How do these new payware planes hit performance ?

[jfri 42]

I am considering buying some of these newly released planes
1) Milviz Cessna 310
2) DCS Concorde
3) PMDG 737
4) Justflight 146
When making the decision there is one important thing I must consider. Performance. My system is Haswell 4770K @4.5 GHz RAM 16 Gb 2200 MHz NVIDIA 2070 Super SSD drives Win 10.
Also I use VR with a HP Reverb G2 headset.
I see that I don't full fill the system requirements for the Cessna 310 in VR and for the PMDG. Do these two planes hit performance harder than others ? I now have one payware plane and that is the JF Turbo Arrow III/IV. And I don't see any harder hit on performance in that compared to default planes. Is 1) to 4) different ? Should I stay away from 1) and 3) because they are harder on performance ?

[Swe_Richard 1,175]

I have number 3 and 4. Excellent performance from both!

have you tried FBW? I get about the same or better perf from those two

Edited May 12, 2022 by Swe_Richard
Clarity

[psychedelic_tortilla 171]

PMDG is absolutely fantastic in terms of FPS and VRAM performance. A good bit smoother than the FBW A320, for me at least (which isn't choppy either). 

I run the sim with the specs in my signature at 1080p, render scaling of 130, and locked to 40 FPS. The PMDG never dips below 40 at most airports, even with a bunch of AIG VATSIM traffic. Only at large airports (Simwings EDDM, Gaya LOWW etc.) and at some of the worse optimized Asobo offerings (especially LSZH) it'll dip below during takeoff/landing, but always above 30 FPS. Incredibly nice experience, I have to say!

At 1080p, I'm obviously CPU bound, my 3070 is a little bored, even at 130 render scaling. I'm thinking about a 1440p Monitor, but I'm actually quite happy were I'm at now.

Edited May 12, 2022 by psychedelic_tortilla

[CaptainNick 575]

I own them all except the Concorde. 
No real performance hit on my end but that 4770 is most likely starting to hit its limits at least in msfs. I’m super impressed by the performance given by the two big tubeliners with all the systems etc running. Of the tubes I’d give the nod to the 737 as it’s visuals are much better than the Maddog. I imagine you would be ok if you turn down some things like AI traffic etc.

[jfri 42]

1 hour ago, Swe_Richard said:

I have number 3 and 4. Excellent performance from both!

have you tried FBW? I get about the same or better perf from those two

But what are your system and what resolution do you use ?

I just installed and made a quick test of FBW. In VR the cockpit felt more fuzzy but no significant difference in performance. But it as a very short and quick test.

[Swe_Richard 1,175]

2 minutes ago, jfri said:

But what are your system and what resolution do you use ?

I just installed and made a quick test of FBW. In VR the cockpit felt more fuzzy but no significant difference in performance. But it as a very short and quick test.

I have a 5900x. 32gb 3600Mhz RAM. 2080 Ti and the sim on nvme. Running 3440 x 1440. I get better performance from the 146 and 737 than I get from the FBW. If you can use the FBW you should be ok with the others(?). 

[jfri 42]

1 hour ago, CaptainNick said:

I own them all except the Concorde. 
No real performance hit on my end but that 4770 is most likely starting to hit its limits at least in msfs. I’m super impressed by the performance given by the two big tubeliners with all the systems etc running. Of the tubes I’d give the nod to the 737 as it’s visuals are much better than the Maddog. I imagine you would be ok if you turn down some things like AI traffic etc.

How do you think the Milviz Cessna 310 compare to the tubeliners with regard to performance ?

[Bobsk8 12,844]

29 minutes ago, jfri said:

How do you think the Milviz Cessna 310 compare to the tubeliners with regard to performance ?

The C 310 has same performance for me as any other GA aircraft including default Cessna's. 

[Bill A 68]

I'm actually getting better performance on the FBW320 compared to the PMDG737. Flying at an altitude of 35000 over Los Angeles my frames were fluctuating between 24-30...they were all over the place. and clear skies too. Never had this issue on the FBW. My specs are bellow so I would think my frames would be higher for the PMDG. Im also on 1080 resolution with most settings set to high a and clouds set to Utlra. LOD terrain on 100 and building at 150.  Any advice on what I can be doing wrong? I have my refresh locked at 30 on the sim not Nvidia CP.

[virtualstuff 770]

Performance isn't an issue anymore 🙂

But I'm running a high end system...

[DAD 2,660]

3 hours ago, Swe_Richard said:

I have number 3 and 4. Excellent performance from both!

have you tried FBW? I get about the same or better perf from those two

same. all fine. smooth as silk with real weather and live traffic. other specs below in my sig

[Bert Pieke 7,590]

3 hours ago, jfri said:

I am considering buying some of these newly released planes
1) Milviz Cessna 310

I am flying this airplane on a 4770K just like yours and have no trouble with it.

The TDS GTN works really well in this airplane.. 😉

[jpe828 624]

My System is a Ryzen 5 3600, with a 5700XT, 32gbs ram. The 310 has 0 FPS hit, in fact one of the smoothest airplanes I have in the sim. The 146 is very good too, I find perhaps a couple stutters when panning around the cockpit quickly, but that certainly could be a sim thing. Overall for a complex airplane it is very good. I generally have my FPS pegged at 40 with a mix of high and ultra settings that I think make the sim look good. 

[odourboy 1,290]

An informal comparative performance test on my relatively modest machine (see sig): 

39 FPS PMDG 737-700

38 FPS Leonardo MD-82

36 FPS Aerosoft CRJ700

30 FPS FBW A320 (Dev)

37 FPS - Default Cessna 172 Skyhawk

In all cases, VC view, Ready For Takeoff at KCLE RW 24L.

4K, 90% Render, TLOD 200, Clouds, Textures, Vectors - Ultra, real-time traffic and live weather

 

Edited May 12, 2022 by odourboy

[AJZip 251]

The PMDG 737 and the JF BAe146 both fly as smooth for me (VR using a Reverb Gen1) as the stock Cub.  Really.