We're all going to be wishing we had more powerful computers after the new high fidelity airliners from PMDG, Leonardo and BAe are released.

1 hour ago, fogboundturtle said:

Sounds like are sad that you don't have an high end system and you are trying to justify your middle of the road hardware. There is always going to be an elite group of users who will brag about what they have.  A sage once said "Happiness is not about having what you want but wanting what you have". 

Careful now Foggy,  some of us have had to endure your Porsche flexing😉

4 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

Counterpoint:  people with high end PC's have been simmers for a long tim (up until MSFS they needed very powerful PC's to run addons etc)

To me, one of the greatest things about MSFS is that it does run well even on modest PCs. I remember when we first saw the pre-release videos of MSFS back in 2020, most of us were skeptical. We thought our current hardware couldn't possibly run the sim in the smooth manner showcased in the gorgeous videos. I too was skeptical. I'm delighted to admit I was totally wrong. 

Great post. 

I have a marginal PC and am greatly enjoying the sim. 

I'm happy, though, that folks who waste money on expensive hardware rubbish help keep folks employed at AMD, Intel, and NVidia. 

Also: lol at all the folks who claim that simmers with more expensive hardware know more about PCs and aviation. Ha ha. 

Just now, Ricardo41 said:

Great post. 

I have a marginal PC and am greatly enjoying the sim. 

I'm happy, though, that folks who waste money on expensive hardware rubbish help keep folks employed at AMD, Intel, and NVidia. 

 

You tend to have strong opinions about people "wasting" money on high end hardware.  I'm happy you are happy with your low end hardware.  Not all of us want our sim to look like a potato though.

Just now, ryanbatc said:

You tend to have strong opinions about people "wasting" money on high end hardware.  I'm happy you are happy with your low end hardware.  Not all of us want our sim to look like a potato though.

Are you saying that the dozens of screenshots I've posted on the screenshot forum - straight outta the sim, unedited - make MSFS look like a potato?

10 minutes ago, Sceadu said:

Careful now Foggy,  some of us have had to endure your Porsche flexing😉

Hey. It's my mid-life crisis car. 😛 

Just now, Ricardo41 said:

Are you saying that the dozens of screenshots I've posted on the screenshot forum - straight outta the sim, unedited - make MSFS look like a potato?

I would be frustrated if my sim looked like that, yes.

    Just wait about 20 years or so when simmers who can afford quantum-powered PC's start complaining about the brand new MSFS 2040 flight sim😏 

Couldn’t agree more with the OP. I have an 8700k and GTX1080, both stock, no OC, 16 GB of RAM. FPS locked at 30, Vsync on, 1440P monitor. Most of the settings that matter to me (I do a lot of relatively low and somewhat slow) are n ultra (clouds, terrain vector, buildings, trees). Sim pumps out 30 FPS, stunning visuals. I have never flown a sim as much as this one, not even close. 

One thing I would recommend to people: expand your horizons  get out of Boston, JFK, Frankfurt, Heathrow. I fly exclusively in the Caribbean, which I’m sure makes a difference with my framerates.  The islands and the water is GORGEOUS out there, try something different!

 

Honestly alot of screenshots I've seen of MSFS here don't do the sim any justice, even Ultra settings.

Some folks just can't capture the true beauty of the sim in screenshots. The screenshots look like washed out dull bland XP11 sometimes. 

 

1 hour ago, David Mills said:

I remember when we first saw the pre-release videos of MSFS back in 2020, most of us were skeptical

now that you remind us: some were saying those 4K@60 fps demo videos must be fake because we got burnt before, and because:

1) no other flightsim looked this great, despite all their bleed/blade elements

2) real hardcore simmers(tm)  don't need pretty pictures without LNAV/VNAV/FMCs

3) it is Microsoft and Microsoft have betrayed us before with that DX10 screenshot for FSX, only to admit later it was merely an "artist's concept" rendition of what it could be. remember this from 2006? who needs MSFS when FSX with DX10 (which never happened anyway) already looked this great (in the artist's head only) 15 years ago 😊:

Edited April 27, 20224 yr by turbomax

Didn't someone make a comparison to that old FSX screenshot and the new sim?  I thought it looked pretty good in MSFS.  We still don't have God rays hehe....though the skies can look incredible at times (and not at others hehe).

1 hour ago, fogboundturtle said:

Hey. It's my mid-life crisis car. 😛 

Nothing wrong with that 😉 

1 hour ago, David Mills said:

To me, one of the greatest things about MSFS is that it does run well even on modest PCs. I remember when we first saw the pre-release videos of MSFS back in 2020, most of us were skeptical. We thought our current hardware couldn't possibly run the sim in the smooth manner showcased in the gorgeous videos. I too was skeptical. I'm delighted to admit I was totally wrong. 

I think you need to define what 'run well' means, because we will all have differing views on what is important.  For example, getting a stable 60fps with settings on low would not be running well for me, and neither would 15fps but everything on Ultra.  Surely we all have the same basic criteria - the maximum smoothness we can get with settings high enough to satisfy us with the visuals.  Many lock the sim at 30fps and I agree it is smooth, but I personally prefer 40fps because the feeling of flight feels better - the aircrafts reaction to wind & turbulence for example. 

A higher end PC will make this fps/visuals dance, in general, easier.  There is less need to sacrifice fps for visuals or visuals for FPS.  A $3000 PC is not going to give you twice the FPS and visuals of a $1500 PC, but it will give you more options and headroom.