MSFS Required Specs

[Anthracite 131]

20 hours ago, Noooch said:

@ChaoticBeauty that is great because I read somewhere that B450s from MSI may have VRM issues, but maybe if associated with a bigger CPU. Thanks a lot !

Not b450, X570 Msi boards have vrm issues and should be avoided. 

the b450 tomahawk is an excellent board with oddly, one of the best vrms of b450. It’s the mobo I built my wife’s computer with.

 

for X570 in my own build it’s a gigabyte aorus elite. Easily the highest performing economical board in the X570 range.

[Noooch 1,084]

Thanks for you input @Anthracite

[Tuskin38 6,451]

  

2 hours ago, michal said:

The official requirements don’t say anything about SSD,

It does under the 'Ideal' section.

Edited April 25, 2020 by Tuskin38

[RALF9636 1,902]

15 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

  

It does under the 'Ideal' section.

Indeed. Thanks, I missed that.

 

Edited April 25, 2020 by RALF9636

[Heli 66]

A nice recommended spec is the 50 Mbps internet connection.  Last time I used Google Earth in VR, the photogrammetry was streaming at a cap of 20 Mbps, so Microsoft might be allowing 2.5x more bandwidth for streaming the planet, this will reduce pop in and help hide sudden texture rendering. 

[SPowell42 7]

On 4/21/2020 at 7:00 PM, Steve_Ellis said:

"50mbps" Are there many people who get that ?

Yep, 100 mbs is the basic tier with Spectrum cable/internet.

[Dominique_K 10,133]

13 hours ago, michal said:

the size may not matter anyway if you go above certain threshold.

The storage size is an important factor for those with a cap or a slow/unreliable connection. A TB-sized SSD just for the cache might be then a welcome addition.

[soloraj 38]

It has been helpful to know what the required specs are for running MSFS and they are reasonable by today’s standards.  However, it would have been even better if Microsoft had explained why they arrived at the specifications.

For example, is the 1909 Windows update required because it introduced Favoured CPU Core Optimization?

Is the minimum spec enough to run 1080 resolution with medium scenery and lighting settings, is the ideal spec is suited for 4K with high settings or VR, etc.

The specs have resulted in as many questions as answers, we only have half the story.

[ArchStanton 156]

In an German forum an alpha tester said: "The min. specs are enough for nothing, the middle variant is enough for offline mode or online frustration and the third is enough for real fun, whereby 8 GB graphics RAM is still rather too little."

[pmb 5,137]

26 minutes ago, ArchStanton said:

In an German forum an alpha tester said: "The min. specs are enough for nothing, the middle variant is enough for offline mode or online frustration and the third is enough for real fun, whereby 8 GB graphics RAM is still rather too little."

And this was said by a person notoriously bashing MSFS for several months now.

Kind regards, Michael

[Anthracite 131]

6 minutes ago, pmb said:

And this was said by a person notoriously bashing MSFS for several months now.

Kind regards, Michael

 

34 minutes ago, ArchStanton said:

In an German forum an alpha tester said: "The min. specs are enough for nothing, the middle variant is enough for offline mode or online frustration and the third is enough for real fun, whereby 8 GB graphics RAM is still rather too little."

I guess he went and built computers identical to the quoted specs and gathered a lot of data to back up those comments. Presumably gave a verbose breakdown of the performance at several resolutions and graphical settings.

[ludekbrno 302]

32 minutes ago, ArchStanton said:

In an German forum an alpha tester said: "The min. specs are enough for nothing, the middle variant is enough for offline mode or online frustration and the third is enough for real fun, whereby 8 GB graphics RAM is still rather too little.

But remember, that MSFS Is still in Alplha, so it's only BEFORE main optimalization phase. In Alplha they adding functionalities and optimalization will start after they add all functions, whitch they want on release.

[pmb 5,137]

4 minutes ago, Anthracite said:

I guess he went and built computers identical to the quoted specs and gathered a lot of data to back up those comments. Presumably gave a verbose breakdown of the performance at several resolutions and graphical settings.

No. He's a freeware programmer, retired and doesn't build regularly computers. He has 1, perhaps 2, machines, as we all have. And he can't have collected a lot of data from others, at least not according to the NDA .

Kind regards, Michael

[zmak 331]

1 hour ago, ArchStanton said:

In an German forum an alpha tester said: "The min. specs are enough for nothing, the middle variant is enough for offline mode or online frustration and the third is enough for real fun, whereby 8 GB graphics RAM is still rather too little."

"Another poster said" type posts should be completely ignored especially when on a non English forum past down as 3rd hand information and translated to English

What could possibly go wrong? 😂

[Anthracite 131]

1 hour ago, pmb said:

No. He's a freeware programmer, retired and doesn't build regularly computers. He has 1, perhaps 2, machines, as we all have. And he can't have collected a lot of data from others, at least not according to the NDA .

Kind regards, Michael

Well that’s a shame, I’m sure we would have all been delighted if the negativity train actually had a cogent argument to levy against the product they have demonised since day one.