Been simming for a long while now.  Worked through the FSX limitations but stuck with it.  Then I bought into P3D at v1.2 and have moved forward with each release since.  Sure there have been some hiccups but there has never been anything like it.

 

I read the forums daily and all the complaints about frame rates not being high enough even though there is a limit of what the human eye can detect!  My computer easily keeps me between 17-28fps and the program works just fine.

 

My question is this.  Are we hung up on frame rates from FSX days?  Are we hanging on to the supposed need to have blazing fps?  Prepar3d runs fine in the teens.  Maybe, just maybe, it does not need to run at 30 to be good.

 

Think we might just be hanging on to an old concept and missing the fact that this sim really does work well at most any rate??  Try turning off the FPS counter and just enjoy the fact that this is one heck of a good flight simulator for us to enjoy flying with.

 

It matters. The human eye can tell the difference past 60fps. Anyone that says you can't tell the difference above 30fps is incorrect. You can.

 

30fps is what I would accept in some games and simulations. In p3d's case, I get 25-30 and I'm ok with that. 

 

But to get the real experience I would prefer 60fps. It's smoother and seems more responsive. You can get this if you load into a rural area or climb up to FL300+. Trust me, it's hard to go back to 20fps. Thankfully those frame rates only last as long as takeoff.

Nathan is right, but people complain more about stutters than fps. I don t care having to fly 18fps over big cities, but i hate when the fps fluctuation is so huge.

Trying a limiter called dxtory right now, and it works great !

P3D runs really well even at 20fps with no major stutters. I just tend to try to get as much performance out of my PC that I can. That's the obsession with FPS I guess. The reason we spend nearly $1000 on graphics cards.