I just increased my FPS to Unlimited from 20 (I have a High End Machinte)They do jump to an average of 60 FPS, but I get stutters after 2 mins, so I went back to my 20 FPS smooth-Stutter free flying experience.

Here is an interesting fact, that begins to explain the difference between screen refresh rate and fps requirements for smooth motion:Quote:You have a fluid film with 24 fps. The film roll has to roll thru the projector. To not see it rolling you have to make the picture black while the film rolls on. You would have to blacken the screen 24 times per second. But 24 black moments are too visible. Thus you have smooth motions but flicker.The solution is: Show each frame 3 times and make the screen black 3 times per frame. This makes the black moments shorter and more frequent: "Triple the refresh rate". So you see about 72fps in the cinema, where 3 consecutive frames are the same. Strange solution? Solution of an analog world.This quote is from:http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htmwhich some of us should read before dumping all our personal observations in these threads that make for good reading, but usually end up in a "bun toss". :-)

Ryan,Actually, the reason it is advisable to set your screen refresh rate to significantly higher than 60Hz is because of ambiant mains lighting. In the UK (and almost certainly elsewhere) the mains lighting is set at 50-60Hz, so if the screen refresh rate is similar you get "strobing" - often not enough to be immediately obvious but the harmonics are such that the brain picks it up and it can result in eye strain and fatigue. Screen refresh rates of 72+Hz avoid this problem.http://www.monitorsdirect.com/pdf/refreshrate.pdfAlastair

There is an even greater difference not discussed in this thread:1) the 3D card displays a serie of finite (discreet) time slices of motions for each frame (an ideal close to ideal 0s time per frame)2) the Cinema displays (and in fact the film captures) a time slice as long as the refresh rate (that is each of the 24 frames cover a time slive of 1/24 of a second).What does this says:1) mathematically, an infinite number of frame per seconds are needed to render an ideal motion.2) time aliasing which is inherent to the process produces "motion blur" and fools the brain.In other words:1) you need as much as possible FPS, up to a certain amount for which your brain is fooled enough. It could be up to 100fps but I guess it is hard to tell.2) 24fps seems to do wonders in every cinema, but I would suspect even at 15fps, with each frame capturing as much as 1/15sec time of motion, would fool the brain also enough as long as there are no quick movements from side to side.Last but not least:if you have a camcorder, and if you can change the shutter speed, try to do the following: select a very fast shutter speed and shoot a very fast movement, like your hand going fast up and down. Since each captured frame from your 25PAL (30NTSC) would cover a time slice shorter than 1/25sec (1/30sec), you will recreate what your video card is doing in 3D, and you will be amazed to see how much the camcorder used to render smooth movements will suddenly display jerkiness and stutters...Hope this helps!

that has little to do with the actual refresh rate though.With 60Hz current you get similar (though lesser) effects at every multiple of 60 (as well as at 30 and 15 though also less noticable).

>Here is an interesting fact, that begins to explain the>difference between screen refresh rate and fps requirements>for smooth motion:>>Quote:>>You have a fluid film with 24 fps. The film roll has to roll>thru the projector. To not see it rolling you have to make the>picture black while the film rolls on. You would have to>blacken the screen 24 times per second. But 24 black moments>are too visible. Thus you have smooth motions but flicker.>The solution is: Show each frame 3 times and make the screen>black 3 times per frame. This makes the black moments shorter>and more frequent: "Triple the refresh rate". So you see about>72fps in the cinema, where 3 consecutive frames are the same.>Strange solution? Solution of an analog world.>>This quote is from:>>http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm>>which some of us should read before dumping all our personal>observations in these threads that make for good reading, but>usually end up in a "bun toss". :-)The common Cinema "Frame" rate is 48 so that each frame is shown twice ( done by the shuttter) . This results in almost no perception of flicker as the persistance of vision usually kicks in below 45hz. The shutter also serves to minimize any flicker from the lamp as it is "chopped up". In the same way, TV which is either 25 or 30 FPS is scanned a twice the frame rate, but only 1/2 the picture on each scan. ( Called interlacing) This eliminates the flicker since it is over 45hz)

>Then again, last time I saw a Disney, it didn't strike me as>action packed rollercoaster with an excess of camera>movements.And is flying in FS9 a rollercoaster like event? Hardly.In fact Disney's classis are full of suden movement and rapid action. Clearly you did not like the movie and you probably fell asleep...Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2

>They do jump to an average of 60 FPS, but I get stutters after>2 mins, so I went back to my 20 FPS smooth-Stutter free flying>experience.that's the problem with fps in FS9. Hight frame rates are not a guarantee for smooth flying experience.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2

>1/15sec time of motion, would fool the brain also enough as>long as there are no quick movements from side to side.That is correct. Even 1 fps is enough if you are looking at a still picture!Number of fps needed is clearly a function of how rapid action is. There is nothing in normal flying that would require more than (cinema-like) 24 fps unless you are performing acrobatics.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2

the Disney example is exactly related to time aliasing of the movement I've commented above: finite (discreet) time slices for each frame. However, 3D rendered Disney movies or the like (Shrek, Toy Story etc...) are rendered with special algorithms to render the traditional camera shutter speed which create motion blur, and offer time-aliasing rendering...Hope this helps!

Yes movies is a tricky business. Unless games which are happen in real time ;)

I've got news for you, that's a problem in every PC game - not just FS9. I don't know why people think FS9 is somehow a special case when it comes to stuttering or issues with overall smoothness. I've had no more trouble getting FS9 to run smoothly than I have any other sim I own. I have more problems with stuttering in Grand Prix Legends than I do FS9. The issue of stuttering is almost totally seperate from framerate. If you have stuttering in the sim, you have something cuasing the stuttering whether you're getting 20fps or 60fps or 100fps. I had an instance a few days ago where the sim started to stutter on me - a very brief but noticeable pause every 3 seconds or so. It's something I absolutely hate with a passion and if it starts to happen I immediately start looking for the cuase. In this case, I took a look at the processes running on my system and noticed something I hadn't seen before - a service called wfmmgr.exe or something like that. A quick google search later I discovered it was a service installed by Media PLayer 10 which I had just recently installed and that it seemed to want to access the internet alot. So, I disabled the service and voila, no more stutter. Now I can't be 100% certain that was the specefic cuase of the problem, but its gone now and I'm happy.

I'm still using 2002. Stuttering? I have know I idea what that is. I HAVE noticed that putting the fps to 'unlimited' is an improvement. Although if your gunna get 12, your gunna get 12 no matter where its set.Unless you set it too 11...........