May 19, 20179 yr Most of you are probably aware that the performance of FSW is a bit disappointing. I've figured out that this is almost entirely due to the scenery. I'm getting pretty good frames if I max out everything but keep the scenery on minimum. Changing scenery from minimum to low almost halves the framerate. So I guess the only thing that needs to change is how scenery is rendered. As it stands, it's still using a single CPU core to do all the work. My GTX 670 is far from being used to its full potential. I don't know if changing this is even possible, as it might be quite "deep" in the engine, but I really think it should be a priority. Would love to hear everyone's opinions on this. Edited May 19, 20179 yr by fsxkitty Jehan Kateli
May 19, 20179 yr 35 minutes ago, fsxkitty said: Most of you are probably aware that the performance of FSW is a bit disappointing. I've figured out that this is almost entirely due to the scenery. I'm getting pretty good frames if I max out everything but keep the scenery on minimum. Changing scenery from minimum to low almost halves the framerate. So I guess the only thing that needs to change is how scenery is rendered. As it stands, it's still using a single CPU core to do all the work. My GTX 670 is far from being used to its full potential. I don't know if changing this is even possible, as it might be quite "deep" in the engine, but I really think it should be a priority. Would love to hear everyone's opinions on this. My installation uses all 4 cores of the cpu, 9 GB of my 16GB ram and 3.4 GB of my 4 GB ram on the 970 graphic. All sliders to ultra and 20 FPS in big cities rising to 50-60 in more open land. I like the early access and looks foreward to what is coming. Greetings Kurt MSFS, X-Plane 12 AMD Ryzen 9 3900x, 32Gb ram, RX 5700 XT 8Gb ram, 1TB SSD
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.