Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RALF9636

Fenix and performance

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, anthony500 said:

I recently picked up again x-plane 11 with the challenger 650 and can manage to have easily around 50 fps ,

Chalk and cheese. In X-Plane: Turn on shadows and set reflections to high. Add 10 AI planes. Then install all the orthos you need plus a volumetric cloud and shader mod. Install Active Sky. Then let me know how your FPS fares?

Edited by jarmstro
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, MDFlier said:

Your overclock was probably 100% fine.

I think that Flight simulator just doesn't like overclocks. Has something to do with a timer that it uses. If you overclock your cpu, it makes the clock tick faster than it normally would be and x number of click ticks doesn't represent the correct amount of time any more.. 

I rebuilt my system in 2019 and from the moment I installed the i5-9600K it has run at 5Ghz on all cores with zero issues in X-Plane 11 and now in MSFS2020, The only CTD I have had within MSFS has been related to an addon. I am still running the same overclock today and have not had a single CTD with the Fenix and have completed 8 flights now, each one around 3 hours.

When I initially rebuilt my PC I did a lot of testing to ensure that everything related too my overclock was super stable and it has been. It really doesn't take much to throw an overclock into a problematic situation, A friend of mine recently updated the Bios in his PC and suddenly started getting random CTD's. It turned out that the exact same overclock he was previously running required an increase of 0.045v to achieve stability whereas he had run the previous overclock for his gaming/video editing PC for 2 years without problems.

  • Like 1

 

Richard

My Rig: i7-12700K | Noctua NH-D15S Black Version | MSI Pro Z690 - A | 32 GB DDR4 3600 | EVGA FTW3 3080TI | 1TB WD Blue NMVe (MSFS 2020) | 500 GB WD Black Gen 4 NVMe | 4TB WD Black Conventional | Corsair 4000D Airflow Case | Honeycomb Yoke & Throttle | Airbus Side Stick | Virpil Rudder Pedals | TCL 43" 4K TV |

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

Chalk and cheese. In X-Plane: Turn on shadows and set reflections to high. Add 10 AI planes. Then install all the orthos you need plus a volumetric cloud and shader mod. Install Active Sky. Then let me know how your FPS fares?

I have orbx, active sky , shader mod, and sitting at Egll with objects set to maximum yes I get 50fps on a cloudy day  … without these relatively high settings it’s even much more. 

But you’re missing the point.. Where do I talk about settings and visuals ? Of course msfs is by far superior to x-plane in terms of visuals. 
All I’m saying is 30 fps is not smooth when compared to 50 fps and in 2022 we should not be satisfied by this. 

  • Like 2

Anthony

WIN 11 - MSFS 2020 - X-plane 11

i7 12700KF - Asus ROG Strix Z690-F Gaming - RTX 2080

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, anthony500 said:

I have orbx, active sky , shader mod, and sitting at Egll with objects set to maximum yes I get 50fps on a cloudy day  … without these relatively high settings it’s even much more. 

But you’re missing the point.. Where do I talk about settings and visuals ? Of course msfs is by far superior to x-plane in terms of visuals. 
All I’m saying is 30 fps is not smooth when compared to 50 fps and in 2022 we should not be satisfied by this. 

My 30 FPS is smooth as silk, and I have worked in high end video for decades, and still do as a consultant. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

spacer.png

Bob Cardone         MSFS 2020 , Fenix A320, Milviz C 310 , Kodiak , PMDG DC6,   Carenado Seminole,  Mooney, JF Arrow, Simple Traffic  

TrackIR   Avliasoft EFB2    ATC  by PF3    FlyVirtual.net  CLX PC

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MySound said:

Yeah. Welcome to 2022 buddy. 
MSFS is not PowerPoint. 

Yeah. There’s no way I’m going from 4K to 1080p on my OLED 77” just to squeeze as much fps out of the sim as possible. Sorry buddy.

  • Like 2

i9-12900KF | Asus ROG Strix OC RTX 3090 24GB | G.Skill Trident Z5 32GB DDR5 | MSI MPG Z690 Carbon EK X | WD Black SN850 2TB | LG 77" OLED | Thrustmaster Hotas Warthog | MFG Crosswind pedals |

“Intensify the forward batteries. I don’t want anything to get through”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This argumentation, we should not be satisfied with 30 FPS in 2022, it was fine in 2005 with FSX but hey, welcome to 2022, is kind of weird.

How can 30 FPS have been fine in 2005, but be bad in 2022?

Have human eyes and brain deteriorated in the last 17 years so they are not able to build the illusion of a smooth movement anymore? (And no matter how high the FPS are, it is still an illusion. The eyes just see still pictures - it is the brain that creates the perception of a fluid motion.)

Here is a proposal for those who are not satisfied with 30 FPS:

Exclusively use 30 FPS for six weeks. Never use higher than 30 FPS for these six weeks.Then after these six weeks let us know if you are still unsatisfied with 30 FPS.

The brain can adapt to 30 FPS and create a smooth experience out of it. It just unlearns it when you keep using higher FPS. So you will then notice the difference when you get back to 30 FPS.

But your brain can learn it again. Just give it a chance.

Your reward are much higher graphics settings in the sim.

 

I am not talking about VR here, that might be a different story.

And of course there are individual differences. Some people need more training with 30 FPS than others to be able to adapt. And most probably there are even people who only need 20 FPS to have their brain create a smooth experience.

Edited by RALF9636
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree I myself was entirely satisfied with locked 30 fps last year … that’s until I came back to do some flying in x-plane with much higher achievable fps and the additional immersion it brings. And then once you see it you can’t go back unfortunately and think about it. At least that’s my case. 


Anthony

WIN 11 - MSFS 2020 - X-plane 11

i7 12700KF - Asus ROG Strix Z690-F Gaming - RTX 2080

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, anthony500 said:

I agree I myself was entirely satisfied with locked 30 fps last year … that’s until I came back to do some flying in x-plane with much higher achievable fps and the additional immersion it brings. And then once you see it you can’t go back unfortunately and think about it. At least that’s my case. 

You can get far higher fps in MSFS as well. Just turn off all the online functionality and turn down or turn off all the graphics and traffic settings until you get to the same graphical quality that you get with X-Plane. In fact you will find your fps is far higher than you get with XP if that's what matters to you. It's a ridiculous comparison. Turn everything down in MSFS and see what happens. Or install something even older such as FS98 and watch those frame rates soar.

Edited by jarmstro
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

30P, 24P, 60i, 144 etc..

I think it is what you are used to seeing.

Traditional film was/is 24 fps shown as double frames at 48 fps.

TV used to be interlaced 29.97, so 59.94 half frames per second. This seemed smother than 30P but once I got used to 30P it was smooth. This is in the US Europe and the rest of the world uses 24 as a base (I am not using the 1% reduction for simplicity) for TV.

60P or more felt "plasticy" sort of video gamish.

This is speaking as someone who ran a video production company for 25 years, now retired thank God.

So I think if you grew up with gaming computer at 60 or 144 fps 30 does look bad. But us old timers are very happy with 30 or even 24 fps.

At 24 FPS there is a "7 second rule" in film making. It means in order to not have a jerky scene an object passing through a frame has to take 7 seconds, or a pan has to take 7 seconds to pass all the way through your shot, or it will be jerky. There are also "rules" about motion blur (how long the exposure is for each frame), the standard is 50% of frame rate (so 1/60 sec for 30P.

This all gets very complex and somewhat silly really.

There is no right or wrong. Just what you feel good about.

Me personally pretty much anything better than 24 fps is fine. Yes that is very jittery when panning fast. But actually flying an airplane you are either looking at instruments or you are looking straight ahead in critical phases, landing and T/O.

I use a 4 screen setup, so I don't pan much. Peripheral vision is very important when landing and multi screen or very wide screens help mimic this well in my opinion.

So these are just my thoughts on this subject. No one is wrong or right it is all good, use what you feel works and understand others may have different perception and ways of seeing the world and interacting with a sim.

Sim on and enjoy!

Edited by 177B
  • Like 8
  • Upvote 1

Pit.jpg

Com GA Pilot, Retired • MSFS 2020 • Gigabyte 8th gen lga1151 motherboard z2370 hd3, i5 8600 8th gen 4.3ghz, Thermaltake 750w power supply, 4 x 8gb ddr4 dimm, MSI force GTO 1070 8gb ddr5, 4 SSD's • 4K main display with 3 HD displays, one is a touch screen. Often used as 3 1080P NVIDEA surround screens and one HD touchscreen for AirManager

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, 177B said:

30P, 24P, 60i, 144 etc..

I think it is what you are used to seeing.

Traditional film was/is 24 fps shown as double frames at 48 fps.

TV used to be interlaced 29.97, so 59.94 half frames per second. This seemed smother than 30P but once I got used to 30P it was smooth. This is in the US Europe and the rest of the world uses 24 as a base (I am not using the 1% reduction for simplicity) for TV.

60P or more felt "plasticy" sort of video gamish.

This is speaking as someone who ran a video production company for 25 years, now retired thank God.

So I think if you grew up with gaming computer at 60 or 144 fps 30 does look bad. But us old timers are very happy with 30 or even 24 fps.

At 24 FPS there is a "7 second rule" in film making. It means in order to not have a jerky scene an object passing through a frame has to take 7 seconds, or a pan has to take 7 seconds to pass all the way through your shot, or it will be jerky. There are also "rules" about motion blur (how long the exposure is for each frame), the standard is 50% of frame rate (so 1/60 sec for 30P.

This all gets very complex and somewhat silly really.

There is no right or wrong. Just what you feel good about.

Me personally pretty much anything better than 24 fps is fine. Yes that is very jittery when panning fast. But actually flying an airplane you are either looking at instruments or you are looking straight ahead in critical phases, landing and T/O.

I use a 4 screen setup, so I don't pan much. Peripheral vision is very important when landing and multi screen or very wide screens help mimic this well in my opinion.

So these are just my thoughts on this subject. No one is wrong or right it is all good, use what you feel works and understand others may have different perception and ways of seeing the world and interacting with a sim.

Sim on and enjoy!

The most sensible comment on the FPS topic I've seen here. Not sure why the topic gets argued for what is right/wrong so often. It all boils down to what works for you. 

For me, I always used the 30 FPS solution back in my FS9 and FSX days when I had marginal hardware and those sims really seemed to benefit in terms of microstutters issues. After having a high refresh rate monitor and playing other games in recent years at 100+ FPS it seems to have changed my perspective. 40-60 FPS, even with fluctuations, does not stutter for me in MSFS and, to my eye, looks much more fluid. I paid for high-end hardware and I want to milk my 3080 Ti for everything it can handle rather than locking my frames at 30 while my GPU is snoozing at 50% usage.


10700K @ 5.3 | 3080 Ti | Gigabyte G34WQC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, vrdubin6 said:

The most sensible comment on the FPS topic I've seen here. Not sure why the topic gets argued for what is right/wrong so often. It all boils down to what works for you. 

For me, I always used the 30 FPS solution back in my FS9 and FSX days when I had marginal hardware and those sims really seemed to benefit in terms of microstutters issues. After having a high refresh rate monitor and playing other games in recent years at 100+ FPS it seems to have changed my perspective. 40-60 FPS, even with fluctuations, does not stutter for me in MSFS and, to my eye, looks much more fluid. I paid for high-end hardware and I want to milk my 3080 Ti for everything it can handle rather than locking my frames at 30 while my GPU is snoozing at 50% usage.

I tried that same argument awhile back, regarding TV , movie, and FPS, and the folks used to modern games  with FPS over 100 before they were happy, went ballistic, so I gave up. Even today, people watch an action movie on their HDTV, and don't complain about the 30 fps they are watching. 

  • Like 1

spacer.png

Bob Cardone         MSFS 2020 , Fenix A320, Milviz C 310 , Kodiak , PMDG DC6,   Carenado Seminole,  Mooney, JF Arrow, Simple Traffic  

TrackIR   Avliasoft EFB2    ATC  by PF3    FlyVirtual.net  CLX PC

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Yeah. There’s no way I’m going from 4K to 1080p 

I bet the majority of simmers couldn't tell the difference between 1080 p and higher resolutions. It's like them fancy expensive french wines - pour a glass of that expensive Chateau Neuf whatever, sit it next to a glass of that Walmart special in a box for .99 cent - Most folks will praise the Walmart stuff to high heavens.

I've been playing video games for over 30 years and have never worried about "fps" - that's just an internet thing with 0 relevance to the average gamer. 

Edited by Ricardo41

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

15 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

I bet the majority of simmers couldn't tell the difference between 1080 p and higher resolutions. It's like them fancy expensive french wines - pour a glass of that expensive Chateau Neuf whatever, sit it next to a glass of that Walmart special in a box for .99 cent - Most folks will praise the Walmart stuff to high heavens.

I've been playing video games for over 30 years and have never worried about "fps" - that's just an internet thing with 0 relevance to the average gamer. 

You omitted the part of his quote that he is talking about a 77" TV. If you can't tell the difference between 1080 and 4k on a 77" display then you probably need some Hubble Telescope level corrective lenses. 

  • Like 6
  • Upvote 1

10700K @ 5.3 | 3080 Ti | Gigabyte G34WQC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vrdubin6 said:

 

You omitted the part of his quote that he is talking about a 77" TV. If you can't tell the difference between 1080 and 4k on a 77" display then you probably need some Hubble Telescope level corrective lenses. 

I can't imagine using a 77 inch screen as a PC monitor, unless is was many feet away from me. https://www.avu.ca/video/perfecting-proximity-finding-optimal-tv-viewing-distance/


spacer.png

Bob Cardone         MSFS 2020 , Fenix A320, Milviz C 310 , Kodiak , PMDG DC6,   Carenado Seminole,  Mooney, JF Arrow, Simple Traffic  

TrackIR   Avliasoft EFB2    ATC  by PF3    FlyVirtual.net  CLX PC

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, MDFlier said:

Your overclock was probably 100% fine.

I think that Flight simulator just doesn't like overclocks. Has something to do with a timer that it uses. If you overclock your cpu, it makes the clock tick faster than it normally would be and x number of click ticks doesn't represent the correct amount of time any more.. 

What?  lol

try not to provide PC advice if you are just going to make stuff up.  The reason flight simulator "doesn't like overclocks" is because it gives the cpu a workout, and runs for an extended time, and most people don't do overclocks correctly or they try to push the overclock past their system and cooling capacity because they saw some guy get 5.25 or whatever on youtube, and they don't want to acknowledge that not every chip and setup can do that.  I have a nice, stable and reasonable overclock on my system, but my cpu won't do 5 ghz stable without overheating with my current cooling setup, so I don't push it.  works fine.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...