If I recall, and I have been flight simming since FS 98, the main objective of flight simming was to have a smooth flight experience.  I am sure even with my settings I could get 60 frames in a nice quite area (10700k, 3080). Big deal, bravo, but instead I have my frames locked at 30 and a smooth experience, which makes me quite satisified, yes like most of us,every once in a while will get a stutter, in a highly dense area.

So explain to me, so many topics frames are mentioned, is it for bragging rights?  I always thought flight simming the aim was to get a smooth flight ?  This is not a one shooter game,or racing car, this is supposed to be a SImulator.

Sure the greater the frame rate, the more head room u have to play with, and that's fine.

Thus, would u rather have 60 or 90 frame rates, with ur computer working harder, or a smooth and enjoyable flight experience, even in highly dense area, ex KLAX, where I have frames locked at 30, and yes smoothness is my objective.

4 minutes ago, Sunshine13 said:

If I recall, and I have been flight simming since FS 98, the main objective of flight simming was to have a smooth flight experience.  I am sure even with my settings I could get 60 frames in a nice quite area (10700k, 3080). Big deal, bravo, but instead I have my frames locked at 30 and a smooth experience, which makes me quite satisified, yes like most of us,every once in a while will get a stutter, in a highly dense area.

So explain to me, so many topics frames are mentioned, is it for bragging rights?  I always thought flight simming the aim was to get a smooth flight ?  This is not a one shooter game,or racing car, this is supposed to be a SImulator.

Sure the greater the frame rate, the more head room u have to play with, and that's fine.

Thus, would u rather have 60 or 90 frame rates, with ur computer working harder, or a smooth and enjoyable flight experience, even in highly dense area, ex KLAX, where I have frames locked at 30, and yes smoothness is my objective.

I Agree!!! Are you using DX 11 or 12? Also what are you limiting your frames with? Photogrammetry on or off?

 

Thanks

Not going to disagree, I am in the same boat...locked at 30 even though I can usually achieve much more.  I admit, I would love to get 60 so I can sync to my monitor and I can in fact get 60+ in some aircraft/scenery but I prefer to just keep it locked at 30 and not worry about it.  The Fenix 320 in dense areas with AI can even challenge my 30 fps at times.  I have been simming since 1988 on Sublogic Flight Sim when it ran at about 1-2 fps....😄

I have mine locked at 30 in the sim, and my GPU runs at about 40-60% utilization, but some folks have argued in the past that you should strive to get your money's worth out of the expensive video card you have invested in.

So you are going to get different views on this.. 😉

Edited October 14, 20223 yr by Bert Pieke

 Photogrammetry is on, V sync on, using DX12, but might go back to DX 11, and most of my flying is with, the PMDG 737-800 and I am flying into heavily dense areas. Smoothness, smoothness is all I want, like mentioned before their is always once in a while u get that stutter on the ground while taxing, but I can live with that.

It just turns me off, where so many topics people are talking about frame rates,  Isn.t this a simulator, and we are flying, not in a race car, or one person shooter.  

Edited October 14, 20223 yr by Sunshine13

Consistency is the primary target and mainly because most of us cannot get 60fps locked. But....it doesn't matter if its Call of duty, flight sim or a racing sim, 60fps is always going to be the holy grail over 30fps just for sheer sim or game responsiveness. If we all had the horsepower it would always be the preference to have a higher frame rate. When the rtx4000 series power is mainstream in 3=4 years , this debate will be a thing of the past...

This has been discussed ad nauseum, and this is the third thread you make on the same topic (that I'm aware of). Why can't you just accept that some people care about fps more than others?

 

Edited October 15, 20223 yr by Cpt_Piett

Your obsession with this is weird. Other people have different preferences. Why is that hard to accept?

its not a matter of accepting, I surely can get 60 frames on my computer in dense areas, but so what, the key to flight simmiing has always been to have a smooth fliight.

I will turn it around and what is your obsession about frame rates when talking about our simulator, and not a race car or one person shooter.

1 minute ago, Sunshine13 said:

its not a matter of accepting, I surely can get 60 frames on my computer in dense areas, but so what, the key to flight simmiing has always been to have a smooth fliight.

Soooo if someone gets 60 fps and it is smooth they should lock it at 30 anyways because you think that's better? Cool. Good for you.

30 FPS doesn't look acceptable to me. Panning looks like trash, and TrackIR totally sucks. If you don't agree, great, you do you. We don't need another new topic on the same thing multiple times to discuss your weird preference.

I think the OP meant Frames, frames, frames frames, Smoothness, Smoothness, Smoothness.

sp

I'd like to lock it at 30fps but I just can stand the jitter when panning/looking around

I adjust settings to get 55+ fps but when landing in some larger airports it drops to 40-45 

Once I'm 1500+ feet above the ground I'm back to getting 55+ fps so with screen sync it's pretty good

 

 

Panning sucks at 30 fps. At 40 it looks quite a bit better. I live with 36 as it is close enough, and doesn’t generate excessive heat. 

Kiwikat, I am not saying that everybody should lock their frames at 30, we all have different hardware and software

what I am saying is that we should be looking for a smooth flying expreience, and not be so persistent about frames, that;s why as u mentioned, that panning looks like trash.

M yflight experience so far has been smooth, so u could be concerned about frames, good for u, to each their own.

Kiwikat, and I don't need another person bragging about their frames, flying and flight sim, is all about smoothness,  u can get 30, or 60 frames it doesn't matter, a SMOOTH flying experience, and I am just a bit tired about hearing how many frames u can get, to each their own 

Finally, if u need 45 frames or even 60, this simulator when ur flying is that u want to get a smooth flying experience, as much as possible

 

5 hours ago, Sunshine13 said:

If I recall, and I have been flight simming since FS 98, the main objective of flight simming was to have a smooth flight experience.  I am sure even with my settings I could get 60 frames in a nice quite area (10700k, 3080). Big deal, bravo, but instead I have my frames locked at 30 and a smooth experience, which makes me quite satisified, yes like most of us,every once in a while will get a stutter, in a highly dense area.

So explain to me, so many topics frames are mentioned, is it for bragging rights?  I always thought flight simming the aim was to get a smooth flight ?  This is not a one shooter game,or racing car, this is supposed to be a SImulator.

Sure the greater the frame rate, the more head room u have to play with, and that's fine.

Thus, would u rather have 60 or 90 frame rates, with ur computer working harder, or a smooth and enjoyable flight experience, even in highly dense area, ex KLAX, where I have frames locked at 30, and yes smoothness is my objective.

Locking at 30 vs locking at 60 is a huge difference if you use any type of head tracking, like Track IR.  If you just fly around without that, or maybe use a home cockpit it's less noticeable.

I don't lock at all, nor do I use vsync.  Things are generally smooth unless I'm cranking the LOD and flying big cities with cloud layers, AI traffic and payware sceneries.