Should FPS be limited through Nvidia?

[Noel 4,499]

51 minutes ago, Pivot said:

Bert, are you referring to the VSync options for Frame limiting? I haven't noticed an option to select limited frames.

Pivot, the FPS is limited when you have VSync set to ON in-sim you just choose one of the three selectable factors:  20, 30 or 60.  Think of it as 20/60, 30/60, or 60/60.   Multiply your choice with whatever your screen refresh rate is.

Examples:

For 60Hz refresh, set the 30/60 factor and your frames will lock to 30/60 x 60 = 30 FPS lock.

For 120Hz refresh, set the 20/60 factor and your frames will lock to 20/60 x 120 = 40 FPS lock.

The Achille's Heel of the Vsync frame limit model is when frames cannot be maintained at the frame lock as stuttering insues.  However, this can be predicted and you simply set sim to avoid that outcome depending perhaps on the specifics of your pending flight.  For me I only need be mindful of where I set Terrain LOD, as all other settings are on their highest settings and I can always maintain the minimum 30 FPS for how I'm set up.

[reignman40 450]

I cap my frames at 45 through RivaTuner. It is a nice balance between frames and GPU temps. 

[RJC68 823]

11 minutes ago, reignman40 said:

I cap my frames at 45 through RivaTuner. It is a nice balance between frames and GPU temps. 

Are you using Gsync?

I find that with a good old fashion 60Hz 4K TV it has to be either 60fps or 30fps

Edited August 1, 2022 by RJC68

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

3 hours ago, Pivot said:

Bert, are you referring to the VSync options for Frame limiting? I haven't noticed an option to select limited frames.

There is one.. right below Vsync

Edited August 1, 2022 by Bert Pieke

[Virtual-Chris 682]

15 hours ago, RJC68 said:

Oh boy you do realize you’re going to wake the 130fps trolls 😂

 

At least 130FPS! 😛

Seriously, I'm a 60 FPS snob/troll. FPS=RefreshRate is the ultimate goal for me.

[Virtual-Chris 682]

15 hours ago, RJC68 said:

Oh boy you do realize you’re going to wake the 130fps trolls 😂

 

Double post

Edited August 1, 2022 by Virtual-Chris

[RJC68 823]

6 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

At least 130FPS! 😛

Seriously, I'm a 60 FPS snob/troll. FPS=RefreshRate is the ultimate goal for me.

LOL, Sorry for the sarcasm it’s just that this whole debate happens so frequently here and for anyone just getting into flight simming trying to get the best out of their machine can be really daunting.

I understand completely, 60FPS is like the holy grail and I can achieve this some of the time but not all of the time so I find a happy compromise and make adjustments too what I am flying and where. If someone wants to run 30, 40, 60 FPS or anything in between and they are happy with the results they get then all good for them. At the end of the day were all here to help each other

[tup61 1,560]

1 minute ago, RJC68 said:

I understand completely, 60FPS is like the holy grail

To me the holy grail is smooth performance. I never check my fps in MSFS (and can't remember ever doing so!). I just want MSFS to look smooth. And with my current setup it does (mainly thanks to my great G-Sync monitor). I seriously don't know if I am looking at 30 fps or 60 fps or whatever but I couldn't care less.

I am absolutely sure a lot of people here would be very happy with their performance if they did NOT look at the fps and be worried about it. Instead of looking how the sim performs, how it feels to them, they only look at that little number in some corner of the screen. Such a shame. 😉

[jimcarrel 688]

In my case, every different version in MSFS and other flight sims can be different as far as frame rate for smooth flight goes.

I've found in one version, unlimited can result is best smoothness, another version may run better locked. There are too many variables, to consistently set a "rule".   

[Noel 4,499]

19 minutes ago, tup61 said:

I am absolutely sure a lot of people here would be very happy with their performance if they did NOT look at the fps and be worried about it.

Me too and I think if the comparison was done double-blinded most would likely not be able to do better than random chance on guessing whether it's 30, or 60, provided it's smooth and stutter-free and that includes panning in the cockpit.  The COST of doubling frame rate is huge, as well, in terms of taxing hardware.

[Alvega 2,124]

22 minutes ago, tup61 said:

To me the holy grail is smooth performance. I never check my fps in MSFS (and can't remember ever doing so!). I just want MSFS to look smooth. And with my current setup it does (mainly thanks to my great G-Sync monitor). I seriously don't know if I am looking at 30 fps or 60 fps or whatever but I couldn't care less.

I am absolutely sure a lot of people here would be very happy with their performance if they did NOT look at the fps and be worried about it. Instead of looking how the sim performs, how it feels to them, they only look at that little number in some corner of the screen. Such a shame. 😉

Some people are beta testers who need to know if an update increases or decreases performance, others like to know if a mod is heavy on FPS or not so they can decide whether to use it or not. You can't do it without looking at FPS. I see you don't care for any of that, but you shouldn't criticize the ones who do.

[tup61 1,560]

6 minutes ago, Alvega said:

Some people are beta testers who need to know if an update increases or decreases performance, others like to know if a mod is heavy on FPS or not so they can decide whether to use it or not. You can't do it without looking at FPS. I see you don't care for any of that, but you shouldn't criticize the ones who do.

Oh, I didn't meant to critize everyone who looks at fps. 😉 I do understand for some it is necessary. But I doubt if it is for most regular users.

And btw what you say about someone looking at fps to see if they can use a mod or not... that's exactly what I meant! They install a mod, see a decrease of 10 fps and think 'I can't use this mod'... while the sim might still look great with 10 fps less! 😉

But anyway, everyone is free to check fps if they want to of course! 😉

[Sethos 4,335]

25 minutes ago, Alvega said:

Some people are beta testers who need to know if an update increases or decreases performance, others like to know if a mod is heavy on FPS or not so they can decide whether to use it or not. You can't do it without looking at FPS. I see you don't care for any of that, but you shouldn't criticize the ones who do.

On a similar note, it's weird that we still don't have a proper static benchmark function that a lot of games have. Get an idea of performance, plus see averages, minimum, max FPS etc. instead of this anecdotal stomach-feel "I think this increased my performance" stuff. 

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

On 7/31/2022 at 2:31 PM, RJC68 said:

 

Oh boy you do realize you’re going to wake the 130fps trolls 😂

 

You mean people with a different opinion? 🙄

[MySound 403]

9 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

At least 130FPS! 😛

Seriously, I'm a 60 FPS snob/troll. FPS=RefreshRate is the ultimate goal for me.

For me too, thats why I have a 120 Hz OLED and FPS limited to 120.

Am I a troll? Well, maybe I have just better eyes.

Whoever doesnt see a difference between 20 and 40 FPS should maybe consider to visit a doctor.

The higher FPS - the better. However, MSFS is different in the way that you induce stutters when the mainthread limits. And sure, temps / power consumption are lower at lower FPS. I mean, that's like dricing a Ferrari with 20 mph - sure, it will consume less. But will it be as much fun? Not if you have a German Autobahn.

Edited August 1, 2022 by MySound