11 hours ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

I find the balanced setting to be quite a nice compromise, and it should increase performance on average by 7-10 fps according to Fenix. 

I’ve been a bit confused by all the concern about performance. 

Perhaps that’s because I chose “balanced” at the time of first setup.

So many people here worried about performance, but most do not seem to want to compromise even a little bit!

 

Well I bought it. It's certainly very impressive. The EFB is awesome, best I've seen in any aircraft so far, and I love how easy it is to use the performance calculators.

Performance isn't great, as predicted. Wasn't expecting much from my 9 year old system though to be fair. Initially it was a stutter fest, I changed the display rendering to GPU and reduced to Balanced which did improve things a little bit. Performance mode makes the displays look absolutely terrible and almost unreadable so that was a no-go. Using the 4K liveries instead of 8K seems to make a bit of a difference as well unless I was just getting used to it. This was all with traffic off completely and with fairly basic weather, I imagine it will go downhill once I start adding that in.

It's flyable, but I'll be honest and say at this stage the 737 for me will probably see more use as it is a lot smoother, at least until I can upgrade my system.

 

18 minutes ago, micstatic said:

How much uglier is going to balanced in terms of graphics?

This is how balanced looks on my setup. 3840x2160. 

4 minutes ago, Tom Wright said:

Performance isn't great, as predicted.

Turn off the Cabin rendering in the EFB. That'll buy you a couple more fps.

4 hours ago, OzWhitey said:

So many people here worried about performance, but most do not seem to want to compromise even a little bit!

 

With so much cheerleading and over the top hype antics by folks here with this particular product no one wants to hear anything about compromising at this point. 
The overzealous biased hype squad here set these end all be all addon aircraft expectations for this A320, folks bought in and expect such perfection. Thats why it’s important consumers remain realistic and patient with new product releases.

Edited May 21, 20224 yr by blueshark747

1 hour ago, blueshark747 said:

With so much cheerleading and over the top hype antics by folks here with this particular  product no one wants to hear anything about compromising at this point. 
The overzealous biased hype squad here set these end all be all addon aircraft expectations for this A320, folks bought in and expect such perfection. Thats why it’s important consumers remain realistic and patient with new product releases.

I actually think that there has been "over the top hype" for a certain other recent release, Fenix has been much more stealth.

Now that it's released, people are excited. Why? Because it's keenly priced and very, very innovative. It's doing things that none of us have every seen before in a sim, which is kind of fun.

I actually think performance is pretty good with this aircraft, but them again I was conservative with my initial choice ("balanced" not "quality"). Those posting frame rates really need to quote this setting, as well as their choice for display rendering.

Early days, but no complaints from me about performance so far, and I'm someone who'll leave a pretty-but-stuttering aircraft in the hangar collecting dust. 

7 hours ago, 177B said:

I am really impressed by the Fenix.

On my 5 year old system running 4 monitors with lots of pop-outs and extra programs running I still get 25-30 FPS even in payware KBOS. I have it set to 30fps max so I would probably get more when airborne. 

I run FS2020 windowed about 4000x1080 px with pop-outs of all the 4 screens and browsers on the sides and lower screen.

I will post some photos in a while.

It flies very nicely with my Bravo and VBK side stick. 

The frame rate really surprised  me with my old system described in my signature. After some of the complaints I have seen. The PMDG is marginally better frame rate vise, but I love the pop-outs in the Fenix and don't mind 5 fps slower or so.

I would not hold off even with an older system.

@177B

I found this interesting as we have similar systems,  However, I dont have PMDG so I cant compare the '5 fps slower' comment.  I kind of took this as PMDG maybe runs at 15 fps and Fenix runs at 10 fps?

Has anyone noticed PFD/MFD performance degradation over time? I tried KSFO-PHOG real time 5.4 hours. Upon approach and descent both PFD and MFD were stuttering while airplane itself was pretty good. Just pilot and copilot display were having an issue.

27 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Has anyone noticed PFD/MFD performance degradation over time? I tried KSFO-PHOG real time 5.4 hours. Upon approach and descent both PFD and MFD were stuttering while airplane itself was pretty good. Just pilot and copilot display were having an issue.

I will try that flight tomorrow. It's a route I often use for testing longer flights.

2 hours ago, OzWhitey said:

I actually think that there has been "over the top hype" for a certain other recent release, Fenix has been much more stealth.

Now that it's released, people are excited. Why? Because it's keenly priced and very, very innovative. It's doing things that none of us have every seen before in a sim, which is kind of fun.

I actually think performance is pretty good with this aircraft, but them again I was conservative with my initial choice ("balanced" not "quality"). Those posting frame rates really need to quote this setting, as well as their choice for display rendering.

Early days, but no complaints from me about performance so far, and I'm someone who'll leave a pretty-but-stuttering aircraft in the hangar collecting dust. 

Yea Fenix have been lowkey, humble and have released a solid product IMO

1 hour ago, sd_flyer said:

Has anyone noticed PFD/MFD performance degradation over time? I tried KSFO-PHOG real time 5.4 hours. Upon approach and descent both PFD and MFD were stuttering while airplane itself was pretty good. Just pilot and copilot display were having an issue.

I've seen this happen to me twice in the PMDG. I think it's a MSFS2020 issue. 

1 hour ago, Mike S KPDX said:

@177B

I found this interesting as we have similar systems,  However, I dont have PMDG so I cant compare the '5 fps slower' comment.  I kind of took this as PMDG maybe runs at 15 fps and Fenix runs at 10 fps?

 

I read it as the PMDG runs at 30-35 while the Fenix runs at 25-30 and he'll take the 5fps hit. 

Watching a bunch of A 320 videos on Youtube.  The one annoying thing, and maybe it is just me, but when the person in the video  is talking  about  the A 320 they are talking at a mile a minute. It is like those commercials where they read the disclaimers  at the end, in rapid speak, so you can't understand what they are saying.  What is their word not allowed hurry? Slow down, so we can understand what you are telling us. 

Edited May 21, 20224 yr by Bobsk8

19 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Watching a bunch of A 320 videos on Youtube.  The one annoying thing, and maybe it is just me, but when the person in the video  is talking  about  the A 320 they are talking at a mile a minute. It is like those commercials where they read the disclaimers  at the end, in rapid speak, so you can't understand what they are saying.  What is their word not allowed hurry? Slow down, so we can understand what you are telling us. 

i have no issues  at all especially  on the  one  you had  commented  on

21 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Watching a bunch of A 320 videos on Youtube.  The one annoying thing, and maybe it is just me, but when the person in the video  is talking  about  the A 320 they are talking at a mile a minute. It is like those commercials where they read the disclaimers  at the end, in rapid speak, so you can't understand what they are saying.  What is their word not allowed hurry? Slow down, so we can understand what you are telling us. 

Sounds like you just need to hit the settings on the video Bob and slow it down to 0.75x or 0.5x