42 minutes ago, roi1862 said:

No problem if you'll show me how to run smooth at 30 FPS on my 165hz monitor without it being slide-show i would gladly do it. I am locked at 40 FPS with the recommended High-end settings. My GPU is at 95% to 100% and my CPU about 40%. I dont think we should be limited by either CPU or GPU. The load should be spread evenly. 

On P3D i was quite happy with locked at 33 FPS. On this one i simply cant. Its unflyable.

Evenly loaded assumes that you have a balanced system to begin with.. 😉

Not sure why 33 fps would be unflyable... I quite happily fly at 30 fps (on a 60Hz monitor).

3 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

Evenly loaded assumes that you have a balanced system to begin with.. 😉

Not sure why 33 fps would be unflyable... I quite happily fly at 30 fps (on a 60Hz monitor).

Well said; I am in very good company then!

30 fps on 60Hz monitor is most of the time stable for me also on the Ultra settings and 4K. But for now we are with default airplanes and default scenery 😄 

Strangely I have 15-17 fps at FL300... which was never so in P3D...

Edited September 1, 20205 yr by Vali

46 minutes ago, Vali said:

30 fps on 60Hz monitor is most of the time stable for me also on the Ultra settings and 4K. But for now we are with default airplanes and default scenery

Ohh man once that PMGD is released...even without heavy payware airport....

15 hours ago, RustyFlyer said:

I am glad that you have contempt lol for  ("... Im ... Detest low frame rate...") low frame rates. I am also glad that you have decades of experience gaming and simming. My gaming experience only begins with pinball machines, with foosball, with "Pong" played for a quarter ($0.25) on Pong video machines in pizzerias & bars, then with text-based D&D on an Atari hooked up to my LR TV, with Donkey Kong, with Sega's Outrun (a great "simulated" racing game for its time!) & Zillion, with Links 386 Pro (a great golf sim/game designed for folks who were, like myself, running 'puters with 386 processors @ a whopping 25 MHz (yes, that is an M, not a G 😉 )), with iteration after early iteration of MFS beginning with v3.0...................   I think you get the point.

 

 

I'm not sure what our gaming experience has to do with it. But since you seem interested in that...

I'm 62. My first experience was as a professional photographer. We photographed scientific apparatus for a company that sold those items to schools and colleges. It was a ZX80 I recall. Of course, prior to that all manner of primitive arcade machines that were available at the time. We also photographed the very first desktop PC. I mention "decades" (didn't say experience) only to point out how long it is that I have been sensitive to low frame rate and thus prefer higher frame rate. 

 

Quote

I think you get the point.

 

I don't to be honest. 

 

Quote

Yours is a complete misunderstanding of my comment. Nowhere did I indicate that some do not perceive differences in frame rates or in motion presentation connected with differing frame rates. 

 

Huh! I've not misunderstood anything. I wasn't arguing with you. Nowhere did I say you believed that "some do not perceive differences in frame rates". 

 

I was simply commenting on my own sensitivity to such things, my own subjective opinion, putting forward my own experience. I actually said "it's different for me" Not everybody is challenging you, you know. Lol! 😀

Edited September 2, 20205 yr by martin-w

14 hours ago, RustyFlyer said:

 

Before COVID, my wife and I enjoyed movies in theaters at 24 fps (inherent "blurring nature of the medium" aside). After COVID we will resume doing so, and until then, and afterwards also, I will continue to enjoy flying over Manhattan in MFS '20 at 30 fps (with virtually all of my settings maxed out) while still being able "to see the grains of sand" (a euphemism, but the point is clear). *To me* to sacrifice this capability for the marginal fps increase is not worth it.

 

Yeah, you cant put the "blurring nature of the medium aside" though. As I said, 25 frames per second is totally smooth in cinematography. Its more like the equivalent of  60 frame per second in a game. 

 

Quote

while still being able "to see the grains of sand" (a euphemism, but the point is clear).

 

That's fine. Some prefer external eye candy and some prefer performance, smoothness when panning in the virtual cockpit etc. For some, like me, it destroys immersion when I pan around in the cockpit and I see the inevitable impact of a mere 20 frames per second. But again, its all fine. Each to his/her own.  Its all personnel preference. the important point is that you enjoy the sim.

 

Quote

*To me* to sacrifice this capability for the marginal fps increase is not worth it.

 

A valid choice. Many simmers are all about the systems though. The flying. They have their heads inside the cockpit most of the time and are not admiring the scenery as much. For them, eye candy is not a big deal. Smoothly panning in the VS is. 

 

You need as well to consider that lower FPS with TAA is a big visual issue. Anything below 50 FPS on 1080 will be AA issue on clouds, ground etc...