I am a very dedicated (latest version) of P3D, and that was over the last few months, the absolute 'go to' before (if I had time) I ended a session, and had the time to bring another flights sim to bear...

Since getting 1GB download (actual on Cable, 945 Mb's, the most current Cable tech will pipe line...) running feed to a i7-985 four core CPU, that is being fed by a GTX 1070 (non Ti), I frankly, haven't touched either P3D or XP11.  Nothing at all in regards to them...but, with having gotten a ultra fast download pipeline speed from my Cable package, (had for about three weeks now...) and being able to fly over the dead center of most U.S. downtown MAJOR cities at over a 120 knots, and see no, (before my eyes build up) no building and real time rendering of Photogrammetry or A.I. and absolutely no further (EVER!!!!)  malformed (nuclear looking) A.I. or Photogrammetry,  it is so real world...I can't stop shaking my head in total disbelief.  I think I am FINALLY seeing since ordering and installing the Premium Plus Package...what the Microsoft 'vision' was to take 'real world' telemetry to the next level, unseen in the last 20 years.

I have read that 'some' think that having a full GB download pipeline would make no discernable difference, and that tells me RIGHT OFF...that they currently do NOT have that download pipeline working for them on their setup.  No sir!  In having it...over the last three weeks, I have SEEN...the difference in the rendering of all scenery at Ultra, and custom-Ultra current settings.  

The MSFS servers DO HAVE the capacity to download telemetries to your system, with enough pipeline headroom, required to give you total, real life, (with even a modest) GPU such as my GTX 1070 8 GB card...no stutter, no morphing, no 120 over land knots pause, or build up of scenery assets around the plane...NONE..even if you pan...it's all there, fully rendered in Photogrammetry if the current flight plan has it available.

I was flying over Michigan last night, at Ultra (at my usual 120 knots, non tubed...and it was simply STUNNING, to see all the very crisp, and very  detailed Photogrammetry down below my wing.  It actually quite stunned me...as I have NEVER seen such visuals from my over 30 years of flight simming. Never....  

With my older Cable ISP package of 360 MB's , I did...see real time morphing,  building flashes coming into detail,  some (like downtown New York) as well as Seattle,  nuclear views...at 360 Mb's...so if ANYBODY tells you that you can get the same scenic performance at anywhere up or down from 360 Mb's...well, they are so full of ****,  as to their eyes are brown!  Most will be making that assumption, from not HAVING run their downloads from the MSFS Severs with a (Cable) of 945 Mb's . No sir....

In closing...if you have a current system with assets CPU/GPU that is at, or BETTER than what I have currently, then I can MOST ASSURE you, that the cost of upgrading, (or working a deal with your ISP) is beyond the word...'worth it'!!!

Since seeing MSFS (the scenery and the animation performance) with an 945 MB's pipeline...I have not been able to stop flying MSFS.  It is that 'real world' now...and I'm hooked right through the cheek....for when the MSFS WORLD, LOOKS like the real world now, outside my home...how could you (as a flight simmer) not be hooked through the cheek!

Cheers!

Edited October 3, 20214 yr by Sesquashtoo

Bump one time so others might see this avenue as a path to better scenic visuals...not tried yet...

For myself, mind blowing!

Ses

7 hours ago, Sesquashtoo said:

Since getting 1GB download (actual on Cable, 945 Mb's, the most current Cable tech will pipe line...)

I envy you.  For anyone living in the UK this is pure dreamland.

We struggle in most built up areas to get 70Mbs and even then the ISPs operate all kinds of hiden throttling methods so that downloads from the main speed test sites will show the full speed, but trying to get that speed from anywhere else, even when they have the high speed server capacity, will be disappointing.

 

Like you, I'm using a GTX 1070 with 8GB. I have a 6-year-old computer. But unlike you, my internet speed is only 130Mb, which is about one-third the speed of your discarded cable package -- the package you now consider to have been unusable.

Personally, I'm getting superb sim performance from my 130Mb internet connection. I think you're ascribing your improved sim performance to your better internet connection -- when your improvement in sim performance is more likely the result of Sim Updates 5 & 6.

I'm delighted that you're getting such pleasure out of the sim -- as most of us are. But I'm a little concerned that others will read this thread and conclude they can't get good sim performance without a 1Gb data connection. That's simply not the case.

 

39 minutes ago, Biggles2010 said:

I envy you.  For anyone living in the UK this is pure dreamland.

We struggle in most built up areas to get 70Mbs and even then the ISPs operate all kinds of hiden throttling methods so that downloads from the main speed test sites will show the full speed, but trying to get that speed from anywhere else, even when they have the high speed server capacity, will be disappointing.

 

I live about 12 miles south of Leicester. 6 weeks ago I installed satellite internet from SpaceX (ordered in April).  The highest speed I have seen so far is 400MBs, but my average is around 200MBs.  The service is currently in Beta.  Speeds have gradually been increasing.  Latency average is about 30ms, but 20ms is promised.  We are lucky in the UK because we are at the northern most track of the satellites so no dropouts in the signal. 🙂

I had been using EE home broadband on my narrowboat and had an average of 15-20MBs.  When I first installed MSFS (store version), it took several days 😂.  I re-installed MSFS a couple of weeks ago and it took a couple of hours - I was amazed to see MSFS reporting 130MBs!

I have to agree with David. I would have concluded that I would have to have that 1Gb data connection to get stunning visuals just by reading that post, but I feel that it is not the case. I have a 300mb connection, I have every graphics setting maxed, and I still get all of the stunning visuals with great performance as described in the OP, AS LONG AS I am flying at the slower speed he described. But, if I'm flying a complex aircraft with lots of weather and AI turned on, then my performance does go down a bit. For me, it is perfectly fine, since 99% of my flying is in GA aircraft, so my view is always stunning.

1 hour ago, Biggles2010 said:

I envy you.  For anyone living in the UK this is pure dreamland.

I had FTTP installed in August. 900+Mbps download speeds. But a fast download speed hasn’t altered my choice on my preferred flight sim package.

I'm still trying to fill in the blanks from the title. I'll take an 'n' please ?

1 hour ago, David Mills said:

Like you, I'm using a GTX 1070 with 8GB. I have a 6-year-old computer. But unlike you, my internet speed is only 130Mb, which is about one-third the speed of your discarded cable package -- the package you now consider to have been unusable.

Personally, I'm getting superb sim performance from my 130Mb internet connection. I think you're ascribing your improved sim performance to your better internet connection -- when your improvement in sim performance is more likely the result of Sim Updates 5 & 6.

I'm delighted that you're getting such pleasure out of the sim -- as most of us are. But I'm a little concerned that others will read this thread and conclude they can't get good sim performance without a 1Gb data connection. That's simply not the case.

 

David, if you can fly at 120 knots, and pan around, in Ultra, with Photogrammetry in full view, AND, you don't see ANY artifacts, scenery morph,  and where ever you pan, it is fully formed (with clouds) to the horizon...then that is what I have, every second of flight time.  At 360 Mb's I had at some time or another,  an artifact of some kind...or I could see A.I. still rendering,  (at some time, depending on the complexity of what I was viewing or flying over) With my 945Mb's of pipeline speed, I see none of that,  I only now see a fully formed MSFS world telemetries, at ANY time of use, over any kind of complex scenery. Personally, I would never ever, consider going back to anything slower than my current download pipeline... No sir.

Cheers!

Edited October 3, 20214 yr by Sesquashtoo

Just now, Sesquashtoo said:

David, if you can fly at 120 knots, and pan around, in Ultra, with Photogrammetry in full view, AND, you don't see ANY artifacts, scenery morph,  and where ever you pan, it is fully formed (with clouds) to the horizon...then that is what I have, every second of flight time.  At 360 Mb's I had at some time or another,  an artifact of some kind...or I could see A.I. still rendering,  (at some time, depending on the complexity of what I was viewing or flying over) With my 945Mb's of pipeline speed, I see none of that,  I only now see a fully formed MSFS world telemetries, at ANY time of use, over any kind of complex scenery. Personally, I would never ever, consider going back to anything slower than my current download pipeline... No sir.

Cheers!

I have 60Mbps.  If I'm seeing what you describe above, then I'm not noticing it.  <shrugs shoulders>

41 minutes ago, monica6211 said:

I have to agree with David. I would have concluded that I would have to have that 1Gb data connection to get stunning visuals just by reading that post, but I feel that it is not the case. I have a 300mb connection, I have every graphics setting maxed, and I still get all of the stunning visuals with great performance as described in the OP, AS LONG AS I am flying at the slower speed he described. But, if I'm flying a complex aircraft with lots of weather and AI turned on, then my performance does go down a bit. For me, it is perfectly fine, since 99% of my flying is in GA aircraft, so my view is always stunning.

Then, for yourself, you have a good outcome. If you still will see 'wherever' any occasional not fully rendered scenery, or you see a building pop up, or any kind or blurry or morphing of any of your scenery, then you are not getting what I am, since having gone from 360, to 945 Mb's  At 360 I also had some well rendered scenery, but not at any time of day, any scenario, any cloud (real weather) etc, on my pretty frugal computer assets. Since piping at 945 MB's that has totally overcome my modest system hardware.

Edited October 3, 20214 yr by Sesquashtoo

2 minutes ago, Mace said:

I have 60Mbps.  If I'm seeing what you describe above, then I'm not noticing it.  <shrugs shoulders>

OF course apples to apples, my MSFS is full Ultra with a few higher tweaks.  If you are also at Ultra 'plus' settings, then you are most fortunate to not notice anything of what I was describing for visuals.  Good go! 🙂

40 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I live about 12 miles south of Leicester. 6 weeks ago I installed satellite internet from SpaceX (ordered in April).  The highest speed I have seen so far is 400MBs, but my average is around 200MBs.  The service is currently in Beta.  Speeds have gradually been increasing.  Latency average is about 30ms, but 20ms is promised.  We are lucky in the UK because we are at the northern most track of the satellites so no dropouts in the signal. 🙂

I had been using EE home broadband on my narrowboat and had an average of 15-20MBs.  When I first installed MSFS (store version), it took several days 😂.  I re-installed MSFS a couple of weeks ago and it took a couple of hours - I was amazed to see MSFS reporting 130MBs!

I read your post and Ray's...and no way did I want to come across as elitist....no.   I only wanted to share my A/'B about from going from 360 Mb's to 945 Mb's and what has occurred for my scenery rendering under Ultra settings, real weather, and a Com folder pumped full of more than 30 GB's of 'stuff'.  My hope for point, was to say, that if you can get it...and you don't mind securing it...it would be well worth your added cost to obtain.  That's the true meat of the post.

34 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I had FTTP installed in August. 900+Mbps download speeds. But a fast download speed hasn’t altered my choice on my preferred flight sim package.

The truth is, had I never been offered 945 upgraded from my 360, I would have been word not allowed of the visual gains...so ignorance as they say, would be bliss.  Because of such great gains, on my modest system...I was prompted to post that it can be a very powerful visual path upgrade in itself...not having to invest in hundreds to thousands more for hardware.  A high speed pipeline, might be all one needs to get what they expect and would like to see, all the time, and not sporadically.  I would have never known of course, unless I was offered the deal, and took advantage of it.  But I now have the A/B experience, and wanted to say, it is simply amazing the uptick in visuals, ONLY with having gone to a real 945 Mb download pipeline.

Cheers, Ray, and oh...I still will fly (of course) P3D, and WILL get the new XP12 when it comes out...but for now...I'm IN LOVE with my hot new visuals in MSFS.  It's hard to push any other button and fly right now, LOL!

Edited October 3, 20214 yr by Sesquashtoo

4 minutes ago, Sesquashtoo said:

The truth is, had I never been offered 945 upgraded from my 360,

Full Fibre To Property is why I now have those speeds. I live in a suburban part of Greater Manchester which probably explains why. All copper phone cables are being phased out as part of a government initiative. Is your feed full fibre from the exchange to a box in your house?

8 minutes ago, Sesquashtoo said:

Cheers, Ray, and oh...I still will fly (of course) P3D, and WILL get the new XP12 when it comes out..

Good for you! 👍