Anyone else still having trouble with fps in cockpit? Can’t get above 23 fps with a new rtx3080 everyting up to date please let me know settings are on custom but most at high
1 Like
Wait till SU5. So many posts about this.
1 Like
Ok thanks man
2 Likes
Common problem. Annoying I know
1 Like
23 is very low for that setup though. Is it in a heavy plane (A320, 787, DC-6 etc) in a busy place (big airport, photogrammetry city)?
If so, turn down the glass cockpit refresh rate to begin with. That should improve things a bit. After that, the LOD settings (the two sliders) seem to be the heaviest.
Also make sure that you don’t have performance-killing software running in the background.
VMs (including Docker and WSL) can also be eat some CPU. If you don’t know what they are, they’re not an issue – you’d have to install and run them yourself.
I certainly agree on waiting for SU5 which is made to improve this issue (since you’re most likely heavily CPU bottlenecked).
Thanks for the reply i fly mostly the 787-10 and before ik had the rtx2070 running like the same fps 27 at the highest in cockpit
I did put the settings on the lowest to check and gained fps for sure but still you don’t play with a 3080 on low fps i’ve put fs2020 as high priority on task manager but didn’t help much and other games i play with no problem at super good fps so i think its indeed the simulator that is problem here
In the menu i have 144 fps but as soon i start in game i have the same story 23/27
1 Like
Few games are as CPU-heavy as MSFS though – the issue in the thread I linked has never caused problems for me in any other game. It’s possible there’s some sort of issue with Acronis and MSFS specifically, but my guess is that it’s simply affected more heavily because of the CPU bottleneck in MSFS, whereas almost all games are GPU bottlenecked.
Still, hopefully SU5 will improve the situation for you (and the rest of us, too)!
1 Like
Gpu usage is as we speak 60%
What screen resolution and renderscale are you using and what ram do you have?
Fortunately SU5 is out in a few days and from what I heard they are moving the cockpit stuff to another thread.One of the reasons I don’t often fly glass cockpit aircraft.Also the 3700x is not the best CPU to pair with a 3080.Not to say its bad but you loose out on some performance.
1 Like
32gb vram 1920x1080 144hz renderscale 100 i tought
1 Like
Those are really poor frame rates for your hardware, I’m surprised, although a 3700x isn’t fantastic (I’m only on a 3800X myself) it should do better. In energy options, if it’s there make sure you have AMD high performance mode enabled rather than just the Windows one and I presume you have an XMP ram profile in bios enabled. Kill anything running in the background including Dragon centre, GForce experience etc. as you could use the spare overhead and finally this is the best tuning advice I’ve found on the forum, take particular note of those settings that are CPU limiting.
I stumbled upon this when I’m getting low fps on my RTX 2080 Ti. After I made the changes suggested there, my FPS was restored back to a stable 30s.
I think this is a bit of a generalisation. It al depends on the resolution and quality settings. I suspect that at 4K Ultra even a 3080 GPU will still be the limiting factor. I run a 3700X with a RTX 2060 at 4K, high setting and typically get around 25fps with the GPU essentially permanently at 100% and the CPU at around 15% with still a lot of room on the main thread.
Your stressing you videocard at 144FPS your using all resouces to get that.
I have locked my FPS at 30 in nVidia Control Panel and my MSFS runs very smooth on a 1070 GTX.
Remember human eye cannot see past 25FPS so why is it most people keep chasing FPS.
1 Like
This simply is not true. It is a myth promoted by monitor sales pitches in the 90’s. It very much depends on the individual. Some are comfortable at lower frame rates, and some not. I would argue it also depends on the game also. MSFS does not require high frame rates. Where as a first person shooter requires quicker reactions, therefore the early you receive information the better your reaction time. Competition FPS gamers would be very disgruntled having to play on less than 144hz.
1 Like
That’s untrue. The human eye see infinite number of FPS as it’s an organic sensor. It’s actually your brain that’s either fast enough to process everything you see, or ignore a few details. You can train your brain to process everything you see. So when you’re on 30 vs 144 FPS, you can tell the difference and your brain will process every frame you see. So different people will see them differently depending on how well their brain process them. It is however, does have depreciating scale the higher FPS you go. Eventually, your brain will ignore a lot of detail at very very high FPS.
That being said, MSFS should be enough at 30 fps. Even though you can tell a difference between 30 to more FPS, for MSFS it’s not that needed.
Yep. I can easily notice (without a FPS counter, obviously) when my framerate in a first-person game drops from 165 to 100 fps. It’s very easy, in fact, just move the camera quickly and notice how choppy it is in comparison to 165 fps. Saying the human eye can’t see above 25 (or 30, or 60) fps is absurd and very easily disproven.
The reason 24 fps is fairly fluid in movies is that they have natural motion blur, and there’s no user input. Games don’t have either of those two things helping out (the motion blur setting doesn’t quite do the same thing).