Your video links don’t even show VR!
Show me you running in VR with a decent frame rate and then I might believe you!
I didn’t say it did. For the second time.
Hey everyone. I am a fps junkie. I love by games at 144fps…that’s why i bought 3080 and 9900k. This flight sim…i mean, wasnt it obvious it will never go 90fps on any machine when even 3090 would not push this in 2d 4k? There was no way this would run natively smoothly. On the other hand - i gotta admit that 45aws, heck even 30aws seems really okay for the flying. I gave up and just accepted this. And i am having fun 
i am running an ancient cv1 woth a crazy stupid resolution, but still it taxes the pc like crazy 
but once again - i’ve managed my expectations as it was obvious it will just not perform better
2 Likes
Hello all,
I have been reading this thread as I also play in VR (on a Lenovo Explorer)… I suspect @Greekanadian that you have a software issue ; because my configuration is far less efficient than yours and I can achieve a playable frame rate.
I have a brand new 10700K, a GTX1070 and 32Gb Ram. Obviously, my GTX is at 100% load, but the VR is still enjoyable assuming you don’t want to fly at 100ft.
Considering your configuration, you should obtain something playable !
What I have noticed is that the game (or DX11 ?) loads mainly the first two processors while the rest remains idle. As AMD is relying more on the number of cores, it may have an impact, but not that big.
For me, as native WMR configuration, all I tried to change on OpenXR had a “degrading” effect… the best I get is using the default VR settings and increasing of one step texture res and terrain res.
All this make me think your issue should be mainly on software side.
It seems very heavily dependent on the aircraft you choose as well. The only aircraft that work really well for me are ones that don’t have EFIS. That appears to be a known bug but really becomes apparent in VR.
Then there seemsto be levelsof bad among the electronic instrument planes. A smaller turbo prop or something similar runs well enough to be playable. OTOH something like the 747 is a horrible stuttery disaster over a major city. I have a fairly high end system too (3900x and 3090).
1 Like
So I played around last night with how I’m opening the game and found some irregularities that I can’t replicate again, here is the process I did.
Specs
8700k
16gig 3200mhz
2080s
First i am using the 446.14 nvidia drivers which helped with the spikes but was still just buried in the red at 30 fps.
Now last night came home switched from newest drivers because I was playing cyber punk to the 446.14.
Started steam vr
Launched fs2020 and went through menus and launched into game on runway.
Dev console enabled
Cntrl+tab to vr and bam 45 fps in the yellow not in red like before but the fs2020 fps counter in dev console was enabled and in my right upper eye.
I flew a little while like that everything felt great compared to 30 fps and red.
Now I cntrl+tab back to disable the fps counter and once back in vr absolute garage framerate, jumping from 30 to 0.
So I close everything fire it back up with dev console enabled with fps counter and back to 45 fps and consistent.
Then I tried to close everything down and disabled dev console. I had bad framerates since no matter what combination I do even enabling the dev console it’s bad now. I have tried recreating this multiple times with no luck.
I was wondering if anyone else has experienced something similar.
I completely disagree. All I build are AMD systems. For myself and for family and friends. All of them work great in anything we throw at them. Including any FS we have ever owned.
1 Like
I don’t want to enter the AMD / Intel war… I have been thinking to this for a looong time before deciding for myself. But the question is more “how many cores / threads is the game using ?”…
Knowing that one only core is more efficient on Intel processors, they are better for games that are not able to balance their load on all the cores / threads. Looking at stats sites, it seems it is the case for most of the actual games (related to DX11 ?).
For having done different tests to check my processor temperatures, I can tell you that FS2020 really loads 2 cores ; which will give better performances on Intel (at equal price).
This being said, I can understand a comment like @anon17491698’s as he probably ran into the issue I am explaining here.
Considering that I built this PC almost for the sole purpose of playing flight simulator 2020 in VR, and the lackluster and very disappointing performance even on very high end hardware despite following guides ( which did improve performance somewhat ) I will be selling off or returning all the hardware that I bought for this system because I just don’t need it for anything else.
Based on what I’ve seen here in order to have an acceptable level of performance and visuals for me personally in a VR flight simulator I will need at least 3x the performance that I’m getting from an RTX 3080 and an AMD 5800X. This level of performance is just purely unacceptable, as well as disappointing.
So looks like I will purge all of this from my mind and come back to it in 2022.
1 Like
I’m sorry. I know the frustration. Maybe give TrackIR a shot. Works brilliantly for me. If I had your setup and was getting garbage performance I’d be ■■■■■■, too. But really, I’d give an Intel machine a shot. My personal feeling is that you’d get what you’re looking for with it. I’ve been down this rabbit hole, and I was convinced my Ryzen machine would be awesome. It is. For a work desktop.
Really sorry, man, I get it. I really do get your frustration.
Intel machine really isn’t going to solve the VR performance issues.
Current Hardware no matter which “team” just is not capable of providing an adequate level of performance on VR for this game.
Thank you for the suggestion however I only have 24" displays add I have no intention of going out and buying bigger ones and using track-IR. It’s just not worth it.
I am a (bush and seaplane) pilot in real life but am currently out of work due to coronavirus, so not only was I hoping I could have a lot of fun cruising around, I wanted to use it as a training tool and something to keep my skills up. Without VR, it just isn’t possible. I could likely make do with XPlane11, but I just cannot get over how terrible that game looks, visually.
1 Like
I run it on a 32” screen, mostly VFR, I’m a real pilot as well, and TrackIR is incredibly immersive. Certainly enough to keep your skills up.
TrackIR does seem like it would be a good compromise to VR, however with my monitor size it just isn’t really worth it, and I don’t want to buy a larger one. If I had my 55" TV with me right now, maybe it would be worth it, but not with these small monitors.
I tried running FS2020 with dual monitors by changing the driver settings to wrap-around, but it looked terrible because my monitors are not the same resolution. They’re the same size, but one is 1080p and the other is 1440. Because of this, when enabling the wrap-around it forces the 1440 monitor to 1080p, making everything look pretty bad, especially text. (not just in flight sim)
I was so set on FS VR to be this awesome experience that would let me fly again, so it’s really disappointing that today’s hardware just isn’t up to the task. I went overkill on what I would typically buy thinking it would be enough, but it’s not.
I have no business spending this kind of money when I am unemployed so I am just going to get rid of everything and upgrade when its actually worth it and I’m hopefully employed…we really need a functioning vaccine before summer so I can get back to my seasonal flying jobs. Sigh.
I’m SO GLAD I did not pay scalper prices for a Reverb G2 like I really was considering, lol.
You’ll be back flying by summer. Vaccines are on the way. I know of a handful of people who’ve gotten them already. I really empathize with you. This has turned our worlds upside down, some of us more than others, through no faults of our own. I just fly for fun, not professionally, but I absolutely cannot wait to be sitting in the back with a professional like yourself up front, on my way somewhere fun again, and I know I’m not alone. Hang in there man.
Thanks, appreciate that. I haven’t been behind the yoke since October last year because I made the, in hindsight, bad decision of leaving my job to go traveling over the Canadian winter expecting to get a new job or worst case go back to my old job when spring rolled around.
Then the good ol 'rona happened and there WERE NO flying jobs when I got back 
…
But there was no way I could have known any of that was going to happen so I try not to beat myself up about it too much.
Hope you can get flying too!
I think as others have said across numerous threads and message boards, GPU and headset are the main red herrings here.
The problem is (any you see this clearly if you put the frame counter from MSFS developer mode on) the sim is limited by the main thread. The sim itself uses very few threads. So brute speed of your main CPU core is the main determining factor.
I have an I9-9900K o/c’d to 5.2 GHz and a 3080 with 32GB RAM running off an Evo 960 M.2
With low graphics settings I get 25-30 fps in built up areas and up to 40fps at altitude or in low density areas. Changing the settings to high does not change this. When I look at a graph of GPU utilization after my flight it is never above about 70%.
A lot of people are hoping that DX12 or XBox development will resolve this. Asobo have already said that DX12 will only marginally affect performance.
The sad truth is that due to the unpredictability of user activity, computer ‘games’ are not well-suited to being multi-threaded like other applications like 3D rendering. This is why mutli-core performance benchmarks are always done on something like blender. However it is certainly true that other sims like X-Plane and DCS have done a better job of using multiple cores than Asobo has on MSFS
So the reason why most games run with better graphics on a 3080 than a 3070 is because there GPU is the limiting factor and a better GPU will give higher quality visuals and or better FPS. The CPU has far less to do in your average game than in a complex sim like MSFS.
This is not great news for us simmers. We will have to hope for 30GHz single core CPU’s to leverage the most out of modern GPUs, for MSFS in VR at 60+ FPS at least. Imagine the cooling needed for that. Liquid nitrogen, I think
1 Like
@Greekanadian, try disabling SMT in your BIOS. I have an 5950x and it worked wonders for me after I got the tip. Also going back to NVIDIA 457.30 was helpful to remove stuttering. Hope it works for you too.
1 Like
A small point of accuracy, Xplane doesn’t use multi-core technology. Dunno about DCS.
1 Like
Thank you for the correction. I wasn’t 100% certain, but I thought it did.
Interesting though that two complex simulations can perform so differently when they are coded using similar single-threaded CPU approach and GPU is not a factor - which as far as I can tell it isn’t.
Perhaps, given that the differences are so much more obvious in VR it is just that Xplane VR has been around for longer and the Asobo one will improve with time and refinement.
However, given the overall quality of MSFS I am surprised that Asobo would release an enhancement that is all but unusable by a significant proportion of their VR audience, and requires a lot of tweaking and trial and error. People (including me!) have spent hours trying out different suggestions.
The only ones that made any difference for me using a Rift S have been making sure the OpenXR registry key is correct (bizarrely, mine pointed to Steam, so SteamVR would run even though I bought the sim as a standalone through MS Store) and opting into Oculus beta drivers.
I mean, this was in beta wasn’t it? Be interesting to hear from anyone who was in the VR beta programme (there is a guy on YouTube, but he only has fantastic things to say about it)
1 Like
@ Greekanadian,
Please consider purchasing Aerofly FS2 on Steam (on sale for $40 ). You will see not only top quality aircraft and many areas of scenery that are as accurate as MSFS2020. The performance of FS2 in VR is 3 to 4 times faster than MSFS2020 - it’s fairly common to get 90Hz (FPS) performance. I run it on Intel 9700K+Nvidia RTX2070 and my Dell G5 Laptop (all AMD - 4800H CPU and 5600M GPU ) with both my HP Reverb G1 and Quest2 - and with either ASW or Steam Reprojection (if needed in complex areas )get very smooth, stutter free performance. Visually, you will have to give up the beautiful clouds of MSFS2020 but for flight training fluidity (smoothness), it can’t be beat. It supports both joystick-HOTAS and just using hand controllers for the cockpit switches and knobs. Since it is on Steam, you can buy it, install it, and give it back after less than two hours of testing if you don’t like it.
I have several flight sims (P3D, IL-2, XP11, DCS…) but if I want to check out any VR flight experiences, I always compare them to Aerofly FS2 for sheer high FPS performance. I see your need to keep your skills sharp while waiting to return to real life flying. I am pretty good at performance tweaking ( I am constantly reading these forums ) and I am only getting about 35FPS with MSFS2020 - but it is really visually beautiful. For your purposes, you might do well with Aerofly FS2. Don’t give your hardware back until you try it.
1 Like