So I turned everything to max settings turned on Bing Data Maps and photogrammetry etc. 

I flew King Air about NYC and got 4FPS lol. 

FIRSTLY:  I know and willing accept I set my settings way beyond my systems capabilities. 

But a question I had was... would any single system upgrade make a difference when dialed back a bit.

Here's what I have:

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
RAM: 16.9GB 
GPU: RTX 2060 Super
Motherboard: B450 Aorus Pro Wifi
Installed On: 1TB SSD
Internet Speed Test Via Google: 49.8Mbps download 10.1 upload

Edited February 20, 20215 yr by NZAA

Video card, in my opinion.

32gbs of fast ram... and ram is cheap. So thats easy. Then your GPU. The CPU is fine. But I think ram will help you., especially in dense areas. Internet wifi or ethernet cable? Yours is marginal, I found I need to be over 100 to have scenery load in fairly quickly, even then its spotty. But I think this is more optimization. 

Most critical info not given, screen resolution

11 minutes ago, peroni said:

Most critical info not given, screen resolution

Happy to add any more info if it's a factor. Just ask 🙂

I have two screens. MSFS only used on one.

Primary Screen: LG, 1080p 1920x1080 60Hz via HDMI

Second screen: Phillips, 1920x1080 60Hz via DVI  (never used MSFS on this)

24 minutes ago, jpe828 said:

32gbs of fast ram... and ram is cheap. So thats easy. Then your GPU. The CPU is fine. But I think ram will help you., especially in dense areas. Internet wifi or ethernet cable? Yours is marginal, I found I need to be over 100 to have scenery load in fairly quickly, even then its spotty. But I think this is more optimization. 

I had wondered if 32Gb would make a difference. 

Internet over ethernet. It's as fast as it seems to get around here and is sold as fiber.

32Gb ram would probably give you most bang for the buck, you should start with that.

Yep, memory would be the pick in this case!

Edited February 21, 20215 yr by TheJAG

11 minutes ago, TheJAG said:

I am surprised you are only getting 4 FPS with that system

Likewise. I have a Radeon 5700XT, which Tom's Hardware rank only 3 places higher than your 2060 Super (albeit scoring 6% higher in their scoring), so 4FPS sounds way too low. I can definitely echo the above recommendations to double your RAM - cheapest upgrade and it doesn't hurt to have as much as you can afford. With my setup (see signature), I get a steady 30FPS in most areas, though it can dip to 14FPS in the most challenging locations (and occasionally single figures, but probably due to one-off issues), and I'm running all Ultra with a 1440 monitor. When I installed (with a 1080 monitor at the time), the recommended settings were mainly High, and probably still would be, but I can cope with the occasional FPS hit for greater detail.

For what it's worth........I just took a flight from KLGA to the north end of Central Park (Cessna 152) and then turned south and flew to the end of Manhattan Island. I'm running Ultra settings with everything maxxed and a single monitor at 1920x1200. The rig is a 10700K OC'd to 5.1Ghz, 32 GB RAM, and a RTX 2060 Super. Framerate was set to unlimited and it never dropped below 29. From Central Park to The Battery over the most dense part of the whole flight the FPS held at 34-36. I don't exactly know what this means but the problem definitely isn't the 2060. Maybe the guys are right when they say it's RAM. My RAM usage did get up to 24GB and I would guess that with 16GB you're hitting the swap file which can be a real slow down. As I say, this is just for what it's worth because all mileage is, of course, variable..........Doug

 

6 hours ago, NZAA said:

So I turned everything to max settings turned on Bing Data Maps and photogrammetry etc. 

I flew King Air about NYC and got 4FPS lol. 

FIRSTLY:  I know and willing accept I set my settings way beyond my systems capabilities. 

But a question I had was... would any single system upgrade make a difference when dialed back a bit.

1. No graphics card/CPU can do TRUE MAX no matter what they tell you, not even a 3090s with an i9 processor .  road vehicles, airport static planes. traffic of any kind will erode frames quick.  Hell heavy AI traffic alone will bring any system to its knees.

2. You absolutely need 32 GB RAM. I was getting OOMs around New York quick with 16GB, 32 made a world of difference.  This thing USES about 24GB-27GB ram near NYC and gets worse the longer you fly.  I would say this thing with a bunch of addons could exceed 32GB ram, we haven't even see how bad the RAM usage is yet.  Wait until we get good AI traffic and really complex planes.

3. I have a i7 9700KF, and a 2070 super and I get about 30-40 frames over NYC, but you need to dial the settings back. I use HIGH as a global setting then I change clouds and cockpit effects and field of view to ULTRA I feel this is the best bang for the buck. Resolution 2560X1080. 100% scale.

 

Edited February 21, 20215 yr by aniiran
30-40 frames most times around 37-42

Question:

If you look at your ram with (f.i) GPU-Z and it indicates that your system ram is at  (around, or just below) 16 and you have 32 ram, is that a realistic indication of the actual system ram you are using?

and what would be the usage if you have 16 gb ram (actual) in the same situation

 

 

 

3 hours ago, aniiran said:

 

1. No graphics card/CPU can do TRUE MAX no matter what they tell you, not even a 3090s with an i9 processor .  road vehicles, airport static planes. traffic of any kind will erode frames quick.  Hell heavy AI traffic alone will bring any system to its knees.

2. You absolutely need 32 GB RAM. I was getting OOMs around New York quick with 16GB, 32 made a world of difference.  This thing USES about 24GB-27GB ram near NYC and gets worse the longer you fly.  I would say this thing with a bunch of addons could exceed 32GB ram, we haven't even see how bad the RAM usage is yet.  Wait until we get good AI traffic and really complex planes.

3. I have a i7 9700KF, and a 2070 super and I get about 30-40 frames over NYC, but you need to dial the settings back. I use HIGH as a global setting then I change clouds and cockpit effects and field of view to ULTRA I feel this is the best bang for the buck. Resolution 2560X1080. 100% scale.

 

Looking a heap of youtube comparisons between 16 and 32gb.. there's a difference but only marginal. 

4 fps at 1080p is not normal at all. Something is wrong with your setup, make sure the monitor cable is connected to the PCI-E GPU and not to the motherboard video out.