I fly on a 15-inch laptop with an intel core i7 and an RTX 2070. 1920x1080 resolution and the performance is fine. No complaints. Keep giving us better cluds and weather Asobo, don’t downgrade the sim again.
So weird, I’ve turned up my settings and still have more frames than before?
2 Likes
I’ve noticed that before too. My sim runs pretty great on SU9. No complaints even flying the FBW.
I’m also, again, loving using my refresh rate and the sims weirdly labeled sync settings.
I’m finding 120 hrz sync on and 20 FPS (1/3 divider) is sweet 40 FPS cap, kinda useless on the ground for both GA and complex craft but once at reasonable altitude it’s money even in particle producing weather.
Edit: If anyone knows where that setting lives and if we can craft a 1/4 divider that would be tots amaze
Edit2: I could stretch monitors legs at 165 and sync @41
I clearly doing something wrong as my i5-6600k, GTX1070, & 16GB RAM are still moving things along as usual in the 737 with High settings at 1440p. Just flew into and then out of LAX yesterday in some weather too.
2 Likes
Your problem (melted buildings) are caused by bad internet connection or serverproblems.
2 Likes
It’s much nicer this morning their time.
I’ll be quite happy fiddling with my sun visors for a bit, easily entertained.
My super serious pilot moment of the day, heading to Pacific Northwest at FL14 … ponders … Googles Mt Rainier … climbs to FL16
1 Like
I can answer that one. I7-9700k 2070 super with a HP G2
Performance reduced on ‘most systems’? An emotive, evidence-free assertion.
6 Likes
Is about on the same level as the millions and millions of extremely happy users. 
3 Likes
Still inconclusive, as people with no issue dont post, “SU 9, performance is the same! Woot!”
You are right. SU9 is the best release ever. People just posted because they were bored.
Cheers
6 Likes
You’re funny, guess you didnt read the whole thread
1 Like
No, I didn´t read it. I just saw the latest topic in the forum list and thought: hey let´s post something there.
Cheers
2 Likes
For a lot of us it is, I just finished a great flight finishing with a massively poor landing and the over two hour monster never appeared.
I will not lie to you, frame rates on the ground are not optimal but they are functional enough.
Maybe, the The Title of this Topic should be
Please for the love of all MICROSOFT, “direct & facilitate” Asobo to fix these issues.
4 Likes
I have quite similar results to yours indeed. Do you remember which values did you get before SU9? I do. Indeed, before SU8, which was the one that started the performance loss. Before that update, also with cloudy weather and AI traffic, I got 50fps or even 60fps on level flying and around 45fps on ground. That was with photogrametry enabled. Now I have to disable buildings photogrametry to have a decent landing performance on international airports. I can´t say that those updates improved the performance.
Other users are saying the same (posts and all info are in the forum). So, what should we do? Typical answers we get are: mods are causing this, your HW is causing this, drivers are causing this, etc. Anything except “yes, the update caused this”. If you are lucky just enjoy, but many others are not lucky at all. If it was just 10 or 20 people then we could think that´s an isolated issue but there are more than that and they are using both PC and Xbox, do I doubt they all have HW or drivers issues. There are polls after each update but as results are not public we can´t get a clearer picture, but when some people is getting bad results and other people good ones you expect that developers are focused on helping the guys with problems because the others don´t need any fix.
The ground performance starts to degrade below 300ft approx. I don´t know what causes that (maybe collissions are activated) but there´s a clear altitude threshold, and after it you can see how fps start to drop massively. This also happens on vanilla airports and without AI traffic. You can test it yourselves. So I also doubt addons are the guilty ones. Ah, and check how over the ocean or the desert you get exactly the same results. What addons are applicable there? There´s even no photogrametry at all on the ocean except some isolated small islands. Even better: fly over north pole or Antartica. Exactly the same… So, when your system gets similar results no matter which area is used (light or dense scenery) is your system the guilty one or is just that game core can´t deliver better results?
Cheers
4 Likes
My frame rates tend to be about the same taking off from a large airport in a complex plane (MD-82) as they are landing and I’d love to tell you how I tweaked things to make it all work but I didn’t.
27FPS is my basic “this is fine” level and it dips below that full Ultra bump the anisotropic from 6x6 to 8x8 at LAX and PDX but much of that is do to Simple Traffic and the large variety of planes I see.
In GA at KBOS I do a bit better but as soon as I’m airborne to any extent I’m hitting my frame cap at 40FPS
(edit: flying through a thunderhead will reduce frames to mid 30s)
In game sync on, refresh rate at 120hrz FPS lock set on 20 (which really means 1/3 shh it’s a secret) for 40fps lock which is plenty for most sync options.
All screens taken from completed flights today btw
FlyTampa’s KBOS
Edit2: I have to add my local airport KBVY was notoriously bad as I would see 27 FPS in the stock Cessna until I got closer to Boston and KBOS, here I’m seeing a 9fps improvement.
As I got over Salem,Ma I would see it climb into the 30s , here I’ve got 40fps and a smidge of headroom
1 Like