I could be mistaken but in photoreal scenery with PMDG's beautiful and amazing 777 which I am so grateful for, I find the scenery is a little more blurry.

 

Thus it leads me to the following theory based on what PMDG has said in their manual as well.

 

There is less free memory available for photoscenery in rendering when using the 777 compared to a more standard less memory intensive aircraft such as the trike or even the standard LearJet in FSX.

 

Also what I have found is that if you don't change views often and stay in the cockpit you can conduct 16 hour flights with no OOM issues at all, and I have a load of photoscenery installed on my machine. Including FTXAu which is semi photoreal with lots of autogen.

 

I could be missing the fact that underneath the gigantic 777 the scenery is being rendered as well as in front. I would say my machine is doing an outstanding job as it is doing so much. But it definitely is not rendering at the capacity I was flying over my Swiss Pro Flylogic scenery as with the Learjet. I should take some screenshots to put in this thread later today or this weekend.

 

And I only have a basic i5 with 4gb memory and a 550gtx ti nvidia card.

 

 

 

FTXau isn't photoreal scenery. It's just lots of textures and updated landclass, more autogen than default, though there's a slider for that, which also has a 0 setting.

 

Actual photoreal, (I only use NL2000 photoreal and that hasn't had any problems) will eat up more VAS, and also power to render.

You could play around with fiber_frame_time_fraction=, which I needed for Orbx YMML to show up as anything more than about 5 blurring pixels of green and grey for up to 5 minutes after landing (even before the PMDG 777 existed).

 

fiber_frame_time_fraction= values will force the processor to spend more time cleaning up textures every frame. Yes it will reduce fps, but for me it was that, or autolanding on a 1km/sq grey blob every time I arrived at YMML, and considering I live in Melbourne...