Still Whining…I thought you were going off to play DCS …
Afternoon all,
When I received my new system (ordered more or less specifically for msfs) I was expecting it to perform way better than it did. Initially thinking it was not working correctly but benchmarks suggested otherwise.
It’s got 11900k, 3090, 64gb. I do have everything on ultra and running 1440p but will be lucky to see more than 35 FPS on the ground at busy airports and rarely see more than 60 FPS during flight. When I first received the system I’d be lucky to get 20 FPS on the ground and 40 in the air.
I have spent hours optimising what I can and within my ability mainly from help off forums like this and it runs well now with the above stated FPS which is perfectly flyable.
The game is so heavy on the system, it’s almost as if the more computing power you give it, the more it wants!
Persevere watching help videos do taking advice from the forum and you should be able to improve it to some degree
Oh God.
Nah, in my standard, from your spec i want at least stable in minimal 60 FPS in every conditions (in ground or flight), why? because Microsoft said ideal spec is lower than your spec (ideal spec should have 60FPS minimal):
THIS IS BROKEN GAME / SIM (in performance aspect).
I pessimist about performance optimization update in end of July, i think that update will only give us just 1 or 2 more FPS hahaha.
anyway, this is my FPS gameplay that try to not sacrifice much graphics quality but with playable FPS possible haha 
:
(The weird thing is when i change the graphic to low-end, it just give me 3-4 more FPS, GOD this is definietly broken game / sim in performance aspect)
sim ii not broken at all, you want way too much , typical gamerstyle, most simflyers are very happy with a constant 30 fps.
1 Like
I’ve found that with my pc, i7-9700k OC to 5Ghz on all cores, 32GB 3200mhz Corsair vengeance RAM and a lowly 1060 3GB GPU, setting on low preset I can get 60fps.
This sim is NOT broken, but is seriously under performing, and nowhere near its full potential.
As soon as I add any kind of eye candy frames drop to 30 or lower. I’m hoping that with a new GPU I can get good frames with reasonable settings.
I’ve just spent the best part of this morning really getting to grips with what works and what doesn’t, what makes the biggest impact in terms of performance loss and what can be set higher. I dare say I’ve had to get creative.
I’m happy to say I’ve now got great visuals and good performance running at 30fps locked.
I Said this sim is broken in performance aspect lol.
Also I pessimist about performance optimization update in end of July, i think that update will only give us just 1 or 2 more FPS hahaha.
What u think? How much more fps can we get after that update?
I’m unsure. I used to use P3D v5 and with the same setup I could easily achieve 60fps with most settings on high, only problem I had was constant crashes due to low vram, resolution was the major factor.
This forced me to abandon P3D before update 5.2 arrived, I’ve heard that the crashes no longer occur now, but because I came to this sim, I haven’t looked back, MSFS ( even in its present state) is imho far superior in terms of visuals and it’s getting there with other aspects
I’m hoping that the DX12 coding is done properly to avoid crashes due to low VRAM.
I’m in no position to afford a new GPU at the moment.
Yes, really. Look at memory usage percentage. Your memory use in above image is 82% , which is the bottleneck.
AND look at your screen prints, the FpS reports confirm that… it sais the reader thread (RdThread) is the limiting factor. The rest is waiting for that, you probably have zillions of page fault hits all the time ! Your CPU and GPU are waiting for the RAM and SSD to catch up, because there is no buffer space.
Put 16GB RAM extra and you’ll be fine. With your config (a laptop !? which one !?) I would put 64GB.
Hmm idk cuz i saw 0 hard fault.
But maybe u’re right, because microsoft state 32gb is the ideal ram.
What u think of this:
- my soldered ram is 8gb 3200mhz
- if i add external ram 16gb 3200mhz, i will lose dual channel? @ArcanePython931
No there are no hard faults, that would euuhm… freeze things completely. I’m talking measures MSFS takes to fit it all in small memory. Your CPU+GPU are far better, the memory keeps it back from max performance, because MSFS tries to fit it all into 16GB. It spends far more time transferring from SSD to RAM and from RAM to GPU. It’s like having a pipeline with a narrow part… the narrow part will set the performance, not the rest of the pipeline.
I have no idea about how dual channel works in your PC, but if you add memory, you should get dual channel… also when you would add 32GB instead of 16GB. What type/brand is your laptop ?
Oh, because I don’t know there is 32gb ram stick in market.
Rog zephyrus g15 (2021)
I just read in internet, that says modern motherboard in this years can mix ram capacity even can mix ram speed frequency and still run in dual channel without problem.
But if ram stick with speed frequency is greater than the other ram stick, then the speed frequency will follow the lower one.
Modern motherboard is flexible for ram now than old motherboard.
And the good news is my laptop type can support up to 40gb ram:
I stumbled upon this topic when I was trying to fix my FPS Limited by Main Thread. I followed this method and it solved my FPS issue, now I get stable 30 FPS and no longer limited by main thread. This helped my case, maybe it can help you.
I Will try
Already try, no effect
I found a crippling area for my system at least.
I was flying around here
The Flying W Ranch GA01 Terrible performance, trees on top of PG trees
Stoney Point Field 6GA0 Roswell PG Area 34°3’31"N 84°23’24"W
Crobb County Intl-Mccollum Field KRYY Marietta PG Area very low fps
And then along Atlanta to
Atlanta Rgnl Falcon Field KFFC Down to 2-5 fps, 30 GB RAM in use
That whole area has PG data, which are mostly forested areas. Apparently it’s all very unoptimized PG data and the sim places auto gen trees over the PG data forest. It’s not too bad at first but it deteriorates as RAM usage keeps increasing. Here I was down below 5fps, and the game had over 30GB allocated
Atlanta Rgnl Falcon Field KFFC
Over Atlanta it’s much better as well as over Hartsfield - Jackson Atlanta I KATL, a very complex handcrafted airport, good performance. It’s all on the PG trees mixed with autogen trees that cripple my system. As soon as I leave the city or airport and go back over the forest, fps tanks.
1 Like
Hmm… did you test KATL after the Nordic update or before ? I deinstalled KATL a few weeks ago, now I can fly around Atlanta and land… it is better now ? I still have the airport uninstalled there. Deleted in Content manager… it stays available for download.
After. I don’t remember this problem from before the Nordics update and I did traverse the western side of the USA the same way. Maybe less forests there.
KATL is actually where I got better performance since it’s away from the crippling trees. Flying around Atlanta (in the city) and landing at KATL was fine, yet flying on to KFFC fps tanked again, ram usage went up and I had to land at 2 to 5 fps.
I’ll see if I can find what’s causing the crippling effect. I suspect it’s the autogen trees behind drawn inside the PG data trees. Back to turning things on and off again.
Even I have to defend MSFS at this point. This is NOT a first person shooter. You do NOT need 60FPS. If you are getting 30FPS with minimal stuttering and you have the graphical settings where you like the eye candy you are golden. You won’t find a pc out there that can handle getting 60FPS very often because this game likes your CPU more than the GPU. The game is NOT broken. You are expecting way too much and don’t understand how in-depth flight simulation games operate. I am sure many here would be glad to explain, but going around saying everything else is broken besides your expectations will not gain you much unfortunately.