60-100 FPS at Ultra high settings no problem

[flightsimJim 3]

2080ti, i9-9900K, 32GB Ram 

I see people complaining about FPS but I don't see how unless they are on a lower end system...and what did you expect? MS put out the minimum, recommended and ideal specs before launch. I only fly VR now so have had to lower the settings a bit to medium...but medium in VR kicks word not allowed on ultra high settings with a monitor anyday so I don't care.  🙂

[flightsimJim 3]

1 minute ago, flightsimJim said:

2080ti, i9-9900K, 32GB Ram 

I see people complaining about FPS but I don't see how unless they are on a lower end system...and what did they expect? MS put out the minimum, recommended and ideal specs before launch. I only fly VR now so have had to lower the settings a bit to medium...but medium in VR kicks word not allowed on ultra high settings with a monitor anyday so I don't care.  🙂

Why can't you edit posts...at least for 5 minutes? Oh well its your database space...now you are going to get useless posts like this reposting edits.

 

[bobcat999 8,465]

OK. Thanks for your contribution.

Edited March 3, 2021 by bobcat999

[ThomseN_inc 1,128]

9 minutes ago, flightsimJim said:

2080ti, i9-9900K, 32GB Ram 

I see people complaining about FPS but I don't see how unless they are on a lower end system...and what did you expect? MS put out the minimum, recommended and ideal specs before launch. I only fly VR now so have had to lower the settings a bit to medium...but medium in VR kicks word not allowed on ultra high settings with a monitor anyday so I don't care.  🙂

Any prove for this?

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

13 minutes ago, ThomseN_inc said:

Any prove for this?

Probably none whatsoever. That I can imagine anyway. 
It’s like me saying I have had my 911 to 190mph today no problems, so why do I need a Lamborghini. So there 🤪

[marsman2020 1,310]

External FPS tools sometimes show way more FPS then the actual in-sim dev mode FPS counter.  I'm skeptical that anyone can get 100fps on the dev mode counter under any circumstances, you'd be Limited By Mainthread way before that.

[Michael Moe 495]

1 hour ago, flightsimJim said:

2080ti, i9-9900K, 32GB Ram 

I see people complaining about FPS but I don't see how unless they are on a lower end system...and what did you expect? MS put out the minimum, recommended and ideal specs before launch. I only fly VR now so have had to lower the settings a bit to medium...but medium in VR kicks word not allowed on ultra high settings with a monitor anyday so I don't care.  🙂

You cant have both ultra high settings when on medium at the same time.

Do you meen ultra resolution like 4K? And medium settings.

Michael Moe

[ryanbatc 12,833]

I think he is saying when he runs his VR setup at medium it looks a lot better than ultra on a monitor.

60-100 on ultra sounds like a joke though.  Maybe in rural areas.

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

26 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

 

I think he is saying when he runs his VR setup at medium it looks a lot better than ultra on a monitor.

 

 

He must be in need of glasses then. No way does VR look anything like ultra at 4k. 

[cobalt 798]

Personally I see no need for 60-100 FPS. I have MSFS set to a 30 FPS limit and it runs smooth as silk at ultra settings, everywhere. Using a higher setting makes no discernible difference.

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

15 minutes ago, cobalt said:

Personally I see no need for 60-100 FPS. I have MSFS set to a 30 FPS limit and it runs smooth as silk at ultra settings, everywhere. Using a higher setting makes no discernible difference.

The difference between 30- 60 and 90 FPS in a sim (at least to me) is massive. I learned that in the X-plane days, and especially so using vulkan. 

[himmelhorse 1,276]

16 minutes ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

The difference between 30- 60 and 90 FPS in a sim (at least to me) is massive. I learned that in the X-plane days, and especially so using vulkan. 

The REAL difference between 30 and 90FPS is bragging rights LOL 

30FPS using ultra settings for me is much more than acceptable and I really do not see getting 90FPS using lesser settings as a viable alternative. However, each of us know what we like and when we like it. Chasing the ultimate will always be the real goal of some and who is justified in denigrating that approach.

I just love my simming, but am not really appreciating the work involved in fixing the updates that fix previous updates in MSFS.  The end result is brilliant however (if the problem goes away until the next update)  

Why are so many people chasing the latest updates? LOL

Tony

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,798]

3 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

It’s like me saying I have had my 911 to 190mph today no problems, so why do I need a Lamborghini. So there 🤪

 

Hmm ... well here is one doing 8.44 169mph  ... no launch control here

 

 

[EmaRacing 302]

3 hours ago, flightsimJim said:

2080ti, i9-9900K, 32GB Ram 

I see people complaining about FPS but I don't see how unless they are on a lower end system...and what did you expect? MS put out the minimum, recommended and ideal specs before launch. I only fly VR now so have had to lower the settings a bit to medium...but medium in VR kicks word not allowed on ultra high settings with a monitor anyday so I don't care.  🙂

YES

[Flyfaster_MTN002 412]

 

3 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

The difference between 30- 60 and 90 FPS in a sim (at least to me) is massive. I learned that in the X-plane days, and especially so using vulkan. 

so what have you found is the optimum FPS # ?  Aside from 'higher is better' is there some sweet spot beyond where it becomes diminishing returns?