MSFS 2020 will crush your high end computer

[Huascar 179]

No question that playing MSFS on ultra settings on a 4K display will melt your gaming rig. Even the upcoming GTX 3090 could face a serious challenge in a matchup with MSFS.  

I guess we have to settle for lower resolutions and medium graphics settings until new and better hardware technology is developed. The game is still very enjoyable on 1080p, though things could get more complicated with the introduction of more complex aircraft. Think PMDG 777 or FSLab on final approach in New York City. 
 

 

Edited August 27, 2020 by Huascar
Change

[wim123 761]

clickbait stuff, who cares.

[CarlosF 1,239]

Most of my settings are Ultra on a 1080p res, locked @30, my sim world looks stunning and although there are some micro stutters here and there, Im quite happy with the performance Im getting out of my 5 year old pc. 

[AKMGuru 17]

I’m running a i7 8700 , 32 GB ram, RTX2080 super on all ultra settings at 2k res. Getting solid 30 FPS up to 40 in rural areas.

 

Its hardly killing my system. If at all. Game is smooth and looks amazing.

[Huascar 179]

2 minutes ago, AKMGuru said:

I’m running a i7 8700 , 32 GB ram, RTX2080 super on all ultra settings at 2k res. Getting solid 30 FPS up to 40 in rural areas.

Glad to hear about the positive experiences. Waiting on my gaming computer to arrive  so I can experience it myself. Alas, my PC died a week before MSFS 2020 came out.

[AKMGuru 17]

Just now, Huascar said:

Glad to hear about the positive experiences. Waiting on my gaming computer to arrive  so I can experience it myself. Alas, my PC died a week before MSFS 2020 came out.

Yeah that sucks I feel ya. What are the specs of the new rig? 

[Keto Ketchup 240]

I'm more than happy with how this sim performs and looks on my 1080p mid-range gaming laptop with a mix of high and ultra settings. It actually performs better than both FSX and XPlane 11, despite being lightyears ahead graphics-wise. I thought for sure it would be a slideshow on my PC when I first saw the videos, but instead I'm getting an average of 48 fps (which looks great on my 144hz monitor).

Now when VR support comes, then I fully expect to be crushed into oblivion, LOL.

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

17 minutes ago, Huascar said:

Think PMDG 777 or FSLab on final approach in New York City.

PMDG have confirmed "no discernible negative effect on the performance of the simulation" with their 737NG3.

[Huascar 179]

Just now, Keto Ketchup said:

Now when VR support comes, then I fully expect to be crushed into oblivion, LOL.

Perhaps it’s a good thing that MSFS does support VR at the present moment though I can’t wait to have that experience.

[Huascar 179]

5 minutes ago, AKMGuru said:

Yeah that sucks I feel ya. What are the specs of the new rig? 

i7 10700k (turbo clocked to 5.1ghz), GTX 2080 super, 32GB of RAM and my current internet speed is 1000gb. 

[Nedo68 533]

My 2080ti max temp is 74° while in 4k, i try to gain 60fps and not everything on Ultra (Clouds and Reflections is a must have on Ultra, tho)

hehe doubt it will melt 😅

Edited August 27, 2020 by Nedo68

[khague3 46]

I guess I'm just lucky with my rig -- self-built with i7-7820X, 32GB RAM, 1080Ti, running at 4k resolution, all settings on Ultra, and the sim is butter smooth for my eyes.  I don't think I've looked at my frame-rates at all, any time either thru the alpha/beta cycle all the way to release...

[stinger2k2 23]

1 hour ago, Nedo68 said:

My 2080ti max temp is 74° while in 4k, i try to gain 60fps and not everything on Ultra (Clouds and Reflections is a must have on Ultra, tho)

hehe doubt it will melt 😅

Yep, same graphics card, same temperature. I checked with my pc supplier who says dont worry, they can take it no trouble.😊

[PurdueKev 159]

"Ultra" is a completely meaningless term - there is no standard definition and what constitutes "ultra" is different for every game or sim.  It only matters whether the settings you choose to run look good.

No, I cannot run max settings on my quite-capable rig without significantly compromising performance, but the settings I DO run look and perform measurably better than I have been able to achieve on any other sim platform to date.

Edited August 27, 2020 by PurdueKev

[hangar 661]

3 hours ago, Huascar said:

things could get more complicated with the introduction of more complex aircraft. Think PMDG 777 or FSLab on final approach in New York City

Well, I live in and fly in that area...and from what I've seen as far as fps and smoothness, I don't think that right now I'd be eager to install ANY type (large or small) of 3rd party aircraft in this sim.  Why? Because you'd more or less be tripling the number of gauges in the cockpit which will kill your smoothness and fps.

Perhaps at some point in the future if the performance of the base sim improves, yes...but right now you'll be needing to see more than the current 30-60 fps that most of us are currently seeing before you'd want to install a 3rd party plane which uses custom gauges, unless it uses default gauges (but then why bother buying it?).

Of course most folks will still buy and complain that their only getting 15-20 fps in their custom big iron, but I personally, will be seeking (for the first time in decades) an alternate way of enjoying this sim by using default or modified default planes... at least for awhile anyway.

Edited August 27, 2020 by hangar