Example is Xfinity speed plans: 50, 100, 200, 400, 800, or 1200 Mbps....Capital M small bps.

https://www.xfinity.com/learn/internet-service

 

But those speeds are the max under ideal conditions.

For the real speed you are actually getting right now just click on this:

https://www.speedtest.net/

 

I had Xfinity with 50: problems

Changed to 100: no more problems ever

A speed of 100 instead of 50 cost us exactly $5 more each month.

 

Note that 38mbs is 38 milli-bits or one bit of data every 1000 seconds which is insane.

Speeds are generally quoted in Mb/s (mega bits, 1 million bits per second) or MB/s (mega bytes, 8 million bits per second). To complicate matters even further the million can be either 1,000,000 or 1,048,576 depending who quotes it.

 

Back on topic -  my experience of Photogrammetry on a 250Mb connection varies wildly some areas are great and some, well a bit less so.  Maybe try clearing your rolling cache ? Not sure but it may help.

Every time you see a melted building, just reach over and pet your sweet pup.  Turns a negative into a win-win. 

If you are flying into and around major cities then you are seeing realistic.  Fly out into the countryside, smaller cities and towns, and regional and local airports.  We are thriving.....  And supported by a host of freeware addons.

I have a 1gbit line in the U.K. and still have the awful buildings. 

13 minutes ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

I have a 1gbit line in the U.K. and still have the awful buildings. 

BINGO

I thought after 1 and 1/2 years people knew that this was LOD and not internet connection... nothing you can really do and nothing will change, because performance wise this technology is too heavy, so they won't change LOD to anything remotely real-life-like.

18 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I average 200MBs and USA photogrammetry looks awful for me too.  I turned it off in favour of FPS and better lighting on the buildings.

Add to that to turn off caching as it won't be needed.

ns

 

I have not been a fan of the Photogrammetry since the beginning when MSFS released. My first impressions of MSFS were not how wonderful the terrain looked (which it did) or the better default planes, or the performance. My first impression was "omg, look at all these melted buildings...looks like the after effects of a nuclear holocaust". There were undeveloped trees that look like giant monoliths rising out of the Earth, solid bridges and cranes, blocky looking objects all over the place. As good as the terrain looked, the foliage and buildings looked horrendous to me. So, I turned of PG, and started enjoying all the good things about MSFS. No more melted buildings, monolith trees or blocky scenery objects. Every so often I would turn PG back on just to see if things improved. They haven't. And I am one of the lucky ones with a stout 1 Gb fiber optic internet connection, so I know it's not that. PG just isn't that great as far as I'm concerned, and no matter how much I do think some of the PG areas and cities DO really look good, in most places, it's nuclear apocalypse everywhere. Just kills my enjoyment. So, I keep PG off and the sim looks great to me without it. 🙂 

Edited April 29, 20224 yr by sniper31

5 minutes ago, sniper31 said:

I have not been a fan of the Photogrammetry since the beginning when MSFS released. My first impressions of MSFS were not how wonderful the terrain looked (which it did) or the better default planes, or the performance. My first impression was "omg, look at all these melted buildings...looks like the after effects of a nuclear holocaust". There were undeveloped trees that look like giant monoliths rising out of the Earth, solid bridges and cranes, blocky looking objects all over the place. As good as the terrain looked, the foliage and buildings looked horrendous to me. So, I turned of PG, and started enjoying all the good things about MSFS. No more melted buildings, monolith trees or blocky scenery objects. Every so often I would turn PG back on just to see if things improved. They haven't. And I am one of the lucky ones with a stout 1 Gb fiber optic internet connection, so I know it's not that. PG just isn't that great as far as I'm concerned, and no matter how much I do think some of the PG areas and cities DO really look good, in most places, it's nuclear apocalypse everywhere. Just kills my enjoyment. So, I keep PG off and the sim looks great to me without it. 🙂 

The bridges, roads, and car movement. This is where XP11 shines.

18 hours ago, Bozdog said:

Thanks all. At least I know it’s not a corruption in the instal and I will just live with it. Could of ended up for hours messing   with settings to try and improve it.    

would using the local cache download option improve it ?

 

Thanks for all your help 👍

Yes.  You should use rolling cache, as that caches photogrammetry.  Once the photogrammetry is cached, if you fly the same location over and over again, it won't download the photogrammetry from the internet. Set about 10 GB to 20 GB of rolling cache, if your hard drive has the space.  Don't make your rolling cache file too large or else it a rolling cache file that is too large may cause problems.

There is also a manual cache.  For now, I suggest just using the rolling cache.  Once you are comfortable with how the rolling cache works, you can look into the manual cache.  But for people not familiar with MSFS's settings, I don't suggest manual cache off the bat, rolling cache is better.

After reading this thread I thought I would take a second look as I was running 20Mbps (Spectrum's slowest rate) and I saw plenty of "melted candles", ha!  My company just upgraded my home system to 1GB so I hadn't even checked it out.

Just fired up at Las Vegas....WOW!  Never seen it like this.  All the detail - no melted buildings.  While most buildings can look pretty darn good, usually I see melted cars in parking lots... more like "humps" than cars.  Not this time.  The detail down the strip was, for me, an eye opener what real speed can do.  Ran a speedtest and I am getting 860Mbps on my download.  Sure glad this is on the company's nickel!  😄  Can't wait to explore with these new set of glasses.

1 hour ago, DJJose said:

The bridges, roads, and car movement. This is where XP11 shines.

Can't wait for XP12.  

4 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

I have a 1gbit line in the U.K. and still have the awful buildings. 

The line into your home has nothing to do with it. The data from Asobo, goes through many points before it arrives at your home. If there is a weak link in the long chain of junctions , the feed to your home will be affected. You could have 30 GB data from your ISP to your home and still get slow data transfer from Asobo's servers. 

27 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

The line into your home has nothing to do with it. The data from Asobo, goes through many points before it arrives at your home. If there is a weak link in the long chain of junctions , the feed to your home will be affected. You could have 30 GB data from your ISP to your home and still get slow data transfer from Asobo's servers. 

Reading others replies above, it seems it does have something to do with it. And speaking from personal experience, I upgraded from 30mbits to 1gbit and I tell you, as a fact, it helped massively. However PG is still, to my eyes, not good in certain areas. 

Edited April 29, 20224 yr by Ianrivaldosmith