What's the lowest FPS you accept?

[Milviz 919]

Film runs at 24 frames per second because that is close to the absolute minimum that the human eye can detect "flutter" as the frames go by. Most people can live with 18. Needless to say, if you have 40 or more, it's silky smooth... Anything more than that and even those who are pros have a hard time detecting it. I know this for a fact as I used to (and still sometimes do) work with Imax making 3D Stereoscopic films... Imax 3D films run at 24 FPS per eye for a total of 48FPS.

 

If your rig can run FSX at anything higher than 18, consider yourself in the pink....

 

That said, the way that most people detect it (in FSX) is by seeing their FPS change based upon where they are and what they are doing...

[Sekstifire 10]

Less than 18 is absolutely terrible.

 

While its true that film is 24 frames per second, they also use post processing tricks where they blurr the frames, this causes an fps of 24 to look fluid. Of course, the biggest problem in FSX isnt the low frames (unless its below 20), but rather the smoothness. Thankfully I have found settings for my rig that removes all microstuttering, so the framerate is fairly stable, giving me a smooth experience

[bud7h7 1]

If I get anything under 20 FPS in conditions where I should be getting 30, I will uninstall whatever that plane is, and then make sure everyone knows that plane is a performance hog.

[Milviz 919]

That's so kind.... and I see your system isn't even top of the line...

[TheFamilyMan 280]

Smoothness with max eye candy (i.e. realism) is all that matters for me. I only check FPS if smoothness out of whack. A jaw dropping 20 is far better IMO than a sparse 30+.

[Chock 17,769]

1fps is the lowest I'll accept, but only when taking a screenie or when paused. Otherwise, 15 will do, although I usually get better than that with my I7. I actually managed to reduce X-Plane X down to a blistering 4fps tonight by turning everything onto full throttle LOL

 

Al

[Kaly 22]

For me,I think 25fps is the sweetspot.

[fakeflyer737 991]

22, any lower and I'll take up smoking again.

[jdhowell73 0]

i am so spoiled now with 70-200fps in fs9 at max detail with alot of payware add-ons that i can't boot up fsx with my usual 20-40 at max detail. If i enable dx10 i get over 50fps but those flickering runway textures make me dizzy, lol.

 

you do realise that the human eye cant tell the difference on fps at anything above 30~. and your monitor cant display anything above its refresh rate with is probably set at 60. So the best thing to do is use the external fps limiter or even better if you have an nvidia card...use nvidia inspector to restrict the frame rate...makes for butter flying and no stutters for me

[Sekstifire 10]

you do realise that the human eye cant tell the difference on fps at anything above 30~. ...

This is not accurate. Most can't tell the difference between rates over 60 however.

[Stoli151 6]

I used to beat myself in the head thinking I needed to keep 60fps but after reading many posts and watching many you tube videos, I'd say anything above 20 with addons is great. Sometimes if the weather is good I can get over 30 with a payware plane and ORBX scenery. On default I can get over 50. On a typical day with heavy weather, payware planes and scenery and lots of traffic 20 is good. However, with my old budget lappy and low settings(default)I thought 15 was great, go figure.

[Fox-Bat 31]

Locked at 18. Ensures no stutters ever. I have REX+ORBX+Payware planes. I can't tell the difference between smoothness at higher (unlocked) FPS and locked at 18. The only thing is that there is occasional stuttering in unlocked. To be fair - I only fly in Bush areas not big airports or cities.

 

One of the reasons I haven't upgraded (currently 2.1 GHz core duo OC to 2.8 GHz) is that reading on the forums - people with better systems still seem to experience the same issues - stuttering. To be fair, I guess if I did upgrade I could turn the air and land traffic to 100% and fly at nights over major city airports - but I don't do much nightflying over big cities anyway. Bush flying at night and small airports work fine.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

...15 FPS is my floor for low sustained/stress running.

[Bartbear 10]

One of the reasons I haven't upgraded (currently 2.1 GHz core duo OC to 2.8 GHz) is that reading on the forums - people with better systems still seem to experience the same issues - stuttering.

 

18 fps is the lowest i get and accept for a short time : IFly B737-NG in VC view in big busy airport at big town in bad weather.

 

No more stuttering for me, FSX locked internally to 30, normally silky fluent 28-30 fps (all graphics maxed, air and water traffic 60%, land traffic 40%, no Light Bloom, DX9) :

 

Just good selected hardware with safe overclocked processor and:

 

1. Automated Tweaking and Tuning Tooll for FSX (Bojote)

2. Software & Hardware Guide for FSX users (Word Not Allowed)

3. FSX on an SSD

 

:Peace:

 

 

 

[duckbilled 310]

Depends. I can do 13fps when taking off but I need about 20fps to land. My strategy is to depart from complex, busy airports and land at smaller airports. This usually results in flights from large hubs to holiday destinations.

 

My system can handle any scenery package - its the mounds of AI that give me problems. I have Ultimate Traffic set to maintain 13fps. It seems to work well and when it does remove traffic, it isn't too noticeable.