Read the post no matter the settings VRAM does not change Also what are the minimum hardware requirements for MSFS24?
Radeon RX 5700 or GeForce GTX 970
Heres the recommended: Radeon RX 5700 XT or GeForce RTX 2080
so your saying that my 4070ti is no better than this LOL
Then the original poster has a massive problem or has wasted his money in your opinion by lowering settings for 50 series
The point is, msfs 2024 never did this. Both 2020, and 2024 when first launched i never saw it go over 8.5 gb of ram. Now it is. So no. Dont lower your setting for something that wasnt there, and say oh well. Its ok. No. Fix it !
it seems there is a memory leak in sim update 2
sim update 1 worked fine before
I’ve got Ryzen 7800X3D, 32GB DDR5 6000 RAM, RTX4080s and I’m running it all on high graphics with a few monitors to run instruments in my airbus fixed base sim and SU3 is running smooooth!
I guess it’s all down to system optimisation and having been in this flight sim game for over 15 years….i guess experience helps also! Good luck everyone
My intial impressions are I would agree with you. But, it also seems like they increased graphical fidelity as well. Things look a lot better maxed out IMO. Clouds look better, textures look better, TLOD / OLOD is better, shadows in the flightdeck / cabin are better. So it seems like they maxed out the settings some more with what we already thought was smoother in SU2. I hope they keep the graphics and make it a bit smoother! 4090, 13900k, 64ram.
Updated to SU3 Beta this morning and did some testing. I have a 6750XT with 12GB of VRAM.
Spawned at a small, handcrafted airport with a GA, performance looked alright with about 70% RAM consumption.
Then tried the Fenix A319 at the same airport and I got 13 to 15 GB of VRAM use out of 10GB available. Very high GPU frame times and 15 to 20 FPS.
Ended the flight and then reloaded the GA from the first test at the same exact airport and this time I had an increased VRAM usage, around 100%, with degraded FPS.
It seems like there is also an issue with how VRAM is released after ending a flight.
Hi mate,
Same for me with 4090 and TLOD 10 and Texture Low…..SU1 I had everything ultra, TLOD 300 and no fps drop 
Agree, the same for SU3 beta….3 fps with 4090 TLOD 10….
There is and always has been a VRAM issue. I only fly VR so use opwnXR toolkit to just to give frame timings etc and almost always have this on. VRAM is like fuel, goes up as soon as needed but does not go down again when settings reduced. Going out of VR and back in again often got it back but not now, the only thing that will shift it is a reload.
I have also noticed that CPU rdr time has generally increased by about 25% since 1.4.18.0 so started with 1.4.20.0, surely the whole point about beta testing is to only issue what has been tested so how can there be any difference between 18 and 20, they should be identical. This isn’t a resources issue, my CPU usage is down, available headroom on very core at all times and average power draw is only about 60 watts, used to be nearer 70. RX9070XT never hitting anywhere near 100% either.
Agree, GPU, CPU and RAM usage is pretty down, but on ground after 10 minutes, bum fps drop to 3 with GPU latency 200-400 ms, its crazy despite I have 4090 and I7-14th
It also appears that Shared VRAM never gets cleaned up. So, tried a complex scenery and FBW A320, ended up with filled dedicated VRAM (8 GB), and 3.5GB in shared VRAM (totally 11.5). After ending the flight, dedicated VRAM dropped to 4.5 GB while shared VRAM sticked at 3.5 and only dropped to 3.2 GB after a long time of waiting. So it seems there are serious memory management issues going on.
That could also be an explanation why lost performance either never recovers or only recovers very slow.
If that were the case I’m not sure why my vram usage lower compared to the SU2 yet my 5800X3D was running close to maxed causing stutters when panning.
Check this thread and the last comment. Performance issues related to RdrThread - #3 by unequity
Agree with this. The sim still seems to run smoother with Rebar off, especially in situations where VRAM is being hit hard.
Def no expert in this domain… FS has been cpu limited since the dawn of FS so that seems like no surprise to me. All I can say is the sim looks better to me compared to SU2. I’d have to do a lot more testing to say anything specifically, but many elements that were lacking in SU2 and before seem to be heading in a much better direction. I used the default a330 and that actually looked and flew pretty well. A few stutters on takeoff, but I also have everything maxed as much as possble. Again need to do a lot more testing.
Because Asobo set 12GB VRAM as the “ideal” spec in their system requirements. Even 8GB of VRAM is what Asobo has as the recommended spec.
If you have to lower your settings, such as texture resolution to medium or even low, then that’s far from ideal or recommended.
The problem is Asobo also doesn’t specify which settings they consider to be ideal or ever recommended? Or even what FPS number is ideal or recommended?
I discovered yesterday (mainly because I looked instead of just clicking) that in Nvidia inspector there are 4 options for ReBar; Enabled, Disabled and then two other game specific profiles, one of which includes FS2024
Having selected the FS24 specific profile the VRAM is behaving much better and I’m able to play with ReBar on.
I might just have been lucky, but worth a look maybe.
I have a RTX 4070 (only 8GB VRAM), playing with LOD and OLOD 100, no traffic (ships, planes, everything off), default scenery, default C172, empty community folder, 1440p, and all I get is pop-ups to reduce graphics settings to free up VRAM, same with and without DLSS. I’m not gonna bother with this anymore. My computer fulfils the recommended specs, based on that I bought FS2024 and I’m therefore expecting it to run at 1440p with decent performance, especially when staying away from big airports, complex aircraft and large cities…
Have now done to 2d tests, system is i5 13600kf rx9070XT & 32gb RAM stock Ultra 1440p.
On the ground in London City it shows as main thread limited approx 20ms yet the highest thread usage is only approx 65%. Even resetting WH64 to give me the single max level is only 78% which is probably only for a microsecond, maybe the reset of HW64 causing this spike. No wonder it is mainthread limited if it is only using 2/3rds of what is there. Just to confirm this is for the highest single thread, average for the CPU as a whole is nowhere near that.
Just an add on to my VR post that seems odd. in the menu, the box seems about half size and grainy text and in the graphics page, resolution is showing at 100% only circa 1500x 1500 instead of the usual 3200x3100!! In game, it is certainly not running at 1500x1500, it looks normal.
Have also downloaded it all, about 500GB, now takes about 4 mins to load … but now takes ages to load language at 6-7-8% which I never saw before taking about a minute and throughout the process, surely either the drive light or the CPU should be exceedingly active but no, odd quick light flash or 30/40/50% CPU usage. I’m sure it isn’t but one could be forgiven for thinking they wanted to show how much faster the downloading idea was. I can’t see why. Surely the difference should simply be that when it needs base data, it just goes to the ultra quick SSD drive instead of the much slower online servers, it doesn’t need to load more just because it’s there and in Ferrari land, stopping for the odd coffee during the process!
Hope 1.5.2.0 comes soon!!!
That sounds intriguing. I’ll have to try it out sometime. Any idea what exactly it does?