"Out of Memory" Crash - Remember those days. Stable is better than Spectacular

Discussion Hub General Discussion
21

I also think that is it a good post to remind people to be careful with the settings and putting too much stress on their systems.

MSFS is meant to be a long running project and so it is ok that some features (and planned features like f.e. raytracing) can or will bring down current generations of hardware. And yes, it is better to have a stable system instead of having CTDs frequently because of settings set too high.

Still, I think that the problem with MSFS is that it seems to be rather unpredictable.
I read a lot of issues from people who have better hardware than me (by far) and have moderate / high settings and still suffer from CTDs, bad FPS… so there is more involved instead of just detail settings / resolution / FPS).

So far I am rather lucky. I had one major issue a few months ago, but it was more related to the Store itself and the permission handling - and I of course suffered in the beginning of some CTDs over certain areas, but that was a common problem for almost all users and could be fixed by Asobo within a few weeks).

I run it on an i7/7700 / 1080Ti / 16GB Ram in 4k and Ultra settings and have a great experience - even in VR (with some settings lower obviously, but who needs ultra textures or ambient occlusion anyway if your headset´s resolution is too low to really notice these things…?). Of course there are areas (like London PG) where the sim cannot be called smooth with such settings, but I have no issue dialing down resoluation scale f.e. for such areas to get it running well. So all in all, sometimes I think I am lucky that I did not buy a new computer last year as planned - due to lack of graphic cards - reading of people who have the same hardware I was going to buy back then and still suffering from bad FPS in the same areas or having more CTD than I have (the last one seems to be weeks ago for me).

Overall, despite the areas of improvement it still has of course, for me MSFS is by far more stable than P3D or XP11… (but I have to admit that XP11 is rather full of custom stuff, and it is not hard to bring P3D V4 to its knees if you set the sliders to more than average - and it is also overloaded with ORBX stuff, has third party software running in the background in parallel etc. ).

So I think it is both: users being more realistic about what their system can handle und Asobo finding the issues some people have despite top hardware, massive RAM, …

22

There is no doubt that there seems to be some hidden instability in the code when some very specific parameters are met. I expect that is what makes it so difficult for Asobo to find those bugs. Need just the right combination of hardware, settings, background processes, et al.

I recently posted a list of basic system starting points. This goes hand in hand with this discussion.
If you have your system set up for maximum stability first then the same process develops. Once you have the sim running smoothly then you can start boosting the system. Best of both worlds when you have the software and the system tuned to play nice.

1 Like
23

How? :smiley: Serious question! I have the same hardware (except RAM, I have 64 GB), and there is no way I get smooth experience ultra on 1440p (and you mention 4k!). I get a smooth experience on a high-end setting at 1080p (around 30-40 FPS average). In VR… it’s a different story. :stuck_out_tongue: (but I ultimately have found a sweet point between quality and smoothness).

24

@GothicHeart77 I would have to ask the same. I run i5-8400/2060Super/32GB. I can get smooth acceptable frame rates at 1080. 1440 if I stay away from dense areas. Nothing over 15fps at 4k.

Definitely some voodoo going on if you’re cruising at 4k. :wink:

25

Sorry for the late reply.

Actually I was not planning this, but I just started MSFS and checked my FPS during a test flight in the JF Piper Arrow III around Munich area (PG on) and enabled FPS counter (via developer mode) - actually for the first time I think.
I get 60-75 FPS on average and… no, just kidding, I am not.

I wanted to do it earlier, but never had the urge to as it FELT great, but here is the expected “sad” reality.

As said, I am not hunting for FPS and I am probably not expecting much FPS in a flight sim in first place, AND MSFS does a good job that it even feels still quite good with some drops below 20 FPS (which cannot be said for P3D f.e. which feels sluggish and does not deliver much of eye candy for the system hit, either).

Settings - basically ultra and sliders maxed out except:
Render Scaling 100% for 4k or 50% for FullHD for testing.
V-SYNC OFF
Motion Blur OFF
Lens Flare OFF
Glass Cockpit Refresh Rate Medium

Live Weather (only medium amount of clouds today)
Live Traffic
(No Online Player today)

So, my results:
In regular environments and flight l get 25-40 FPS in 4k depending on flight level and amount of Objects (set to 200 each).
This drops to around 18-21 FPS over Munich in PG and low flight level over the city. So maybe “smooth” is the wrong word, though it feels rather good, but it is admittedly not smooth like f.e. Doom :grinning: On the other side I would not be flying so low normally.

With Resolution set down to FullHD, over Munich PG, FPS went up to 26-35, outside Munich 40-45 with same settings.

So I think it is not vodoo magic and within what can be expected. Nevertheless I think it is a good result for a medium pc
especially when I would have expected MUCH more FPS from users running it on 3080/3090 with a much faster i7 or i9…

I did not test now what my FPS show over US cities in PG or in general, but it feels the same to me, as it does with Online players set to ALL or in bad weather conditions.

There have been a few areas of course which almost melt my system, like London (at least when it was released) - but I have read the same from 3090 users. It is better now by far, but still more sluggish than other cities, so I have to go down in resolution for that area (or turn of PG and it is on average again). So far, I think it has been the only area besides one PG city in Japan, not sure which it was. For all my other flights the settings deliver good results (as above probably) and I do not have any CTD. And I do not fly that often close over PG cities. Without PG, the FPS stay in the range of 30-40 FPS and up to 50 FPS in Full HD. In more remote areas without so many city object, FPS might get a bit higher, too.

in VR, it is of course a different story. I run it on a Rift S in standard resolution (render scale 100).
I dropped down Anisotrpoic Filtering to 4x instead of 16x .
Contact Shadows and Ambient Occlusion are OFF (the latter one is eating up a lot of resources on my system and while you can see a difference (especially on dense forests) , it is not that much obvious with the lower resolution. Terrain Shadows and Shadow Masp are down to the default setting 768 / 512. Cockpit refresh rate is set to Low. The remaining settings are still Ultra with Terrain and Object LOD to 100).

With these settings, head movements are completely smooth without any tearing. The FPS averages around 27-30 FPS with 40+ now and then and does not drop below 20 so far - even over Munich PG to my surprise (rolling cache off). I assume, most people get problems with these FPS in VR, but I don´t really bother/noticed (so far). So maybe it´s just me.

However, I set today some texture settings down to medium and can get another 5 FPS on average. And I do not really see that much of a difference within the VR resolution.
Again, when London was released, there was no way to fly that in VR. Now it is ok, but still not enjoyable, at least up and close. Beside that area, flying in VR feels really good (well, at least for me).

So it is no magic, maybe I just can cope with some FPS drops and feel it to be better than it actually is. :grinning:

On the other hand I have read, a 3080 manages around 40-45 FPS in 4k on average, which is not really that high of a jump compared to its price, although I do not remember if his are heavy areas or average ones…

Nevertheless, I am looking forward to test this again in the future, once the availability of the 3080 (TI maybe?) or 3090 is better and prices return to where they have been last Oct/Nov…

Maybe this test puts my feelings and reality back into what makes sense to you.

I keep flying happily even after this test. But maybe I will not use the word “smooth” so lightly…

26

Yeah nice to run 25 frames in VR at low altitude above a city. I get the impression that 1080 Ti performs better than other boards. Also more expensive boards. Wonder why that is.. btw I run anisotropic filtering Off.. I don’t really see the difference.

27

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.