower end.
Move the whole scale downwards so that Ultra is no longer Ultra.
The first method obtained through genuine performance improvements, with a bigger impact on lower end hardware than high end.
The second method improves the lower end, but negatively affects the higher end.
Not this **** again.
The mods should be closing these threads, they offer nothing that has not already been talked about numerous times without any foundation to back anything up. All speculation.
We are coming up to 1 year of this sim being out on Xbox and yet we still get these threads that add nothing but xbox bashing or blame from pc users.
10 Likes
I still dont understand whats so taxing about this game.
I dont think anyone has actually broken it down.
Scenery: Has detail of course and photogrammetry in places but is only rendering in at a distance. Why would this be taxing unless its streaming and loading inthe entire world? In which case why doesnt the sim just be designed to stream in the stuff you need for a flight? Such as sectors? Also a lot of scenery is just repeated assets like trees and tiles and buildings.
The plane: There are various planes with various complexities but really, is that too difficult for a next gen console to deal with? And on top of which its only one plane? For example Forza Motorsport will have multiple ray traced vehicles, fully moddelled racing around a track with AI. I would assume that computational power is more than flying a plane?
The weather: Maybe its the weather and clouds? but again for 2022 should this be a major drain? I know you can claw back fps if you turn off live weather and use presets.
Traffic: this is just pulling in data and making basic models fly about right from a to b? Theres not a great deal of detail to them.
Airports: Third party can be heavy at times but again i feel like its just poor optimisation. Why would an airport make the sim lose fps or crash it, when i can walk around an entire city in say cyberpunk or watch dogs london?
I know people say that the sim is complicated but should it be? Ive always held the opinion that for what it is, this game is poorly optimised across the board and isnt all that clever in what it does. It looks great at times, and some planes are great to fly but it doesnt really wash that its an incredible taxing thing to run, it feels like its some sort of myth thats being sustained here when i look at other gaming titles.
I would argue that it is, or at least should be, by necessity complex not complicated.
It has brought together many different technologies, making it more than the sum of its parts. But it should be easy to use, and for the most part I believe that goal is fulfilled.
If you want you can still get your hands dirty, and dig around under the hood, but it isn’t required, and at the end of they day you will get out of it what you put in to it.
I have similar system.
Ryzen 5900x and 3090
Cpu clocked to 4.7ghz all cores.
64gb ram at 3600mhz
And although it still looks good, the sim was degraded at xbox launch without a shadow of doubt.
My gpu on all uktra settings pre update over london for example was pushing 18 to 20gb of vram useage.
Now its lucky to hit 8 in same scenario, without looking at specs of the xbox pretty sure that 8 is the top end of the gpu chip.
So yes the sim was downgraded to fall in line with the xbox. Also being main thread limited on a 5900x or 5950x is shocking to say the least, and i dont think DX12 will make a difference. Don’t get me wrong it still looks good apart from melted buildings in PG area especially london. But theres lots of room for improvement
1 Like
But xbox series x does fit into the recommended spec pc had. Why the need to decrease graphics because of xbox? We as pc users asked for performance increase since release. And performance increase mean lowering graphics. If they need to lower graphics to get higher performance it’s already 100% optimised or they don’t know how to increase performance without tuning down graphics. No point to increase performance by setting lower graphics for everyone because it will lead to complains about graphics downgrades instead. Better to set lower settings if we have worse hardware. But all of us that use this wants to set everything at ultra even if we use the sim with minimum recommended hardware. Thats the issue not xbox. I also use pc only and have seen those performance/graphics complains since release. I use pc to be able to have options in graphics settings.
I have tried to explain photogrammetry and traffic is really unstable and needs us to set lower t-lod often. But when i say that most of the users defend it and says they want to use it. But to me those things could get more stable if Asobo tried to optimise that without reducing quality in them. With more optimised Traffic and PG they could increase drawdistance of those in the future.
Most of the users want PG and traffic on including me but those are really CPU demanding right now depending on where we fly or how many aircraft are around us.