Probably is.  Quite frankly I've never been clear on what's PG and what isn't.  For example, is any/all/most/none of this PG?  It's, well, freakin' amazing, whatever it is!

How about this--we stayed here many years ago, Rotenburg ob der Tauber

This?

I wonder:  are you using Vsync w/ the 1/2 divisor to maintain 30FPS?   Using this particular method, be it P3D or MSFS, I get the least possible load on both CPU and GPU, versus letting the sim run uncorked, or using another method (RTSS or NV Control Panel or NV Inspector).  Here's what I mean these are two identical runs.  Notice CPU/GPU loads on each:

This is all Ultra, but unlocked.  FPS climbs to 41, GPU is maxed, and MainThread is 52%.  This test flight was exceedingly easy to process:

Here's the same flight however Vsync'd to a frame rate of 30.  FPS 30, GPU now down to 76% and MainThread halved:

The theory is, of course, having your machine deliver the lowest possible frame rate that is completely and consistently stable at the lowest frame rate you can live with, you leave headroom to cope with fluctuating/increasing demand.  By the way this test was done w/ the prior GPU, an RTX 2070 Super.  I always wonder about all of this because I just do not have the performance issues I hear some others report, especially those w/ faster hardware than mine.   

 

 

Edited April 30, 20224 yr by Noel

1 hour ago, Noel said:

I wonder:  are you using Vsync w/ the 1/2 divisor to maintain 30FPS?   Using this particular method, be it P3D or MSFS, I get the least possible load on both CPU and GPU, versus letting the sim run uncorked, or using another method (RTSS or NV Control Panel or NV Inspector).

If you are asking me, my situation is a little different. I have not had nor do I have any performance issues with MSFS. It runs super smooth for me. In MSFS I run a mix of Ultra and High settings. My resolution is a less common one (5120x1440) because I am running on a Samsung G9 Super Ultrawide curved G-sync screen. In NV Control Panel MSFS settings, I have the G-Sync compatible setting enabled and I have my FPS locked at 35. I do not have V-Sync enabled in either NV control panel or in MSFS. My frames in MSFS stay consistently at 35 even when flying the PMDG DC-6 in more complex areas. My system is neither CPU nor GPU maxed, and if you look at the FPS counter in the Dev Mode in MSFS, everything is all green. It took me some time to get the settings all set like this, lots of trial and error, but now it's very well balanced between CPU and GPU use, on my system. I have been building flight sim and gaming specific PC's for two decades now, so I am very good at building a balanced hardware system, from paring the right components together, to the proper PSU, case and cooling solution for my needs. I really have very good performance in MSFS and I am more then happy with the results. There are some areas that look really good to me with PG on, but, like you, I like to jump all around the world and fly in various places, so if I leave PG on, I will inevitably run into some melting buildings or monolithic trees. One example is the Santa Barbara area. I love flying into and out of KSBA, and I have the Orbx KSBA addon. With PG on, there are numerous monolithic trees and foliage all around the airport. Drives me crazy. Turn PG off, and the scenery still looks great to me. All the custom buildings from the Orbx addon are all still there. The rest of the scenery looks crisp, and almost as good as some of the best PG scenery, to me. The one thing I do notice about having PG off is that I do tend to see more of the same houses and roofs repeated, but not so much that it detracts from my enjoyment like the melted buildings do. 

Edited April 30, 20224 yr by sniper31

1 hour ago, sniper31 said:

One example is the Santa Barbara area. I love flying into and out of KSBA, and I have the Orbx KSBA addon. With PG on, there are numerous monolithic trees and foliage all around the airport.

Orbx KSBA is one of about 10 airports I have purchased for MSFS.  Santa Barbara is one of my home towns, and the favorite of all.  That I don't focus on said artifact (not a bad word for poorly rendered PG) is pretty evident because if you had asked me how bad it was around KSBA I would have replied, 'not bad'!  It's one of about 10 bases I have WW now in AH2 so I fly in and out of it a few times a month.  I just did a low and slow flight and saw what you're referring to--I really had not paid much attention as I was busy flying airliners but yes, I see.  I also saw that PG off is surprisingly good!  I noticed not decrease in CPU load w/ PG off, but image quality was shockingly similar--which is why I said I'm not really sure what PG is or isn't.   What is the supposed benefit of PG?  Perhaps it's something that will improve over time--and it will if it adds much.  But again, not clear what it's really adding.  Here is a screenshot from YSSY area with PG off:

2 minutes ago, Noel said:

I also saw that PG off is surprisingly good

Yes, I completely agree and that was my reaction the first time I turned it off.

I don't believe there is any single 'solution' to this because I don't believe there is any single problem.

I started off, when MSFS first came out, being very impressed with the PG stuff I saw. I then found plenty of places where it didn't look so good. I played around with PG on/off in various locations and one of the things I found was that it seemed to be in areas where the sim had obviously had some heavy duty PG applied (like NYC), if you turned PG off the autogen that you get instead is fairly low standard. That sort of makes sense if they've gone to the trouble of making a special PG area.

Long story short - after much experimentation and switching PG and/or caching on and off, I've come to the conclusion that for me at least, there are too many factors in play to make any conclusive statements. I now run with PG on by default, and caching off. Most of the time it's ok. But I do still get moments when it goes melty on me, and that seems to be mostly if I'm simming on an evening weekend (I'm based in GMT/BST land) and I just assume that's a server load issue. I can visit the same places on a weekday morning and there are no problems. I will also get the "insufficient bandwidth"  message occasionally, and mostly during those same time slots. I have noticed that I get those messages (and the melties) most often around Boston, and not just in those bad time slots. I also still find that some PG areas look very good, and others less so. Way too many green concrete trees/sculptures in LA still, for example.

I have found that if I fly around Boston in a Cub, or better still using the Paramotor, it all looks much better, and in general it is certainly safe to say "speed melts" as far as PG goes. Well, it does if you fly down low like I tend to - this is far more a global sim for me than a flight sim anyway. Take a thrash across NYC down at skyscraper rooftop level in an F-15 or F-35 and you are not going to have a good visual ride. Going overhead at FL300 you ain't going to see much down there anyway, and anyway, it should look a bit blurred from up high.

Bottom line is that I suspect it is working pretty much as designed, except for the increasingly frequent server side problems in keeping up with demand. My system is fairly powerful, I tend to be GPU constrained even with the Titan, and my network speeds are normally perfectly adequate. I'm waiting currently for an upgrade to Gbit broadband, but I don't really expect it to make any difference to the "insufficient bandwidth" situations, just maybe a general smoothing out of the connection (apart from all the other downloading aspects)

cheers,

Andy

(I run at 4k and with LODs at 400, and a mix of mostly High but a couple of Ultra settings. Up until maybe SU5 or thereabouts I was running very happily with everything at Ultra and LODs of 500. By this point though I wouldn't care to say whether I think now is better than then or vice versa, my visual memory is not that precise and I have a 55 inch High Def monitor now so it looks a bit different anyway. And I have my framerate locked at 30, which I mostly achieve ok)

Edited April 30, 20224 yr by andy1252
typo

I’ve just trialed a rolling cache of 40GB. Initial impressions, smoother, less stuttering. Clearer. This on a 1gbit line. 

14 hours ago, sniper31 said:

Yes, I completely agree and that was my reaction the first time I turned it off.

Check out KPSP if you want to see lots of bad PG.  This, I assume, is just a case of its not getting any kind of TLC yet.  Still, I am having trouble discerning excellent PG over no PG.  If you have a screenshot demonstrating this post it!

2 hours ago, Noel said:

Check out KPSP if you want to see lots of bad PG.  This, I assume, is just a case of its not getting any kind of TLC yet.  Still, I am having trouble discerning excellent PG over no PG.  If you have a screenshot demonstrating this post it!

Well, I have Orbx KPSP so I do fly in there on many occasion. But, always with PG off, so that is the only way I've seen it in MSFS. I can attempt a screenshot, but because of my resolution, my screenshots are very stretched out and made to be smaller to fit other screens. 

The main reason I use PG is for the sides of mountains.  Monument Valley looks very bad with out it.

ns