Really not that impressed by photogrammetry.

[Claudius_ 326]

2 hours ago, Colonel X said:

I think you're misunderstanding something here. This has nothing to do with VRAM or even the GPU. The scenery rendering is done by the CPU. The sim is heavily CPU bottlenecked (as much as other sims), and the reason the LOD is rather low is that by extending that, the game would become unplayable on most PC's.

Even on Ultra, my 11GB VRAM barely gets filled up by 50%.

The real thing that fill up our RAM and VRAM is the render scaling, higher the value better the rendering, but it kills the fps. My value is 170 with about 30 fps, CPU @60%, GPU @96%.

[Heavy Metal 83]

21 minutes ago, flying_w said:

 Might be nice if the photogammetry part could be disabled and just regular photo ground tiles with procedurally generated cities were an option, but not sure if Bing can support that.  But either way, I'm more than happy.

Hi, try to turn it off in Options > General > Data > Photogrammetry OFF. Did not test it, but if it does what is says, you should have an option here to use or not use it....

[wim123 763]

2 hours ago, Slides said:

I needed none of that to have an amazing flying experience. The best sim experience I have ever had in fact and I have been simming for 20+ years. I was just flying using the roads and other visual markers as a guide. 

you know what. i use paper road maps here, to fly vfr, having a ton of fun.

i am glad i saved all those maps , were difficult to use with fsx.

 

[bonchie 2,305]

One of things I warned about the most prior to release was that people need to not see photogrammetry as a magic bullet.

Yes, it looks really cool in a lot of situations, but it also has serious limitations if the imagery is not top quality, and in a lot of places, it's not. That's also where the blocky trees come from that people are complaining about. It's not the sim's in-game trees. If I'm not specifically land-mark spotting, I have it turned off and prefer to let the AI build the city because it's a much "cleaner" presentation IMO.

 

Edited August 19, 2020 by bonchie

[bonchie 2,305]

52 minutes ago, flying_w said:

Glad you are enjoying it, the great thing here is people who can enjoy it do enjoy it, and whilst I may not like some of it in no way do I think the simulator is terrible because of it.  Might be nice if the photogammetry part could be disabled and just regular photo ground tiles with procedurally generated cities were an option, but not sure if Bing can support that.  But either way, I'm more than happy.

It can be turned off. It's under data options. I like it off if I'm doing low-level GA. Leave it on for airliners or normal A to B flying because the strengths outweigh the flaws when you aren't flying right near it.

Edited August 19, 2020 by bonchie

[captain420 3,099]

2 hours ago, Gomoto said:

Manually downloading does not fix the spikyness of the buildings in the distance. 

The spikyness is not disturbing in smaller cities or towns. But flying over New York for example it is a real problem with manual cache and without it. Buildings should be rendered as cuboid if build as such in any LOD.

How did you create your region when you downloaded manhattan? Did you select the are as low, medium are high?

[Kilo60 660]

5 hours ago, patrickbc said:

Well I almost feel opposite. When I fly really close, the photogrammetry looks great. But from a medium distance of 2 - 6nm not so much.

This is the same area as marked in red on the original photo. Looks fine up close.

I think what's happening is that it is not bad photogrammetry...

 

Its probably the fact, that regardless of your FPS setting (30/60), the game automatically adjusts visuals to prioritize FPS.

 

Setting ULTRA will only go so far when your system CPU/GPU is maxed and the rendering LOD will be automatically reduced at a distance.

 

If you could somehow override this setting you'd probably get a ton of stutters and the dreaded "Blurries".

 

What are your specs and someone with a better system should test in the same conditions!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 19, 2020 by Kilo60

[devgrp 1,233]

If you want better looking photogrametry, turn up terrain details or building details, it's one of those settings. 

Edited August 19, 2020 by devgrp

[Kilo60 660]

Just now, devgrp said:

If you want better looking photogrametry, turn up terrain details or one of those settings. Can't remember the exact one 

If the game automatically lowers the draw distance of objects and LOD detail (based on your system being maxed and not able to render sufficient FPS) this will not make a difference at all!

[devgrp 1,233]

Just now, Kilo60 said:

If the game automatically lowers the draw distance of objects and LOD detail (based on your system being maxed and not able to render sufficient FPS) this will not make a difference at all!

I wasn't aware it did this? I did turn mine up and they look better. I'm not too obsessed with lod like alot of these guys because I know if I'm flying in a real plane, I can't see buildings or whatever clearly when they are miles out. I guess they were going for realism lol 

[patrickbc 33]

50 minutes ago, Kilo60 said:

I think what's happening is that it is not bad photogrammetry...

 

Its probably the fact, that regardless of your FPS setting (30/60), the game automatically adjusts visuals to prioritize FPS.

 

Setting ULTRA will only go so far when your system CPU/GPU is maxed and the rendering LOD will be automatically reduced at a distance.

 

If you could somehow override this setting you'd probably get a ton of stutters and the dreaded "Blurries".

 

What are your specs and someone with a better system should test in the same conditions!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Specs in my signature. EKCH RWY 12 ILS at 1400ft, Da40NG, clear skies around noon. 
 

Do you have a source stating that the sim automatically adjusts setting according to fps? Because turning the dials from high to ultra definitely made an improvement in draw distance, also I can literally make the sim run at 1 FPS if I set the render to 200%, would the sim “not allow me” to to that, if it adjusts setting according to fps?

[JimmiG 244]

1 hour ago, devgrp said:

If you want better looking photogrametry, turn up terrain details or building details, it's one of those settings. 

Yep for the photogrammetry you actually have to adjust the Terrain Level of Detail, since it's essentially a fancy mesh at a very high resolution. Cranking that up to 200 will improve distant photogrammetry somewhat. Still doesn't compare to custom made 3D objects with hand-crafted LODs, though. With the photogrammetry the sim has to kind of guess which polygons to remove based on distance.

Edited August 19, 2020 by AdvancedFollower

[Gomoto 31]

I painted Manhatten as high. You have to zoom in to be able to paint it as high.

[jpe828 624]

Report this to zen desk guys. It is my biggest complaint scenery wise right now.... the black blocky textures in cities and such. Looks good right over top, that is about it. I am sure it has to do with the streaming and servers that they are using... Sim runs great otherwise. 

[iankb 1]

Has anybody found out the effect of the CPU core count?

I use an AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X 12-Core CPU, with 24 hyper-threads.  It would be nice to think that MSFS was one of those programs that actually made use of a Threadripper.

When I get the chance, I will try some testing on this.

So far, I have been very happy running at 2560x1440 on Ultra with a GTX 1080 TI, but maybe I'm not as fussy as you.

However, having skipped the RTX 2080, I will be buying an RTX 3080 when I get the chance, and will be running it at 5120x1440 on an ultra-wide monitor that I am yet to install.