4 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

It's why I stay at 1080x1920 

One of the most stupidest things I've ever done was buy a 4k monitor 

7 minutes ago, tooting said:

In 4k?? With textures above 1086?? I must be doing something wrong I've been tweaking for 4 days solid

I don't have a clue what's going on your system, but to speak for everyone is a bit of a bald statement...

As we know the performance with Flight simulator software can be very different per system a lot of parameters in play here ;-)

Well I have chosen the ultra widescreen route for a reason, and I have local similar performance very happy with the bus a dream to fly now :-)

15 minutes ago, awf said:

Well that is per system different, and I have similar performance as the NG ;-)

So do i. Actually i have 1-2fps more than the NGX in 4K P3Dv  4.1. Around 50-53fps at EKCH Gate A20 medium autogen no traffic.

Thanks Michael Moe 

Oh I can fps coming out my word not allowed, smooth  non stutters is a different thing 

4 minutes ago, tooting said:

Oh I can fps coming out my word not allowed, smooth  non stutters is a different thing 

Its butter smooth but i am on 231 and 4.1

Thanks Michael Moe 

13 minutes ago, Michael Moe said:

Its butter smooth but i am on 231 and 4.1

Thanks Michael Moe 

Same here but _4.2.21.24048 on v2.0.1.231

I can get it smooth I just have to turn stuff down, quite a bit.  Maybe my overclocking 

19 minutes ago, tooting said:

I can get it smooth I just have to turn stuff down, quite a bit.  Maybe my overclocking 

Sorry Pete but that one had me rolling on the floor. Sort of like when you go to the Doctor and say - "It hurts when I do that" and he says " Well, don't do that!".  

Seriously though, as I've been preaching for years it seems, it's a balancing act between hardware and software. Once you get it an keep it, you'll know you hit the sweet spot.

Vic

6 hours ago, Nyxx said:

If its less than CPU running @4.2 less than 16GB RAM and a 1070 then yes it's going to be a no go

I must disagree on this one. I'm running it without problems with 8GB RAM and 560ti(2GB Vram)  But ok, i don't use DL, and i have the feeling my 2700K @4.8GHz is doying all the hard work... But i have a solid 30fps(locked)with all addon airports since the last update. 

The only plane i have problem with is the Maddog X now. It uses too much RAM and Vram, so i decided to upgrade both - RAM and GPU, becouse this one is my all time favorite, and it looks stunning 

2 hours ago, tooting said:

I can get it smooth I just have to turn stuff down, quite a bit.  Maybe my overclocking 

Pete I can understand the frustration when trying different settings and not to have a smooth experience...

But as Vic stated it's a balance act when you have the sweet spot it' s such an enjoyment...

Happy to have look from my perspective at your setup and sharing ideas?

Back to flying...

1 hour ago, Nyxx said:

Same FPS test I do for all aircraft on my PC, not 4k 

Default aircraft =105-110

NG/777............= 58-60

FSL..................= 40-45

MD 80..............= 46-52

Just testing after this FPS get locked @25 for all the above.

 

Hi David.

Could you please tell us your fps with DL on, at Night with flood lights and Landing lights? Under these conditions with 6700K, 16GB and GTX970, the performance of my system remains the same 18 - 21 fps. No improvement at all. 

 

3 hours ago, tooting said:

One of the most stupidest things I've ever done was buy a 4k monitor 

I thought a 4K monitor was actually not a performance hit because you could remove AA and any loss on the 4K was gained by removing AA ?  

I think most simmers understand Vic, acceptance however is a different matter. 

The FPS/GPU/CPU/Add-On analogy put into Car and Top Speed terms:

I want to go faster in my car (PC), I press the accelerator to the floor (framerate = Unlimited) but I can't go faster than 150 mph.  Solution, I buy a faster car (GPU/CPU) that can do 200 mph.  All is great in the world, then I add passengers (add-ons), and luggage (more add-ons) and my car can't do 200 mph any more, it can only do 180 mph ... I add a trailer hitch and trailer (even more add-ons) and my car can only do 160 mph now, I put a Tesla X (FSL A320) on my trailer and now my car can only do 140 mph.  Idea, I'll make my car more aerodynamic and tape up the hood and door seams, remove the front spoiler, remove the rear wing, and button up the underside with single sheet of aluminum (tweak .cfg files) to reduce drag ... I can do 148 mph ... ugh not enough, I start to remove parts from the car (turn down graphics settings) to reduce it's weight like, radio, speakers, nav, seat belts, air bags, plastic trim, electric door motors ... now I can do 161 mph, ugh, still not enough ... 

With that said, my FSLabs FPS performance is very good but it really depends on what airport/location I'm testing it at ... and that's not FSLabs performance drain, that my other add-ons drain ... Orbx SoCal with FSDT KLAX and UTLive at 90% with most graphics settings maxed is going to = 19 FPS no matter aircraft I use, from a Piper Cub to PMDG 747.  So FPS claims without any sort of context or data isn't really much anyone else could use or go on if they need help finding the "sweet" spot which is really just a compromise of settings and/or add-ons used.  It's always been this way and will always be this way, BUT, that doesn't mean one can't compromise and find a working solution ... experiment.

Cheers, Rob.

17 minutes ago, MarkW said:

I thought a 4K monitor was actually not a performance hit because you could remove AA and any loss on the 4K was gained by removing AA ?

Couple of comments:

1.  All 4K monitors I've used will operate at 1920 x 1080 so not sure why there is any "regret", just because someone has a 4K monitor doesn't mean they have to run their game/sim of choice at 4K?

2.  You can "reduce" AA settings in 4K, I wouldn't eliminate them completely unless your working with a very small size monitor.  The larger the monitor size and the closer it is to your eye position the more noticeable "jaggies" will be.  For large screen monitors at close view eye positions, 8K would be enough not to require AA.  But, there is ALSO additional technology coming down the line and/or or already released (for 1080p) where AA processing will be done by the monitor and not the GPU.

Cheers, Rob.