I still believe ISP speed is a big factor.  Most of the people I've seen with very clear PG screenshots or video do have very quick internet (500 mbps or 1Gbps etc).  But you also need a fast CPU.  What I'm saying is someone with an older PC but fast internet might still observe melty buildings.  And someone like me with a great CPU but just average internet is still seeing melty buildings hehe.

Also localized heavy use can exacerbate things on a server.  I tried to load the Gibralter discovery flight the other day and had to kill MSFS with taskman as it couldn't finish loading.

ns

1 hour ago, ryanbatc said:

Most of the people I've seen with very clear PG screenshots or video do have very quick internet (500 mbps or 1Gbps etc).  But you also need a fast CPU.  What I'm saying is someone with an older PC but fast internet might still observe melty buildings. 

Yep, and here is KC, MO, a city I had no idea could look this good!  I def get the melted buildings in a few spots but they are few and far between thankfully.  There are a couple of areas that consistently manifest this which I chalk up to just not being reworked yet.  It's mainly in Palm Springs plus I notice some odd buildings and trees near KSAN.  400Mbps download speed, decent CPU/GPU.  I don't aim to capture buildings much but here's another from San Jose, Costa Rica below.  This is the way it all looks, most of the time for me.  

Oh, and WDC but this was from very early on.   While XP will give you high detail bridges and cars you just don't get the distinct feeling you're actually there, which is where MSFS shines beyond all other sims.  I think this is a side effect of satellite imagery and lighting.  Often times it's not clear I'm looking at a sim, and not the real world, or a photo from the real world.  Enjoy the shot at Medellin CO below and tell me is it real, or a screenshot?  Well you know it's a screenshot but the uninitiated might not.

1 minute ago, Noel said:

Yep, and here is KC, MO, a city I had no idea could look this good!  I def get the melted buildings in a few spots but they are few and far between thankfully.  There are a couple of areas that consistently manifest this which I chalk up to just not being reworked yet.  It's mainly in Palm Springs plus I notice some odd buildings and trees near KSAN.  400Mbps download speed, decent CPU/GPU.  I don't aim to capture buildings much but here's another from San Jose, Costa Rica below.  This is the way it all looks, most of the time for me.  

 

 

This one looks great - a lot sharper than my buildings ever are.

3 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

This one looks great - a lot sharper than my buildings ever are.

Why do you suppose this is?  

11 minutes ago, Noel said:

Why do you suppose this is?  

ISP likely...  200 down in theory but its cable - so I usually get 150-180 - and probably 60-100 if the rest of my family is streaming stuff.

It does appear that the PG is better in high contrast situations where the sat imagery might have had better lighting - which I presume allows Blackshark to produce the PG more correctly.

I don't really buy into that ISP theory, at least not exclusively. I once made an experiment where I downloaded part of London into the manual cache in the hope for improvement. The result was not one iota better than directly streamed.

Tokyo PG looks pretty well on my system while London .. see above - all with the same ISP connection and that's reproducible. Most certainly it's a mixture of several factors, original data, lighting, processing, ISP, state of MS servers, client CPU,... they all might factor in. 

Kind regards, Michael 

 

Edited April 29, 20224 yr by pmb

6 minutes ago, pmb said:

I don't really buy into that ISP theory, at least not exclusively. I once made an experiment where I downloaded part of London into the manual cache in the hope for improvement. The result was not one iota better than directly streamed.

Tokyo PG looks pretty well on my system while London .. see above - all with the same ISP connection and that's reproducible. Most certainly it's a mixture of several factors, original data, lighting, processing, ISP, state of MS servers, client CPU,... they all might factor in. 

Kind regards, Michael 

 

I'm just not certain what is the main factor.

I went to Kansas City and although my monitor is different I tried to get a similar 1:1 view with aspect ratio close enough.  After sitting here in drone for a few minutes my buildings do finally sharpen up to Noel's clarity levels.

If just flying by in a cessna the clarity is close to the screenshot but if faster say in the C414 or C310 the city appears more melted.  As I understood PG is most affected by ISP speed and CPU power.  Maybe it's more GPU related and in that case I would struggle as I am GPU limited.

MCO_skyline by Ryan Butterworth, on Flickr

2 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

I'm just not certain what is the main factor.

Does having rolling cache on play a role?

39 minutes ago, V1ROTA7E said:

Does having rolling cache on play a role?

I use a very large rolling cache FWIW.  I rebuilt it post SU9 but I think I will trim it down to 24Gb or so and see if I can ascertain a difference, which I predict now that I won't.

Edited April 29, 20224 yr by Noel

The problem with rolling cache is, it’s only useful if you fly in the same area repeatedly. Those on a world tour etc, it’s of no use…

I suspect that PG is NOT dependent on CPU (or GPU) for that matter. My internet connection is around 1 Gb as stated earlier, my CPU is a 12900k and I have a 3080Ti. I don't have a suggestion on what could cause the melted look, but in my case, I don't think it's hardware or bandwidth related. In the past I too tried the rolling and manual cache approaches, and I did not notice any difference. I did not conduct and real benchmark/scientific type of testing though. I don't consider MSFS broken or anything because of this. I think it is just a matter of the PG system itself, which is why I choose to fly with PG off. Many, probably most, MSFS users keep it on as they are able to get past the nuclear meltdown look and it doesn't bother them. Me, I just cannot stand it. Thankfully, Asobo was savvy enough to include a switch to enable or disable PG. 

Edited April 29, 20224 yr by sniper31

19 minutes ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

The problem with rolling cache is, it’s only useful if you fly in the same area repeatedly. Those on a world tour etc, it’s of no use…

I'm doing a world tour on a very stretched out scale.  I fly in vast areas all over the world but have regular routes I do from having various bases around the world using Air Hauler 2.  So I will fly into new areas and if I like what I see will establish a base there, so there should be some value in an RC for this.  I wonder what's really needed for large swaths of the world in terms of an RC. Lately I have been exploring and enjoying the heck out of South America what a treasure trove of amazing geology.  I've used a 100Gb RC for the past year or so w/ no untoward effects.

3 minutes ago, sniper31 said:

MSFS users keep it on as they are able to get past the nuclear meltdown look and it doesn't bother them.

I don't see much nuclear meltdown.  I fly all over, but mostly airliners so don't hang around low much.  It does stand out when I see it, but it's fortunately much more rare for me than common.

2 minutes ago, Noel said:

I don't see much nuclear meltdown.  I fly all over, but mostly airliners so don't hang around low much.  It does stand out when I see it, but it's fortunately much more rare for me than common.

Well, the airliner use could be the main difference. I am more of GA flyer and I like to fly under 2000 feet a lot and view the scenery, do some bush flying etc. I do admit that when I do fly higher, mostly when I am flying in the DC-6 or CRJ, I don't notice it nearly as much, except on approaches maybe. The problem for me, is as soon as I see one blocky solid bridge or monolith tree, it bothers me. It just does. But, I don't want to come off unhappy with MSFS, because I am not. I have come to terms with PG, and choose to keep it off mostly, and I am very happy. MSFS performs wonderfully for me, and I don't have any major complaints. 🙂