I get (barely) more the 30 FPS in similar settings with a better system. It actually depends on the plane for me. Example would be my g91 gets 60+fps out of the same airport/flight plan that the Vertigo mod plane can barely do 35 FPS.
edit Apparently avionics incur a significant FPS hit.
Designed that way or not, <60 is visually god-awful for me. I personally don’t think 30fps is acceptable in 2021. That said, I appreciate your response.
edit 2 For anyone reading this chronologically, I have solved my FPS woes! See below.
Have you EVER honestly experimented with that ? Suppose you let someone else set it and then switch off your on screen counter… say at 45Fps, or 55Fps then you really notice the difference between the two settings ? Just try it out, don’t go judge MSFS on a FpS-counter you keep watching, you’ll condition yourself to be unsatisfied all the time. Just look at your screen.
Fair question – I think I have! I only started counting my FPS when I noticed a visual lag in the simulator. From what I can see, I start seeing a difference around 40fps or lower.
When I started MSFS I had the counter up all the time. As I run low spec hardware, it kept below 20 most of the time. For 2-3 months I really started fine tuning… settings gave 3 frames, 4 frames… I was freaking all night with settings, instead of flying and looking around. Then I decided 15Fps will do for me (I’m an old man hehe) and switched off the SDK counter. Within 2 days I was flying and taking pictures. And yes, sometimes it’s bad… I avoid London and Amsterdam. It won’t fly easily. But I’m definitely NOT setting up that silly counter again watching performance all the time. You get mad
I don’t usually look at my fps, but you inspired me to check. This was in the Just Flight Piper Arrow with the GTN750.
I forgot that I had it limited to 30fps, so I’ve been capped at that. My GPU usage stays around 70%.
I bumped my frame cap to 60fps, which allowed me to get 45fps on the ground, and 50fps in the air. (I only went to about 1,000ft) The down side is my GPU was pegged at 100% the whole time. I can’t confirm if it was placebo effect, but it did feel slightly better. I don’t like my GPU being pegged, so I put it back to 30fps. It’s not quite noticable enough for me.
I’m obviously GPU limited. My CPU stayed around 30%, my ram at 50%, and my VRAM at 70%, regardless of the 30 or 60 cap. Other unrelated programs and chrome tabs were running during this test)
As I previously mentioned, when the sim first launched, I was able to get 50fps on Ultra 1440p while flying around NYC. That didn’t last long. (Note: The above numbers were not in NYC.) I need a new GPU, and it’s the worst time to need one😅
As someone who’s been flight simming since '82 and has used virtually every flight sim in that time i have to say I’ve never enjoyed a sim as much as FS2020. Is it perfect? No. Is it finished? No. Is it the best time i’ve ever had flying GA? ■■■■ right it is!
I couldn’t be happier with it and the way the project is going.
I run a mid end machine (R5 3600, 2060Super, 32GB ram) and it runs at 30FPS locked, 1080p Ultra settings in almost every situation i throw at it, and thats with over 200GB of addons in the Community folder, so absolutely no complaints about performance. ( I have no interest in flying passenger jets… i realise performance with those is going to be considerably worse)
All i want to see now is some A2A quality planes and much better mesh for a lot of the world and i’ll be more than happy for the next 10 years or so. The next x-plane will have to be something extraordinary to pull me away from this platform now.
I like the sim on one hand, but on the other hand there are to many issues that need to be resolved.
I’ve bought the large disc version, but there are so many ’ hand crafted aiport’ flaws that i ask myself what pictures, maps or other things they have used for it. Also still a lot of INOP buttons in the default airplanes or faulty settings and weird setup and checklists.
On one side the graphics are crazy beautiful. On the other hand i could set almost everything on ultra in the beginning and it was doable fps wise. Now i have some settings even on low. The difference between the launch and the last update is crazy. Some graphics of houses when flying between 500-1000 ft look liked bombed cities. This, while Asobo has a challenge following some star poi at 500ft.
And more stutters then before, although the fix after WO3 helped a bit. Also the multiplayer, live weather flaws are still here.
So mixed at the moment. On one side the best flightsim there is at the moment graphic wise, on the other side to many graphical, fps and ctd errors
and on a personal note i still hate the takeoff for every small airplane for keyboard players. Movement and wind challenges ok, but this is really not as in a real plan (own experience) weaving left and right like this
My specs are good but not state of the art. Pentium i7, 32gb RAM, GTX 1660ti. FPS is not a problem. To be honest, the human eye shouldn’t be able to tell the difference between, say, 35FPS and 60FPS. Film and video have traditionally been in the 30’s, I believe, so if I get “film or video” quality out of my performance I am not going to complain. Like I said, my gripe is that every sim to date had (or has) planes that use and need advanced avionics. ATC, AP, ILS intercept… to release a product in the year 2020 that can’t compete in those areas is not a true flight sim by modern standards, no matter how awesome the graphics. So, I will not be using it as much as I used to use FS9 until that part catches up. Like many have said, going back to other sims, given the visual realism, is not something I care to do. Here’s hoping…
edit I have figured out the big culprits and solved my performance issues in this sim. I am so happy!
As posted in another thread:
Two settings have had a dramatic impact on performance for me.
The first one:
Options → Graphics → Glass Cockpit Refresh Rate - Setting this to low had a huge impact on my performance.
The second one:
Options → Camera → Chase Camera → Instrument Heads-Up Display - Setting this to off gave me more than 10 FPS. I noticed that if you pop into third person with this on, the meters take a significant toll, even when you are back in the cockpit as they stay loaded.
With these two adjustments, I can run everything else on Ultra. My slowest cockpit (t-45) gets 50+ FPS with the avionics on, my Vertigo cockpit gets 70-75 FPS with avionics on.
edit 2 Just to keep FusionHorse151’s reply in context, I initially stated I had no idea why the changes had such a big impact on my FPS. Turns out the change that did it was the glass cockpit refresh rate.
probably because we have no idea which features and settings are GPU assigned and which are CPU assigned. This is why the stock method for determining the best settings for YOUR machine should always begin with selecting the lowest in every category - then inching them up one by one until you begin to see your rig struggle. Then going back and playing with specific settings that matter the most to you…again, until you find you and your machine’s ‘happy place’
I know, but on traveldays/hotel evenings , i dont want to bring a controller with me as extra weight. Also play the sim on a laptop which overall is ok, but not the best offcourse
@TMarvoloRiddle The quality of photogrammetry heavily depends on the speed of the internet connection. Until recently I was running on a pretty slow internet service by today’s standards, but good enough for my needs until I got MSFS. With that setup the photogrammetry looked pretty much as you described, particularly over cities like London, horrible like the aftermath of a nuclear strike.
There is no cable/fibre internet access in my neighbourhood so the best option available is hybrid DSL/LTE, with max advertised download speed of 80Mbit/sec. So I recently upgraded to that. What I actually get is an average of around 60Mbit/sec with a low of 40 and the highest I have seen is 78.5Mbit/sec. Still a lot better than the 12-15 Mbit/sec I had before.
The difference was like night and day. Now the quality is like the picture from @N405HT . If I fly really low over a dense city I still occasionally get the bandwidth too low message and some bits of bad rendering if my connection speed drops below about 50Mbit/sec, but if I click ignore things continue just fine.
I think a sustained internet speed of 50Mbit/sec is the minimum needed for photogrammetry to work. I should mention that I also upgraded memory from 16 to 32 GB which helped things along.
I am running an Alienware m15 laptop pushing a Samsung Odyssey G9 49inch ultra wide monitor. Laptop spec is i7-8750H cpu and GTX1060 gpu, so nothing special in that department, and I am not having the problems that some people with RTX 30 series seem to be having. My graphics settings are a mix of mostly ultra and high.
Thanks for your reply. I am really interested in getting hardware control of the Garmin G1000 in particular, with less reliance on the mouse, particularly regarding the G1000 soft buttons and rotary encoders.
I currently have reasonable control over the autopilot and radio/nav functions with the Logitech multi panel, radio panel, and SPAD.neXt, but have yet to find an acceptable economic solution to things like the map and flight planning functions of the MFD. Last time I checked these features were not addressable with external hardware. Maybe things have moved forward since then.
I am also running out of buttons on my yoke and throttle for other functions. So I will look deeper into the items you are using to see if they can achieve what I am looking for.
You’re right, I do enjoy the simulator regardless of the hard numbers.