Day 5 most SIGNIFICANT--->OMG! Post..the real deal, LOL!

[SierraDelta 1,358]

36 minutes ago, Sesquashtoo said:

a post doesn't last 5 minutes on the first page

Well, guess what. That's because people keep creating new threads with out checking if the subject has been talked about already ...

[EmaRacing 302]

42 minutes ago, odourboy said:

My observation also. I'm using 80 and there is a very slight but noticeable degradation of the screens and panels. You might improve it with stronger anti aliasing, but you may give back the performance gains you achieved... haven't tried that.

50... A non starter for me. Looks like garbage (i.e. looks like HD). Lol

I'm already on TAA(maximumAA) and it doesn't really have an impact on fps, also, It's the only option available because OFF is ugly lines and the others inbetween make the sky GREEN🤣 

If there was a way to sharpen the instruments that would be perfect, I don't see any blurring on everything else even at 70, which is as low as I tried, fps were already around 60.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

1 hour ago, odourboy said:

My observation also. I'm using 80 and there is a very slight but noticeable degradation of the screens and panels. You might improve it with stronger anti aliasing, but you may give back the performance gains you achieved... haven't tried that.

50... A non starter for me. Looks like garbage (i.e. looks like HD). Lol

Try TS at 2x2..that should make the smaller fonts more readable..

[TheRandomGuy 21]

2 hours ago, Sesquashtoo said:

OMG!

Thank you, AVSIM, for putting the MSFS Tips and Tricks sub-forum...

I am having the most significant yet...OMG!  experience, on day 5 post RTM.

Thank you to the tip'ster that said, you can (I never even touched this...didn't really understand fully what it did...how it worked...BUT I DO NOW!!!!) slide your RENDER scale down from 100 and see pretty serious FPS gains...but...with very little visual degradation that your eye will see.

...was he/she ever right...wowzer!

So...I am running 3440x1440 native, which is about 80 % true 4K, right?  Well around there...and in the settings that I have contributed as try this....try that...I was getting on my system around a constant 27-31 FPS.  

This morning, I dropped my RENDER SCALING down to what I imagine would be around my older 1920x1200 monitor sitting packed away. Non widescreen, around 50/60 scale reduction.

Pressed APPLY and SAVE...and wham bam...my FPS meter shot up to 41-42 (constant),  with flash pops to 48-51 FPS! 42 minus 27 was an OMG---->15 FPS!!!!  I gained over 33 % higher FPS/System output.

For myself, for my eyes...I don't see a tremendous visual difference, between my native 3440x1440 and whatever 50/70 (I have it right now on pause, at 50, with 16AF and 4x4 SS.) translates out to.   So...on day 5 post RTM,  I have full native default ULTRA on...and getting 41-42 in the cockpit, outside camera...and folks...the MSFS world and scenery is down right...always tapped on----OMG!   Happier than a pig in (word not allowed)!!!!!     So  again, a great idea to have the MSFS Tips and Tricks (or whatever it is called..lol) up and running. I read every post...and when I got to the fellow who talked about the 'much mentioned'...(so where was I, when all this much mentioning was going on?!?!?!?) about dropping down your RENDER SCALE for 4K users, to garner on average 10 more FPS with no truly bad visual 'hit'.  So right, and...even for ones with wide screen's...

Day 5, and things just keep getting better and better on the MSFS 'homefront'... 🙂

Back to the flight outta Orbx's KORS, in the Icon A5. ....

Cheers, y'all!

 

Downscale resolution and you will have a linear increase in performance.

What’s ignored in this post is that this ”trick” relies heavily on what size in inches your monitor is. Obviously this works great on a smaller 2k or 4k monitor. I have a 24” monitor @ 1080p. Reducing resolution scale below 100% makes aliasing really bad.

I also have a 27” monitor at 1440p. Below 95% begins to degrade visual quality.

Edited August 23, 2020 by TheRandomGuy

[MarkW 1,502]

The enthusiasm and entertainment value of the @Sesquashtoo posts are in a league of their own. I am a fan!

 

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

2 minutes ago, MarkW said:

The enthusiasm and entertainment value of the @Sesquashtoo posts are in a league of their own. I am a fan!

 

Motorcycling and Flight simming do have a common link...you have to execute a bank to the right or left...:)    Am a dedicated fan of both pursuits.. 🙂

Edited August 23, 2020 by Sesquashtoo

[odourboy 1,290]

5 minutes ago, TheRandomGuy said:

Downscale resolution and you will have a linear increase in performance.

What’s ignored in this post is that this ”trick” relies heavily on what size in inches your monitor is. Obviously this works great on a smaller 2k or 4k monitor. I have a 24” monitor @ 1080p. Reducing resolution scale below 100% makes aliasing really bad.

I also have a 27” monitor at 1440p. Below 95% begins to degrade visual quality.

Great point! I can immediately see the image degradation on my 58" 4K screen as I drop the RS.  

Edited August 23, 2020 by odourboy

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

4 minutes ago, TheRandomGuy said:

Sorry to rain on your parade but this is just common sense. Downscale resolution and you will have a linear increase in performance.

What’s ignored in this post is that this ”trick” relies heavily on what size in inches your monitor is. Obviously this works great on a smaller 2k or 4k monitor. I have a 24” monitor @ 1080p. Reducing resolution scale below 100% makes aliasing really bad.

I also have a 27” monitor at 1440p. Below 95% begins to degrade visual quality.

Everybody around here, knows (or should by now, lol) that I run with a Dell U3415W  native at 3440x1440.  With my using the reducer to 50 %...I am getting 43-52 peak FPS...and clear as a bell...  So, people will have to take that as my posting base line...and make or break from there... 😉

[Huascar 179]

8 minutes ago, TheRandomGuy said:

What’s ignored in this post is that this ”trick” relies heavily on what size in inches your monitor is. 

My understanding is that the size of your monitor/TV is irrelevant in terms of FPS. What matters is the resolution. A 27” monitor on 4K has the same impact as an 80” inch monitor with the same resolution. 
 

“Screen size doesn't directly have anything to do with performance, but resolution does. ... Higher resolutionmeans more pixels, and pixel count definitely does impact performance in modern games - more pixels = more work to be done per frame = lower frame rate.”

Edited August 23, 2020 by Huascar

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

1 minute ago, Huascar said:

My understanding is that the size of your monitor/TV is irrelevant in terms of FPS. What matters is the resolution. A 27” monitor on 4K has the same impact as an 80” inch monitor with the same resolution. 

Hey Huascar...do you happen to know how to assign male/female voices to your avatar PIC?  No matter what I choose, the voice coming back is female...

[Huascar 179]

1 minute ago, Sesquashtoo said:

Hey Huascar...do you happen to know how to assign male/female voices to your avatar PIC?  No matter what I choose, the voice coming back is female...

Sesquashtoo - sorry,  I do not know the answer to your question,  and I can’t even try to figure it out as my PC died on me ten days ago. Still waiting on a replacement.

[TheRandomGuy 21]

7 minutes ago, Huascar said:

My understanding is that the size of your monitor/TV is irrelevant in terms of FPS. What matters is the resolution. A 27” monitor on 4K has the same impact as an 80” inch monitor with the same resolution. 
 

“Screen size doesn't directly have anything to do with performance, but resolution does. ... Higher resolutionmeans more pixels, and pixel count definitely does impact performance in modern games - more pixels = more work to be done per frame = lower frame rate.”

That is correct. My point, as an example, was that 4k looks worse at 60" than at 27" (Lookup pixel density). Downscaling the resolution below 100% on a larger monitor/TV with a borderline bad pixel density/screen size ratio can degrade image quality very much.

If you have a 4k monitor at 27" you can probably downscale the resolution by 50% and still have a decent looking sim. Do the same thing on a 50" 4k monitor and it will look really bad. 

 

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

8 minutes ago, Huascar said:

Sesquashtoo - sorry,  I do not know the answer to your question,  and I can’t even try to figure it out as my PC died on me ten days ago. Still waiting on a replacement.

Oh wow...sorry to read that...hope the next one has killer spec's! 🙂

[TheRandomGuy 21]

13 minutes ago, Sesquashtoo said:

Everybody around here, knows (or should by now, lol) that I run with a Dell U3415W  native at 3440x1440.  With my using the reducer to 50 %...I am getting 43-52 peak FPS...and clear as a bell...  So, people will have to take that as my posting base line...and make or break from there... 😉

I didn't mean for my post to come out harsh. With your pixel density I agree you could possibly downscale a bit with little loss in visual quality and a good gain in performance. 😋

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

2 minutes ago, TheRandomGuy said:

That is correct. My point, as an example, was that 4k looks worse at 60" than at 27" (Lookup pixel density). Downscaling the resolution below 100% on a larger monitor/TV with a borderline bad pixel density/screen size ratio can degrade image quality very much.

If you have a 4k monitor at 27" you can probably downscale the resolution by 50% and still have a decent looking sim. Do the same thing on a 50" 4k monitor and it will look really bad. 

 

So I guess, truly the bottom line is for those running on home TV's...large 4 K monsters...they need the PC muscle...plain and simple..