so far so good.

Everyone. When stating fps I notice CPU, GPU and RAM are mentioned but not always screen resolution. That is absolutely critical. Please state resolution in your posts when commenting on performance.

@Ray Proudfoot Agreed, resolution is crucial along with approximate setting (Ultra, High, Medium or Low-end and where the scaler is set). Also was the FPS achieved in internal or external view and over photogrammetric or autogen scenery.

Indeed. I'm pretty sure it's likely a 2080Ti at 4K = a 1080 at 2K.

I like the inclusion of an additional resolution slider. Set up all the others as you like and then fine tune with an effective, volume slider.

.... How well it works though is yet to be seen.

I think nailed my issue. Looks like the new Nvidia drivers optimised for MFS causes my ”fps pumping” issue. Went back to older driver 451.67. Now all smooth i.e Moscow at same setting I wrote before, 45-50 fps with Icon A5. No stutters at all. Running in 4K, rendering 80 and level High.

Edit: It is 3840 x 2160 on my monitor.

Edited August 18, 20205 yr by casv

There's a point, can we stop saying "2K"? It's a cinematic format that is a slightly wider version of 1080p - if people are using it to mean 1440p they are outright wrong, because 1440p is 2.6K at 16:9.

To be honest, we should just stop using K altogether it was adopted by marketers because 4K is a bigger number than 2160p.

Edited August 18, 20205 yr by ckyliu

1 hour ago, Tom Wright said:

I'm on holiday at the moment so will have to wait until later in the week to download it!

But I'm impatient... has anyone run it on a 4770k and/or GTX1060 at 1080p and can report on performance?

Older CPU, better GPU here:

I7 3770k

1660 Super

16 GB RAM

1080p

Defaulted to high settings on first run, disabled vsync.

Was very smooth in my area (small cities/villages, no photogrammetry) at 1000' AGL in C172.

30/40 fps on ground, up to 90 at altitude.

Also tried ultra. Was good at altitude (20/30 fps) but close to single digit close to ground.

Now trying to restart from high and increase some notches. BTW looks awesome already at high.

A few huge drops once a while. I guess it's the CPU trying to digest downloaded data. 1 Gb fiber connection

Has anyone tested with a current AMD yet (3700x/3900x)? I have a GTX1070 ( Upgrade later), 32GB and will play in 2k. Still impatient to upgrade to i7-10700k or to change to AMD. 

not too bad. went to KLGA and took off runway 22 in varying times of day and weather...averaged a steady 30-45 FPS in the TBM and Cessnas. didnt try the airliners. Occasional dips to 22-25 when the cache is loading or something else causing but no real bad stutters. Feels very smooth. Even with TrackIR.

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Everyone. When stating fps I notice CPU, GPU and RAM are mentioned but not always screen resolution. That is absolutely critical. Please state resolution in your posts when commenting on performance.

It doesn't really matter at this point. Performance is a hot mess, this is a public beta. Lower your settings and you'll see it won't cure any of the (micro)stutters at large airports in a jetplane.

2 minutes ago, Colonel X said:

It doesn't really matter at this point. Performance is a hot mess, this is a public beta. Lower your settings and you'll see it won't cure any of the (micro)stutters at large airports in a jetplane.

It's clearly not a hot mess in the slightest.

Just now, 2reds2whites said:

It's clearly not a hot mess in the slightest.

Certainly not, however it could do with further optimization for the stutters. I am not sure if its the cache causing it? The download of ortho? 

8 minutes ago, Colonel X said:

It doesn't really matter at this point. Performance is a hot mess, this is a public beta. Lower your settings and you'll see it won't cure any of the (micro)stutters at large airports in a jetplane.

It does matter irrespective of whether it’s a “hot mess” or not. It’s a crucial piece of info just as the CPU and GPU is.

I don’t have it yet. I’m holding back until you chaps have finished beta testing it. 😉

10 minutes ago, Colonel X said:

Performance is a hot mess

You keep posting that, do you actually have it installed though? Performance seems to vary quite a bit but my general impression is it's quite efficient compared to anything else we've had bar Aerofly 2.

7 minutes ago, ckyliu said:

You keep posting that, do you actually have it installed though? Performance seems to vary quite a bit but my general impression is it's quite efficient compared to anything else we've had bar Aerofly 2.

Do I have it installed? What the? Take an airliner, fly from KLAS to KLAX, and you will see that anything other than cruise will be depressing. Not by overall performance, which is good. It's the occasional stutters and pauses that are unbearable. But don't take my word, they're visible in ALL of the YouTube videos, too. I take it coming from FSX or P3D, users a sort of tolerant towards these kind of hiccups. But coming from XP11, this is a nightmare.

Edited August 18, 20205 yr by Colonel X