Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Sesquashtoo

The 30-fps Sweet Spot...is A Myth! I've Proved It!

Recommended Posts

Well...for as long as I have been flight simming....I along with everybody else (for the most part..but not everybody...) have believed that if you can obtain a constant 30-40 FPS in a flight simulator...and with the theory of LCD screen-rate refresh rates of around 60 SPS, you could have pretty well, the full stroke of animation within your virtual world.Today...I have absolutely BUSTED that Sacred Cow.RUBBISH!To the reader....please reduce your FS9 to a windowed 5x5 inch up to a 10x10 inch screen...and then WATCH WHAT YOUR FLIGHT CONTROL BRINGS YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!You had better be a much BETTER pilot in your heavy metal approaches with METAR cranking up the heat....for even the slightest control input at 95 plus FPS will have you moving DRASTICALLY off of glide slope, if you let it get away from you. This does NOT HAPPEN at only 30 FPS. Watch at 95 FPS what wind and directional velocity will do to you...at the virtual world processing information to the screen at 100 FPS updates!OMG! I can't wait to have this 'new FPS reality' at full screen on my wide-body! I now have a very serious reason to upgrade...and it's not to only get 30 FPS in ANY sim platform...at my Golden Point. No longer! I want 100 FPS or better. I have seen the Holy Land....... For now it may be at 10 by 10 inches...but..there is absolutely no going back to 30 FPS as satisfactory. Want to see what all my blathering is about? Give it a try...but be warned....with graphic clarity at an all-time high...as well as the BEST ANIMATION in REAL WORLD terms...I have ever seen.....be warned...you might become totally unsatisfied in minutes as to the 30 FPS plateau. 30 FPS does NOT give you the full real-world experience in either FS9 or FSX. This is a myth. You do see much more, interact more...enjoy more...your flight experience at massive FPS performance. Others will debate this. I have seen this and experienced the difference. The debate is over for myself. I want 100 FPS plus, for my flight simming! :) This will now be my new hardware updgrade goal!I am having a ball! LIFE IS GOOD!Cheers!Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hello,I can't disagree .. despite I'm not in position for test it.It's has been already long and heated discussions on many sim's forums .. but yes indeed .. FPS is not only matter of graphic seeing but it's also matter of other datas transmission Regards.bye.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well...for as long as I have been flight simming....I along with everybody else (for the most part..but not everybody...) have believed that if you can obtain a constant 30-40 FPS in a flight simulator...and with the theory of LCD screen-rate refresh rates of around 60 SPS, you could have pretty well, the full stroke of animation within your virtual world.Today...I have absolutely BUSTED that Sacred Cow.RUBBISH!To the reader....please reduce your FS9 to a windowed 5x5 inch up to a 10x10 inch screen...and then WATCH WHAT YOUR FLIGHT CONTROL BRINGS YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!You had better be a much BETTER pilot in your heavy metal approaches with METAR cranking up the heat....for even the slightest control input at 95 plus FPS will have you moving DRASTICALLY off of glide slope, if you let it get away from you. This does NOT HAPPEN at only 30 FPS. Watch at 95 FPS what wind and directional velocity will do to you...at the virtual world processing information to the screen at 100 FPS updates!OMG! I can't wait to have this 'new FPS reality' at full screen on my wide-body! I now have a very serious reason to upgrade...and it's not to only get 30 FPS in ANY sim platform...at my Golden Point. No longer! I want 100 FPS or better. I have seen the Holy Land....... For now it may be at 10 by 10 inches...but..there is absolutely no going back to 30 FPS as satisfactory. Want to see what all my blathering is about? Give it a try...but be warned....with graphic clarity at an all-time high...as well as the BEST ANIMATION in REAL WORLD terms...I have ever seen.....be warned...you might become totally unsatisfied in minutes as to the 30 FPS plateau. 30 FPS does NOT give you the full real-world experience in either FS9 or FSX. This is a myth. You do see much more, interact more...enjoy more...your flight experience at massive FPS performance. Others will debate this. I have seen this and experienced the difference. The debate is over for myself. I want 100 FPS plus, for my flight simming! :) This will now be my new hardware updgrade goal!I am having a ball! LIFE IS GOOD!Cheers!Mitch
---------Mitch-I just tried that with absolutely no change in (Unlimited) FPS. Starting with triple monitors/views, my sys displayed 17-22 fps. Killing views 2 & 3 jumped fps to 35-45 range. ( VIEWS 2 & 3 are partial screen height with popup gauges below and combined, the secondary views use about the same total mon area as main view fwd.) Now with only main view @ 35-45, I reduced View Fwd size to 5x5. Result- absolutely no change to FPS!But here's my phenom! I can detect NO difference in fluidity & smoothness between triple views @ 17 - 22 and single view @ 35 - 45 fps. I wonder if the FS FPS logic doesn't work in my case with triple views?Alex Reid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
---------Mitch-I just tried that with absolutely no change in (Unlimited) FPS. Starting with triple monitors/views, my sys displayed 17-22 fps. Killing views 2 & 3 jumped fps to 35-45 range. ( VIEWS 2 & 3 are partial screen height with popup gauges below and combined, the secondary views use about the same total mon area as main view fwd.) Now with only main view @ 35-45, I reduced View Fwd size to 5x5. Result- absolutely no change to FPS!But here's my phenom! I can detect NO difference in fluidity & smoothness between triple views @ 17 - 22 and single view @ 35 - 45 fps. I wonder if the FS FPS logic doesn't work in my case with triple views?Alex Reid
----------------------------------------Hi Alex... :)I just came in from another 95 FPS plus flight into KORD! OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!In reading your post...I can only say that my CPU and GPU is only having to process info to a single 10 by 10 inch window. Alex...if you can get yourself to 95 Plus FPS...only THEN will you see and experience what I am posting about. Until then...I guess that you'll have to take my claim with your grain-of-salt. For myself.....OMG! Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw!~:)Mitch'er

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello,I can't disagree .. despite I'm not in position for test it.It's has been already long and heated discussions on many sim's forums .. but yes indeed .. FPS is not only matter of graphic seeing but it's also matter of other datas transmission Regards.bye.gif
---------------------------------You are absolutely right! High FPS count (I now see....) goes far beyond just what is being displayed to you. It is all the hyper-free room in data calculations and output that combines to give you the new high FPS virtual world. Is there a difference? Trust me when I say...it is massive if a 30 or 40 FPS virtual world is acting as a baseline. You'll have to experience 95 plus FPS performance for yourself.:)Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Umm Mitch glad your happy but I kinda thought everyone new this?? thats why some of us spent stupid amounts of money to push those kinds of FPS on Massive sceens. Once you see that for real in front of you you can't go back no matter what anyone says.Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Umm Mitch glad your happy but I kinda thought everyone new this?? thats why some of us spent stupid amounts of money to push those kinds of FPS on Massive sceens. Once you see that for real in front of you you can't go back no matter what anyone says.Rob
--------------------------------------------------------------------------LOL! Well, not everyone in the community that's been around for awhile thinks this. For a number of years, most have held the notion that if you can get 30 FPS (as TV scans in around there...) you'd get the same 'animation perception' as would be like watching a plane land upon the runway, etc. on your T.V. It has always been hailed as the 'Holy Grail' of FPS threshold. Frankly...I thought that as well.I had been running FS9 at around 25-30 locked and FSX at around 20-22 FPS. I inputed...and control surfaces moved. I took off. I landed. No crashes due to lack of FPS control. But Rob...today, I just decided to play around...and see what a diminished load would have on my system. I went to a window, reduced to around 5x5 inches...took a 182 around 1.8 VOZ (Northlands) and immediately saw much more 'real' world animation than I had ever seen. It was a joy to watch the wings being affected by movements through the atmosphere in such minute amounts. It was just as I have personally witnessed in real time flight.I then took a flight from KDTW to KORD in a 737. At 95 sustained FPS, it was a brand-new sim. There was massive control input---over let's say around 30-40 FPS constant. It felt real. It looked real. My mind said, yep...you're in a plane....So...you'd think that everybody would think it better, or their getting 'more' out of the virtual experience than at 30-40 FPS. But that is not the case. At least to date. There are many that might post here, that anything over 30 FPS is a waste...and a placebo effect. That's why I wanted everybody to try it out for themselves..if they could get their rig to 95 FPS or higher...and keep it there for an entire flight session. For myself...I have had to reduce my display down to 10 by 10 inches. But quickly did my mind also adjust to that size...and it was a most enjoyable experience to say the least! Now...to wait for equipment that wil give me 100 plus at full-screen on a 30 inch or better monitor.Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
--------------------------------------------------------------------------LOL! Well, not everyone in the community that's been around for awhile thinks this. For a number of years, most have held the notion that if you can get 30 FPS (as TV scans in around there...) you'd get the same 'animation perception' as would be like watching a plane land upon the runway, etc. on your T.V. It has always been hailed as the 'Holy Grail' of FPS threshold. Frankly...I thought that as well.I had been running FS9 at around 25-30 locked and FSX at around 20-22 FPS. I inputed...and control surfaces moved. I took off. I landed. No crashes due to lack of FPS control. But Rob...today, I just decided to play around...and see what a diminished load would have on my system. I went to a window, reduced to around 5x5 inches...took a 182 around 1.8 VOZ (Northlands) and immediately saw much more 'real' world animation than I had ever seen. It was a joy to watch the wings being affected by movements through the atmosphere in such minute amounts. It was just as I have personally witnessed in real time flight.I then took a flight from KDTW to KORD in a 737. At 95 sustained FPS, it was a brand-new sim. There was massive control input---over let's say around 30-40 FPS constant. It felt real. It looked real. My mind said, yep...you're in a plane....So...you'd think that everybody would think it better, or their getting 'more' out of the virtual experience than at 30-40 FPS. But that is not the case. At least to date. There are many that might post here, that anything over 30 FPS is a waste...and a placebo effect. That's why I wanted everybody to try it out for themselves..if they could get their rig to 95 FPS or higher...and keep it there for an entire flight session. For myself...I have had to reduce my display down to 10 by 10 inches. But quickly did my mind also adjust to that size...and it was a most enjoyable experience to say the least! Now...to wait for equipment that wil give me 100 plus at full-screen on a 30 inch or better monitor.Mitch
I actually see no difference between 60 and 230 which is what my machine seems to peek at. In fact, locked at 60 gave better fluidity when looking straight down compared to unlocked frames at 180+ that stuttered...Just my .02,locked@60inNJ :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For a number of years, most have held the notion that if you can get 30 FPS (as TV scans in around there...) you'd get the same 'animation perception' as would be like watching a plane land upon the runway, etc. on your T.V. It has always been hailed as the 'Holy Grail' of FPS threshold. Frankly...I thought that as well.
I disagree with your use of "most". I think most of us have experimented with various settings and found what is the Holy Grail for our individual systems. There is no doubt that an increase in FPS results in a smoother more fluid sim. As has already been said why else would we be upgrading components or buying entire new systems if it wasn't to increase our FPS? But sometimes users have reported that when they set the frame rate slider to unlimited they would see more stutters. This is a fact for some.I mean no disrespect to you but what you are announcing isn't a big deal. Basically you only told us that you had never experimented with the frame rate slider and assumed that what you had read was the only way the frame rate slider should be set.BTW the screen resolution setting has a big impact on FPS also. Running FS9 or FSX at 1680x1050 is not going to produce the same FPS as running the sim at 1024x768. Which one do you think will result in a higher FPS? What you did by reducing the window size is the same a lower the resolution resulting in better FPS. So with that said what resolution were you running Flight Sim at when you were full screen and when your using a 5x5 window?I'm not trying to debunk your test, I'm only stating that you found YOUR sweet spot and what works best for YOU. The 30 FPS sweet spot is not a myth for some!Edit: I see you have started two topics with different titles here in this forum about this. Why?Todd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To the reader....please reduce your FS9 to a windowed 5x5 inch up to a 10x10 inch screen...and then WATCH WHAT YOUR FLIGHT CONTROL BRINGS YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!You had better be a much BETTER pilot in your heavy metal approaches with METAR cranking up the heat....for even the slightest control input at 95 plus FPS will have you moving DRASTICALLY off of glide slope, if you let it get away from you. This does NOT HAPPEN at only 30 FPS.
Then there is the question wether the slightest control input will have you moving drastically off glide slope in real life?At any rate I tried your suggestion and saw no difference in fps or fluidity. And I don't see any sense in 100 fps if the monitor only can display 60 fps. Wouldn't that mean that the videocard is wasting its power by sending some frames that can't be rendered?My systemAMD 64 4000+ (OC to 2.6 GHZ)2 Gb PC3200 RAMNVIDIA 7950GT 512M DDR3 AGPWin XP Home

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then there is the question wether the slightest control input will have you moving drastically off glide slope in real life?At any rate I tried your suggestion and saw no difference in fps or fluidity. And I don't see any sense in 100 fps if the monitor only can display 60 fps. Wouldn't that mean that the videocard is wasting its power by sending some frames that can't be rendered?My systemAMD 64 4000+ (OC to 2.6 GHZ)2 Gb PC3200 RAMNVIDIA 7950GT 512M DDR3 AGPWin XP Home
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hi,Having 100 FPS, is showing that your system is not being taxed to the max....there is headroom 'behind the scenes' for all the thousands of calculations per second happening to make your virtual world; and if I read your reply, you did not achieve an FPS readout of 95 sustainable? That is why you did not see any difference. If you can get your viewpoint FPS to what I posted, you indeed will see a difference. It glares at you! :)To do so for myself, I originally went out of FULL WINDOW mode, and using the ALT-ENTER combo, went into WINDOW mode. I then reduced that window upon my Desktop to 5x5 inches. After that, I increased that window's size until I saw FPS starting to drop off. That was for my system, around a 10x10 inch window. I have left it there at that. I have since taken many flights, over varied topography....and simply could not be happier with how clear and sharp the textures are, as well of course as is the simply superb animation. Also to answer Todd, I am running at 1920x1200. The results are simply stunning. I never changed out the maximum rez setting for my card, at any time during this experiment. :)Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hi,Having 100 FPS, is showing that your system is not being taxed to the max....there is headroom 'behind the scenes' for all the thousands of calculations per second happening to make your virtual world; and if I read your reply, you did not achieve an FPS readout of 95 sustainable? That is why you did not see any difference. If you can get your viewpoint FPS to what I posted, you indeed will see a difference. It glares at you! :)To do so for myself, I originally went out of FULL WINDOW mode, and using the ALT-ENTER combo, went into WINDOW mode. I then reduced that window upon my Desktop to 5x5 inches. After that, I increased that window's size until I saw FPS starting to drop off. That was for my system, around a 10x10 inch window. I have left it there at that. I have since taken many flights, over varied topography....and simply could not be happier with how clear and sharp the textures are, as well of course as is the simply superb animation. Also to answer Todd, I am running at 1920x1200. The results are simply stunning. I never changed out the maximum rez setting for my card, at any time during this experiment. :)Mitch
No I can't get close to 100 fps and with fps unlimited I don't get stable fps at all. My experience was that going to windowed mode and making the window smaller does affect fps and performence very little if any at all. But I would certainly not wan't to use such a small window as 5*5 or 10*10 inches. But rather opposite I would like a bigger screen than my current 19" at 1280*1024 so I could have a bigger window (in fullscreen). Of course there is another option to get high fps and that is to turn down the sliders. Actually I can momentarely get 100 fps in FSX with my current settings. Have you tried limiting your fps slider? Is it still as good?Another suggestion. Use a miltary jet and roll as fast as possible. Can you do two full turns in a second? I have heard that real fighter jet canBTW what is your system specification?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You had better be a much BETTER pilot in your heavy metal approaches with METAR cranking up the heat....for even the slightest control input at 95 plus FPS will have you moving DRASTICALLY off of glide slope, if you let it get away from you. This does NOT HAPPEN at only 30 FPS. Watch at 95 FPS what wind and directional velocity will do to you...at the virtual world processing information to the screen at 100 FPS updates!
No, sorry, no sale. The FS core has an internal 18Hz update cycle...FPS only represents the number of times the video frame buffer is rewritten each second, it has nothing whatsoever to do with dynamics, unless you so burden the sim with video overhead that the main process can't get through the full 18 updates each second.If pushing the FPS to 95 causes massive deviations from the GS, it's not because the sim is somehow updating winds faster--it's the opposite, in fact. The program is so busy trying to keep up with the video frame buffer that it's falling behind on regular 18 beat-per-second flight dynamics calculations. The key has always been to preserve enough "headroom" (available processing time) to ensure that FS runs a complete update each 18Hz tic. If FPS are set to unlimited or too high, video processing can crowd core simulation updates, making the updates intermittent or possibly incomplete. No matter how high the video frame rate, the internal core (dynamics, gauges) will not update faster than 18Hz.The clarity and sharpness you see in a small window are exactly the same as if you take a DVD video and examine the difference between running it in a small window and a full screen. It's simply a function of the pixel density and angular size, much like the difference between watching your TV from 15 ft or 2 ft.This reminds me of a story a former Viet Nam POW once told me, about how his captors had a lamp in the interrogation room that had no plug...it was two bare wires going directly into a socket in the wall. The wires were too small for the socket, and the slightest movement on the floor would make the lamp flicker. The guards would straighten the cord's run along the floor, which, of course wiggled the wires in the socket, and eventually got the light burning bright for a while. It kept him entertained for weeks laughing inside at the guards' repeated, self-reinforcing drill each time he was drug into that room. The guards were utterly convinced that a kinked electrical cord worked just like a kinked water hose.The visual of you sitting at the computer squinting into a 10x10 FS window while fighting the gale force effects of 10 kt crosswinds makes me laugh.CheersBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No I can't get close to 100 fps and with fps unlimited I don't get stable fps at all. My experience was that going to windowed mode and making the window smaller does affect fps and performence very little if any at all. But I would certainly not wan't to use such a small window as 5*5 or 10*10 inches. But rather opposite I would like a bigger screen than my current 19" at 1280*1024 so I could have a bigger window (in fullscreen). Of course there is another option to get high fps and that is to turn down the sliders. Actually I can momentarely get 100 fps in FSX with my current settings. Have you tried limiting your fps slider? Is it still as good?Another suggestion. Use a miltary jet and roll as fast as possible. Can you do two full turns in a second? I have heard that real fighter jet canBTW what is your system specification?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------I have a P4 3.4 running an ATI 1950 Pro 256 meg card.Soundblaster and the rest of the dance, :)I'm of course not running my system always at 10x10 inches! I have done so to see what 95 plus FPS can do for the sim. Others are negating its value. For myself...it has proven to be an invaluable insight to much higher performance. I am curious though that some have not seen a major leap in FPS when having gone to a 10x10 window. Interesting. Each system is that....a unique system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,Have you tried limiting your frame rate to around 35 or 40 in the little screen and trying to fly in that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
--------------------------------------------------------------------------I have a P4 3.4 running an ATI 1950 Pro 256 meg card.Soundblaster and the rest of the dance, :)I'm of course not running my system always at 10x10 inches! I have done so to see what 95 plus FPS can do for the sim. Others are negating its value. For myself...it has proven to be an invaluable insight to much higher performance. I am curious though that some have not seen a major leap in FPS when having gone to a 10x10 window. Interesting. Each system is that....a unique system.
And I'm curious though that you can get so much better performence than me. My 7950GT 512M DDR3 AGP should be at least as strong as yours. Is a P4 3.4 much better than a AMD 64 4000+?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------To do so for myself, I originally went out of FULL WINDOW mode, and using the ALT-ENTER combo, went into WINDOW mode. I then reduced that window upon my Desktop to 5x5 inches...Also to answer Todd, I am running at 1920x1200. The results are simply stunning. I never changed out the maximum rez setting for my card, at any time during this experiment. :)Mitch
You did not change your desktop resolution but by running Flight Sim in a 5x5 window you changed the number of pixels that the GPU was proccessing which as I said before is basically the same as lowering your resolution. I have a 1680x1050 monitor. When I shrink a window to 5x5 inches I end up with a resolution of roughly 500x450. On a 1920x1050 monitor a 5x5 window would have more pixels than my monitor but you still have LOWERED your resolution. You did say you started with a full window (I think you meant full screen since you said you hit ALT-ENTER to get to window mode) so when you made your window smaller you indeed changed your resolution setting for Flight Sim.Try going into FS9 or FSX and change the full screen mode resolution to 800x600 and run the sim full screen and tell me what your frame rate is then.BTW how in the world are you getting 25 to 30 FPS in Flight Sim at 1920x1050 with your hardware? Something doesn't jive and also you're getting better performance in a small window because you are taxing your hardware when you run Flight Sim at the full resolution for your monitor.
I am curious though that some have not seen a major leap in FPS when having gone to a 10x10 window. Interesting. Each system is that....a unique system.
So now you admit that it may not be myth for some? :( Todd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"-------- But rather opposite I would like a bigger screen than my current 19" at 1280*1024 so I could have a bigger window (in fullscreen). ---------"
Jfri-The answer is multi monitors! Here's the other side of the coin. I'm running FS9 on a 5+ yr old 'puter with 3 monitors & displaying triple synchronized views for a 145

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jfri-The answer is multi monitors! Here's the other side of the coin. I'm running FS9 on a 5+ yr old 'puter with 3 monitors & displaying triple synchronized views for a 145

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For me one thing that is as unreal as it gets is that the gauges and instrument are so small compared to real life. A bigger monitor would help here and that would cost much money. Also isn't it unreal having these panels on the left and right monitors that are supposed to depict looking right and left in the plane? I would rather use one big monitor instead of three smaller.
---------jfri- the three monitors are approx EACH same size as yours - so gauges are also same size as you see. (Screenshots really miniaturize everything!) Yes, a larger monitor would increase panel/gauge size- but you can only display multiple views on multiple monitors. (ViewLeftFwd,ViewFwd,ViewRightFwd)In the real world, normal human vision has a FOV of about 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 FPS does NOT give you the full real-world experience in either FS9 or FSX. This is a myth.
I don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob,Frustrating isn't it?Leon
Naw...it's like observing a pack of dogs watching TV. They know not what they are seeing. No difference between "Wife Swap" and "Einstein's Greatest Discoveries" from their perspective. It's all Alpo... From my perspectve, it's still cheap entertainment. :( Bob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And I'm curious though that you can get so much better performence than me. My 7950GT 512M DDR3 AGP should be at least as strong as yours. Is a P4 3.4 much better than a AMD 64 4000+?
-------------------------------------------------------I really can't tell you if my P4 is 'better' than your system. I do know...though....that it is a strong performer and that's why I haven't felt the need to move on, until I see what FS11 will need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites