I am serious. When people in the P3D v3 (and before) days were talking about FPS is a far second to "smoothness" I couldn't believe it, because I didn't really see it. Now with P3D v4 and the 747 with v4, I placed myself at FlyTampa CYYZ scenery at night, turned on all the lights (Dynamic lights are on) with ASP4, Orbx Global and OpenLC NA, 4096x4096 textures. I couldn't believe my FPS were just counting 25ish. 25 FPS in P3D v4 is better than 40-50 FPS in P3D v3. PMDG wasn't kidding when they praised the smoothness of this thing. So now I am in the same boat and will also tell you "Stop monitoring your FPS"

People say this, but the reality is FPS matters. I can tell the difference between 15, 25, 40, and 60 FPS. I'd rather have 60. I don't know how flight sim enthusiasts got to this point where 15 - 20 FPS became acceptable... those figures would be considered atrocious in any other context. Thankfully, V4 brings us a bit closer to catching up with the rest of the world, i.e. mainstream video games (yep, I said it - our flight sims should look and run as good as games like Battlefield 1). And the 747 is the most FPS-friendly complex add-on released to date. 

Alex Pugh

 

1 hour ago, Chapstick said:

I can tell the difference between 15, 25, 40, and 60 FPS. I'd rather have 60.

If this is the case, then why have the display on? That might not be your point, but the OP seems to make the point that people should stop hyperfocusing on the display of it, and yours seems to make a loosely-related counterpoint that FPS is important. Sure, related, but I think the overarching point is that hyperfocus on a stat doesn't necessarily mean smooth.

1 hour ago, Chapstick said:

I don't know how flight sim enthusiasts got to this point where 15 - 20 FPS became acceptable...

Because that's all we've had. When FSX came out, hardware couldn't even handle it. Eventually it got better, but it's still processor-bound, which means we can't get to game standards.

Gotta take what you can get...