The point of this flight was to see if the ground detail still improves in smaller planes after my TBM experiences left me wondering if all aircraft types now suffer from the airliner issues. I can report that the discrepancy persists; my performance improved to such a degree that I almost fired up the airshow assistant for some Aldinga Airshow re-enactments before I came to my senses and realized that the memory management would probably have to dial down the terrain quality if I actually tried to have some fun in the game. Solid warbird experience nonetheless, perhaps Iāll check the FlyingIron planes next.
Default A321
iniBuilds EGGW - Drzewiecki EPWR
In default liveries the A321 has survived multiplayer traffic in the London airports I use most frequently: Iāve tested Gatwick, Stansted, and Lutonāall poorly optimized trash by iniBuilds. The main observation here is that the Bravoairspace liveries cause black screens on these airports in SU5. I didnāt use drone cam on the ground so I wonder if itās those cockpit enhancements he added that cost too much memory. The sound cut out over Amsterdam a couple of times, but I donāt really mind as the visual improvements from city update 14 more than make up for it (PG required of course).
Best performance Iāve had on a Drzewiecki airport. The graphics on approach were substantially better than what I remember from SU4. Now, when I say that, itās important to keep in mind that all those SU4 flights were with ATC. Iād imagine that even though filing a flight plan was possible back then, the same graphics degradation still occurred, which could possibly explain the difference Iām seeing. My only real complaint is that half the terminal disappears in drone camera view, even when the plane is parked at the gate. Thankfully, in walkaround mode the interior was visible, making satisfying screenshots (uwu) possible. Good stuff so far (1.7.28.0).
I just tested the new beta build, and it did improve performance somewhat.
However - using PMDG 737 (which is very stable and well optimized) on a smaller third party airport yields an immediate CTD upon loading in to walk around. I tested this several times, clearing rolling cache between flights.
As iām not sitting on actual performance data on the xbox, I would have to go by āfeelā, and it āfeelsā like a 5% improvement over beta .28.
The reason I am saying it feels a little better is because the avionics warning/CTD came a little later than the previous build.
However SU 4 āfeltā 30-40% more stable than this, so itās still far worse than the sim used to be. (It was great:')
SU 4:
High fidelity 3rd party aircraft
High fidelity 3rd party airport (large)
Flight plan filed with ATC
Photogrammetry ON
Every other setting DEFAULT
= No issues at all, ever really.
SU 5 .30 build:
The following features will usually (90-100%) of the time cause CTD or avionics failure:
Any third party aircraft, or even a default complex airliner
Any third party airport
Using ATC in any way (filing FPLN causes immediate CTD)
The only way to use any complex aircraft is to disable virtually every single feature of MSFS, and only depart from a smaller default (non-handcrafted) airfield. And yet its 50/50 if I will get an avionics failure.
High graphics, RC 16GB, Live Weather, Real Time traffic
Thrustmaster peripherals
YSSY - YPPH (Fly Tampa / Orbx)
Surprisingly, the sim didnāt experience memory crash after ATC FP submission. Good flight end to end. Some minor stuttering on take off and minor erratic aircraft movements when autopilot was switched off on final approach. But this is known issue with A321 (for me anyway and prior to SU5).
Jetstream was epic, combined with poor fuel planning, we barely made it with only 1.5 tonnes of fuel left. At one point while flying across the bight, the headwind reached 172 kt, (FL380) and ground speed was 290 kt, so I descended from FL380 to FL280. Quick check of the flightradar24 and real aircraft on east west run were doing the same adjustment.
I flew a test flight with a 737-800 PMDG with build 1.7.30 from Lfml to Limj, and I didnāt notice any improvement in stability or fluidity. Upon arrival, I stuttered during landing and taxiing to the gate, displaying an insufficient memory message before shutting down the aircraft. This never occurred with 1.7.28 on the 737-800.
The LOD has worsened significantly in photogrammetry, and if the goal of the update was to lower the LOD for performance, we were also capable of achieving this by adjusting the graphics settings.
It seems to me that this is a trial-and-error approach without any targeted structural interventions.
Sorry, but weāre not there yet.
Avionics stayed on but stuttering on the airport was out of control, particularly when turning the plane during taxi. On a positive note, those taxi stutters were exactly like the ones that used to trigger the black screens during no-ATC flights, which could be interpreted as a sign of progress. Tried a vigorous line up to see what would happen, and all I got was choppy performance, no memory warnings. I have at least 3 years worth of grievances with how the KDTW scenery functions in both sims, so all Iām going to say here is that nothing has changed on that front. At KIAH there was improvement in the LOD behavior, similar to what I describe in the next flight. I saw some photogrammetry during climb but itās too early to make judgments.
Hans Hartmann ATR 42-600
Default EGPB - SimulaciĆ³n Extrema EGPA
I didnāt get a single look at the scenery until after shutdown. In any case, the stutters from last flight were thankfully absent this time. The LOD models for the terminal in Kirkwall have been very problematic for me in the past; Iāve only seen the detailed version from the cockpit and standing next to it in walkaround mode, while the drone cam just showed a simplistic box. What made it work now will probably remain a mysteryācould be anything from not using ATC to the ATR being a native plane, or perhaps it really was the new beta that helped. Who knows.
Just Flight Hawk T1
IM Scenery EGXP - IM Scenery EGXH
First instance of a 2024 upgraded airport being an improvement over the 2020 version. The skies were filled with multiplayer aircraft so I kept my distance from London to avoid disappointmentāone of the most effective strategies to limit bad PG loading and CTDs in airliners. No stutters or the usual terrain morphing often seen in this area, just sharp textures everywhere regardless of altitude.
Overall, seems more resistant to memory issues, will test heavier scenery and planes later.
I wanted to repeat the Miami test as it was almost doable in 1.7.28.0, not something impossible like A350 from Heathrow. V Pilot sceneries are so simplistic that I threw in some extra cockpit panning and running around the plane in walk mode, none of which affected performance negatively. Great looking scenery at FL340 and Miami appeared from far away just like in my previous test.
The active runways didnāt have the city in the background for the landing which also was the only way I could get the plane down last time, so I switched to drone and started spinning the camera like a lunatic while the LVFR enhanced city and fantastic photogrammetry was still below the plane during approach. I got some massive stutters out of it, nothing more. Back in the cockpit the frame rate was so stable that the landing ended up being one of my best in this plane.
In the previous build the avionics couldnāt stay on for more than a few seconds at a time, and trying to reach the cargo apron was quite a challenge as the engines kept dying as well. This time, aside from slight stuttering, I was able to finish the job with zero issues. Operating the cargo door is one of my favorite things to do in the sim (I apologize for my perversions), so being able to leave the cockpit without memory warnings is a huge win in my book.
Constantly repeating black screens in 1.7.28.0 versus smooth sailing in 1.7.30.0āflying the A300 to Miami is now possible.
Completed 8 flights with A320N2 using small, medium and large third party airports (but not ultra large airports) YSSY, YMML, YPAD, YPPH, YBLN, EDDK, LIPX, YMHB
Graphics was fully cranked up, live weather, real time traffic. RC16 GB, Two of the eight flights had memory crash after submitting flight plan to ATC but the instruments recovered within a minute and I managed to configure aircraft and have successful flights. All other flights were completed without memory crash.
It is improvement compared to 1.7.28.0 but It still does not feel as good as SU4 where I have not experienced any memory crashes and no stutters whatsoever. There are some minor stutters in 1.7.30.0 (acceptable).
To stress the system a bit more than I normally do I set up a flight with the MS/WT 787-10 from EGLL (to KPHL).
First time with this aircraft and it was a real stutter- show resource heavy āplane compared to the PMDG B777s which are a joy.
We pushed back and stuttered out to RW27R. Departure was stop start with no real impression of speed. Rotation was stutter after stutter as was banking out on the SID.
No Low Memory Warnings but it just shows that whilst we have some really well optimised third party aircraft to work with, some of the stock sim aircraft have not been optimised well - very little if at all.
Yes, the ATC /flight plan through EFB is a major contributor to memory problem. - but so are performance un-optimised aircraft and this experience with a stock airliner came as a bit of a shock to me.
I believe that the 787 suffers the same problem as the 747. As soon as you have more than a page or 2 of waypoints in your FMC flight plan, the sim becomes a slideshow. Long hauls have to be done with the SID and STAR and then only 2 or 3 waypoints in between
Going through the list of failed 1.7.28.0 flights I posted a week ago, this one was completely hopeless back then despite all the concessions Iāve made. The scenery dev used some insane 128K textures which the console struggled to load every time the camera moved, eventually triggering an endless chain of memory warnings after panning in the cockpit during preflight.
The 1.7.30.0 attempt had everything working against it: Morning flight with beautiful play of light and shadow, Bravoairspace livery, ambitious scenery add-on, backtracking the runway to a 180 line up towards the airport buildingsā¦ the list goes on. Common sense dictates that this should have resulted in the most forceful CTD the simming world has ever seen, but instead, I got one of those jaw-dropping unicorn flights that were only possible in the early days of msfs 2020 (if it miraculously didnāt crash).
It seems almost like the big panning stutters somehow protected me from the black screens I used to encounter in similar situations, but at the same time Iām seeing less delayed cockpit and scenery loading than before. Itās as if more stuff is cached while also preserving memory, though I have no way to properly test it. The mountains I saw in Chile were enough to convince me that at least the non-photogrammetry areas have not been downgraded to achieve the improved stability. I was looking at screenshots of crossing the Alps in early msfs 2020 and Iām still deeply impressed.
āIs it time?ā
āIs it time.ā
āIs it.ā
āIT IS.ā
Well, perhaps not quite yet. Maybe A350 or triple 7 next.
100% this
Iāve had 12 or so consecutive successful long hauls in both the 787 and 747 in career mode by removing all waypoints prior to mission load
This is my ultimate SU5 workaround and Iām sure it cascades to most airliners too.
1 straight line, but atleast passengers arrive safely and I get paid.
This is impossible when there are 10+ waypoints in SU5
I completed yet another LIMC-LFMN test flight with a Pmdg Boeing 737-800, this time on MSFS 2020 with real-time weather and traffic, and I must say I was very impressed with the level of detail.
Aside from the fluidity and stability, Iād say the LOD is very close to that of 2024 SU5 1.7.30, which in my opinion significantly lowered the visual quality compared to build 1.7.28, evidently due to the memory saturation constantly reported by the console.
No problems with ATC in 2020, and no slowdowns or stutters.
This should be the standard for 2024 as well.
Weāre confident that everything will be properly optimized for ATC, Asobo aircraft, Inibuilds, landscapes, and airport details without significantly compromising on LOD. Otherwise, 2024 on consoles isnāt worth the cost, given that 2020 already runs very well on Xbox.
Very good analysis.
I tried a flight in MSFS2020 with the PMDG B737-800 and in smoothness and fluidity it felt like a step up from where weāve got to in MSFS2024.
The LOD was close to MSFS2024 SU4 - but not quite reaching the overall quality - and Iād agree with your view that the difference now is negligible - in fact I thought the 2020 ground textures were better in some regardsā¦
In my own view that excellent comparison youāve made shows clearly that degrading the LOD in an attempt to solve the memory issues on Xbox is the wrong approach - and of course, it hasnāt worked at all.
Unfortunately, Iām finding myself doing a lot less flying just lately. The 2 week wait between updates is becoming unbearable. Yes there are slight improvements with each build, but when you do go back to 2020, you then realise what a state 24 is in. 2020 is much smoother in every way and still feels like the upgraded product that 24 was supposed to be. I still canāt believe we are still having such major issues 18 months since release, and lessons donāt seem to have been learnt. SU5 could have just stayed in beta until it was ready, and we could still use SU4, but seemed to be rushed out for whatever reason.
The lack of communication is also very unusual for a game developer. Any other games, people are always kept up to date on progress and potential fixes, and how they are progressing, along with a time frame. All we seem to get is whatever is in the weekly briefing, which is just the same old copy and paste trash!
Thank you for the support.
I would also add that releasing such complex software (MSFS 2024) on consoles, evidently without proper testing and without considering whether the Xboxās memory might be inadequate in both quality and quantity, caused an endless series of problems that were addressed with patches that solved little and damaged stability.
Proof of this is that a year and a half later, weāre still here talking about beta trials and workarounds.
It drives me crazy that some people in various forums recommend flying small planes at small airports to avoid problems!
There are structural deficiencies that need to be addressed at the root by redesigning the whole thing, otherwise weāll never get out of this.
And I donāt even know if the new Xbox will significantly improve the situation.
Those with the PS5 Pro, which is more powerful than the Xbox, have the same problems.
If on a PC to run Msfs 2024 well you need 48 GB of memory between VRAM and RAM, this alone should have been a warning bell.
Test flights 10 and 11 in this beta. As always in SU5.1 graphics fully cranked up, real time weather and traffic. A320N2
This time I picked ultra large airport as a point of origin.
EDDF - LDDU
LDDU - LDZA
The first leg was EDDF - LDDU (EDDF is native scenery part of deluxe version). I was expecting memory crash at EDDF after submitting FP to ATC but surprisingly it held on (60 sec of static and short pauses but it didnāt crash) and the flight was great. A lot of real time traffic on ground as well but some really bizarre traffic movements (known issue). Some minor stuttering (acceptable) while taxing, probably expected with the size of the airport and traffic.
With the second leg LDDU - LDZA the sim wasnāt restarted and I wanted to test performance without exiting. (ended the EDDF-LDDU flight and created new free flight changed flight number and submitted new flight plan). The sim was stuttering especially noticeable on ground low / medium level stuttering throughout the entire session. Iāve flown this route in 1.7.30.0 a couple of times and it is as smooth as, therefore sim exit after each flight session is a must.
Itās nice to read that someone is able to fly without too many problems, but restarting the console after every flight is already a bit of a bummer. The realism and immersion are welcome.
Aside from that, Iām convinced that Microsoft fully realizes that the 2024 product wonāt run as well on both Xbox and PS5 consoles as it should, but for marketing reasons, theyāve forced this software to be used on inadequate hardware.
The hope is that this will force them to refine the product, as they did years ago when hardware was poor (286 or 386 PCs with little RAM and non-existent VRAM).
We donāt expect the performance of a high-end PCāthat would be crazyābut at least stability and an acceptable LOD on a console that we second-tier users, aware of the limitations, can still appreciate given the identical price to the PC version.
That doesnāt seem like a lot to ask.
Go Microsoft and Asobo! We trust in your expertise. Really!
Iāve been religiously restarting the console between flights and doing a full power off at the wall every night as the only way to have consistent performance since I first started flying on 2020 nearly 4 years ago. This is nothing new
Did a great 2 hour flight from Faro to Tenerife in the Asobo 737 max. Smooth from taxiing at Faro to parking at Tenerife. Not the most demanding of airports but I had everything medium, bravoairspace liveries enabled and sent plan to avionics and atc with the efb. Great scenery around Faro, easy jet, jet 2 and numerous others parked up. Quite lively as a few planes landed. Excellent approaching Tenerife with cloud cover over the mountains
