How Much More?

[Noel 4,499]

I've compared both options because I can, and I can tell you as a 'gamer' with 30y of experience, I can't tell the difference, in P3D nor MSFS.  Now you if intentionally try to tease out differences I'm sure you can, but in the way a flight sim is used, I stand 100% behind my belief.  Further, you really need to look at the entire package:  if you're totally smooth, and I am, w/ smooth panning, and have copius CPU headroom to exploit while at Ultra settings, this matters hugely.  I believe this is the least exploited approach that offers far more than it takes away.  I am vocal about this because I believe too many people don't really appreciate how good it is, specifically, vsync to a 30Hz screen, for what it offers.  Not RTSS scanline x/2, but actual vsync to 30Hz.  For first person shooters, racing games etc this will matter, but again, looking at the entire picture of needing headroom to accommodate PMDG and othe likely more CPU-intensive planeware, AND demanding a totally smooth experience, you can't beat vsync to 30hz.  I've tried both 30Hz and 60hz extensively, cannot discern the difference after a reboot/reconfig on the same machine.  The entire argument changes when you can maintain 60fps in all scenarios w/ all settings on Ultra/100/200/200 in something like the PMDG 777.  Even then though, the perceived difference will not be that significant at all.  I say this because I've done both extensively.

How much have you used vsync to 30Hz screen?

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

Is this old argument still ongoing? 
Isn’t the new ps5 and Xbox 60fps now? Gotta be for a reason, no?  

[AnkH 2,262]

Everybody can tell the difference of 30 or 60 FPS. No idea, why this bull keeps popping up in flight sim forums (never in gaming forums, guess why?). There are even plenty of screen tests for this with rock stable 30 vs. 60FPS, if you can not tell the difference by looking at those, you might consider medical examination to check if your eyesight is still ok, seriously. Example: testufo.com

BTW: I can see the difference between 60 and 30, but I still prefer locked 30, but just because I prefer eye candy over FPS in the sims and my rig would be only capable of 60 FPS with too many settings dialled down.

Edited January 14, 2021 by AnkH

[Denwagg 191]

2 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Everybody can tell the difference of 30 or 60 FPS. No idea, why this bull keeps popping up in flight sim forums (never in gaming forums, guess why?). There are even plenty of screen tests for this with rock stable 30 vs. 60FPS, if you can not tell the difference by looking at those, you might consider medical examination to check if your eyesight is still ok, seriously. Example: testufo.com

 

 

 

Oh I can tell the difference. I can also tell the difference between the quality of the image generated at both FPS. I CHOOSE to load my GPU so I am getting between 24-30 FPS and 100%GPU load. 

There is no magic bullet for 60FPS in MSFS and best Image quality. Sometimes you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Regards

[honanhal 1,420]

If you genuinely can't see a difference between 30 and 60 fps, good for you! You can save a lot on hardware. 😃

On the other hand, you should seriously get your eyes checked...

[bobcat999 8,476]

It is not about if people can see the difference between 30 and 60 (surely they can?), but whether it is a necessary sacrifice against other items (visual quality).  

I can tell the difference easily, but in the main I am looking forward through the screen, and there is not much pixel movement.  I notice 30 fps is not as smooth when panning my head to look out of the side window, but it is tolerable.

I long for the day of 4k and all sliders to the right at 60 fps, and I think with DX12 and maybe the next generation of graphics cards, we might soon be there.  Although the devs normally find a way of adding extra graphical effects to slow it all down again! 

At the moment, as others have said, 30 FPS is tolerable for me and it allows me to increase screen resolution and run at high / ultra.

 

 

[iFlySimX 751]

1 hour ago, honanhal said:

If you genuinely can't see a difference between 30 and 60 fps, good for you! You can save a lot on hardware. 😃

On the other hand, you should seriously get your eyes checked...

LOL right?

2 hours ago, AnkH said:

Everybody can tell the difference of 30 or 60 FPS. No idea, why this bull keeps popping up in flight sim forums (never in gaming forums, guess why?). There are even plenty of screen tests for this with rock stable 30 vs. 60FPS, if you can not tell the difference by looking at those, you might consider medical examination to check if your eyesight is still ok, seriously. Example: testufo.com

BTW: I can see the difference between 60 and 30, but I still prefer locked 30, but just because I prefer eye candy over FPS in the sims and my rig would be only capable of 60 FPS with too many settings dialled down.

Exactly!

[spacedyemeerkat 421]

1 hour ago, bobcat999 said:

It is not about if people can see the difference between 30 and 60 (surely they can?), but whether it is a necessary sacrifice against other items (visual quality).  

Actually, someone earlier in this thread really did say that in a double-blind test, people would not be able to tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps.

[bobcat999 8,476]

10 minutes ago, spacedyemeerkat said:

Actually, someone earlier in this thread really did say that in a double-blind test, people would not be able to tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps.

Well that is just crazy.   If I go to and area that is not too busy in MSFS and change to 60 fps through RTSS straight away, I can tell the difference immediately. 

It is the sideways scrolling and panning that gives it away.  When you are used to 30 fps like me, the smoothness of 60 fps almost makes me feel disorientated for a while, as everything seems to whiz around super smooth.

Everyone is different I suppose.  I think it comes from the generalisation (and myth) that the eye only can only perceive 24 Hz at most, and that is why movies are shot at this speed.   But if you watch a high speed movie (high fps) on a TV that is say 100 or 120 Hz, you can easily see the difference.

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

28 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

When you are used to 30 fps like me, the smoothness of 60 fps almost makes me feel disorientated for a while, as everything seems to whiz around super smooth.

And that is the difference 🙂 and that’s what makes it feel and look more like flight. IMO. 

[BigDee 119]

In the 90 th some scientists did say the human eye cannot perceive more than 28 image per seconds.They were totally wrong and their knowledge is questionable. 

 

I have got a 144 hz laptop, I didn`t need it, but it was included in my configuration. The difference is totally perceivable.  Just drag your window very fast from one side to the other. If you see multiple windows on the screen (tearing), then you know you would not get them on a good 144hz screen.

I thought there would be no difference between 60 hz and 144 hz, but there is. For me it`s more of a beauty solution, it feels more fluid. That`s why I still can live with 60 fps, but gamers who pretend they need it for better reflexes are anyway abused, because a frame at 60hz does 17 milliseconds.

Edited January 14, 2021 by BigDee

[marsman2020 1,310]

Honestly while MSFS is graphically a lot better then other flight sims, compared to say Control or other AAA games it's not anything special visually. 

I hope there is additional optimization that can be done, because the console GPUs are pretty limited compared to what a lot of PC flight simmers are running and it will be a very poor experience on XBox if they can't optimize it more.

Edited January 14, 2021 by marsman2020

[iFlySimX 751]

Yea, this is 2021, with the hardware we should be able to hold about 60FPS. I think there is so much crappy code from FSX. Keep in mind that MSFS 2020 was not developed from scratch. They used some things from the FSX code. Probably for cost and efficiency reasons. 

[bean_sprout 1,201]

On 1/13/2021 at 6:36 AM, sanh said:

I don't think flight sims can be optimised. Too many variables. Too many settings, addons, planes and scenery. Whichever combo you use has to be finely tuned.

 

There is no free lunch.

Cheers

bs

[Noel 4,499]

3 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

It is not about if people can see the difference between 30 and 60 (surely they can?), but whether it is a necessary sacrifice against other items (visual quality).  

I can tell the difference easily, but in the main I am looking forward through the screen, and there is not much pixel movement.  I notice 30 fps is not as smooth when panning my head to look out of the side window, but it is tolerable.

I long for the day of 4k and all sliders to the right at 60 fps, and I think with DX12 and maybe the next generation of graphics cards, we might soon be there.  Although the devs normally find a way of adding extra graphical effects to slow it all down again! 

At the moment, as others have said, 30 FPS is tolerable for me and it allows me to increase screen resolution and run at high / ultra.

There you go same sentiment said in a few different words.  For what you PAY for vsync to 30Hz, the payoff is outstanding.  With regard to noticing 30 v 60 I'd be curious to know how many who claim it's anywhere near important in a civilian flight sim have actually vsynced to a 30Hz capable screen, not a surrogate test using RTSS.  My sense is there aren't a whole lot of screens w/ this capability and for those stuck on 120Hz screens and up I know those won't be capable.   I continue to bring this up because I feel the payoff is excellent for the cost and not everyone is aware of just how excellent solid vsync to 30Hz is for flight simulation.   For everyone who has used this and appreciates what it offers there are probably 50 that think they must have 60fps else they lose something more significant than being able to maintain total smoothness anywhere.   Just wait til the PMDG and other stuff arrives.