Yes I agree and I’ll use it if I can tune my system to suit (which of course I can) as theoretically I should get a couple more fps too.
Edit: Adjusting my 3800X settings to high power isn’t quite enough and so far the only solution to the panning freezes has been to push LOD up to 400 for IMO not enough gain in fps (compared with @ LOD 200), now I have 35 on the runway but less than 50 in the air. To me it looks like I may now have to overclock my cpu slightly to get it back up towards 60.
Thanks for your detail testing. It helped much.
Finally, I choose Textures High with 130% render scaling on 1080p monitor. ~25-35 fps.
I set Terrain LOD 100-200 depends on the city or area I flight. If got much FPS fit, I reduce Terrain LOD.
Wouldn’t it be nice if you could set a target/desired fps and the game would scale accordingly based on settings ranges you choose. Dynamic resolution scaling is standard in console games, yet for some reason not in PC games.
For FS2020 the terrain slider has a huge impact. It would be very useful if the game had a learning mode, dynamically reduce terrain detail when fps falls below target and increase it when fps goes above. Especially on landing, the lower you get the less draw distance you need, reducing terrain detail by distance to the ground would work as well.
All we’re really doing here is increase/decrease GPU load until it matches CPU load, or decrease a couple settings to reach a desired fps. Stuff that can be automated.
My bottleneck atm is the weather. The volumetric cloud rendering can be very taxing when flying through overcast weather. Which makes little sense as you can’t see much lol. Smarter culling would help.
I’ve thought of all that and yeah it works in high bandwidth consoles but might not so well on lesser hardware and we’ve all seen what a pigs ear MS made out of scenery culling and the fix where everything less than ultra actually reduces performance… Sometimes it really is better just to let it fly.
Good information. I can’t change render scaling above 1920x1080 100%. If I make it higher I get blurry pixels at the top of the display for some reason. Any ideas why?
I found 30 fps is a sweet spot in terms of visual and performance trade off.
Terrain LOD 125, Textures High with 130% render scaling on 1080p monitor, with other settings mixed Ultra-High-Medium at any city.
Only Low on Glass cockpit refresh.
SU5 performance improvement plus SU6 regression fixes are great.
Pre-SU5, I have only got 20-25 fps in same settings.
I think Dynamic resolution scaling and dynamic detail are great idea (auto higher when cruising and lower when landing).
Is dynamic resolution scaling implemented only on console?
Any exclusive hardware needed like ray tracing and DLSS on RTX cards or just software implementation?
I guess it’s easier to do on consoles with a fixed hardware profile. However some PC titles use DRS as well. (not to be confused with DSR)
However since MSFS is mostly CPU limited, dynamic terrain distance would be a better fit. That’s all software implementation. Having the terrain detail slider on the toolbar would already be helpful. Arm spoilers and reduce terrain detail on short final 
A combination of the two would be best. At cruising altitude over the desert in clear skies I can go up to 4K, terrain detail 400. Yet landing at KSFO, better in 1080p at terrain detail 150. Taxiing to the gate, terrain detail 100 is plenty.
I’ve thought this before and even wondered if a simple link to altitude would be enough. But agreed an FPS target would be great, especially for VR… In one earlier build I did feel the game was already targeting 20 or 30 fps (I cant remember which) so maybe there is some mechanism already coded for this, I have no proof though !
Right.
That combination would be best, and options is a must.
Options to activate or choose certain level to avoid aggressive automatic change. we learnt from aggressive culling on SU5 that fix later with WU6 offscreen terrain pre caching options.
Besides CPU and GPU limit, do Texture Resolutions depends on network bandwidth too?
I don’t know if this coincidental or not.
When, testing with Texture Ultra @1080p over high populated city, I got frequently bandwidth limited alert which I ignore and continue fly that seems normal (besides low FPS).
Changed to Texture High after that, restart sim and fly in same location and the message were gone.
I didn’t do a deep test to set to Ultra again since I need sim restart and lazy to do that, lol.
In the end I stay with High and Render Scale 130%.
Differences (even small ones) are easy to pick out in before-after screenshots when you rapidly flick back and forth between them.
If I didn’t have that ability I honestly would not be able to tell the difference between those two shots at all.
It’s probably a coincidence. I have done many tests measuring incoming data and it always adds up to the same if giving the game enough time. Fly slow or reduce simrate when bandwidth falls behind, either from isp or server. Sometimes I get over 100 mbps over London, sometimes it seems capped below 30mbps. Time of day makes a huge difference.
Anyone noticed any differences in secondary render scaling effects in the latest SU?
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.