I get max. 5 FPS less on the Fenix than in the PMDG which is perfectly fine, but I also took my time to choose an appropriate setting in the Fenix App, in my case shifting the Fenix' displays onto the GPU, which gave me about 10 FPS in comparison to CPU (1080ti, Ryzen 5600x, 2k). I outright don't believe anyone saying he has 20 FPS in the Fenix and 45 FPS in the PMDG in the same situation. That's 25 FPS difference which could only happen with a totally bad Fenix app setting combined with a huge bottleneck (VRAM?).

Just now, abennett said:

All ULTRA , 1440p standard widescreen, inibuilds EGLL is major stutter when panning the camera. I only have a 3070 but still seeing main thread limited in places like EGLL. DD KEWR is an absolute no go.

That's basically my settings, except that I have a 11 GB vram card (1080ti). Check your VRAM usage and try to swap settings in the Fenix App. From what I gathered a VRAM deficit (which is most likely in EGLL) will hammer the main thread (and not the GPU thread).

3 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

I get max. 5 FPS less on the Fenix than in the PMDG which is perfectly fine, but I also took my time to choose an appropriate setting in the Fenix App, in my case shifting the Fenix' displays onto the GPU, which gave me about 10 FPS in comparison to CPU (1080ti, Ryzen 5600x, 2k). I outright don't believe anyone saying he has 20 FPS in the Fenix and 45 FPS in the PMDG in the same situation. That's 25 FPS difference which could only happen with a totally bad Fenix app setting combined with a huge bottleneck (VRAM?).

Useful information.

Thanks for posting.

13 minutes ago, abennett said:

DD KEWR is an absolute no go.

The KEWR scenery is known to be a bit of a mess, so not useful to use as product test of any airliner.

I also get suttering when panning at EGLL in the Fenix A320, but nowhere else.

My Fenix displays also moved from CPU to GPU.

Edited January 2, 20233 yr by F737MAX

15 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

I also get suttering when panning at EGLL in the Fenix A320, but nowhere else.

What TLOD are you using?

3 minutes ago, abennett said:

What TLOD are you using?

Was 250, now 180 and performance is better into KORD and KDTW.

EGLL still a litlle troublesome.

2 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

I explained exactly what I meant by simbrief integration, so stop twisting my words. And you consider the area around the cabin, the galley, etc. "obscure locations"?

Your “explanation” was, quote, “lack of sim brief integration”. Which is flat out wrong, so no need to twist anything. 

LMAO, “cabin and galley”? Yes! So obscure that I can’t even remember ever visiting either locale.
In fact I can confidently say my most satisfying airliner experience so far was in the FJS 727, which, GASP!!, has no cabin at all!

I give (slightly) more credence to the wheel wells, in fact, because at least that’s part of a pilots walk around.

im not at all saying that these things don’t matter, but they’re so incredibly far down the list of priorities for learning to operate a commercial airliner that I can’t even be bothered to consider their  “fidelity”

as I’ve said before, there are far greater development priorities. And when I take a gander at the Change Logs, I’m satisfied with the focus. 

12 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

Was 250, now 180 and performance is better into KORD and KDTW.

EGLL still a litlle troublesome.

Thanks, just in a flight in the 737 when I’ve finished gonna fire up the Fenix and have an experiment. 

It will be interesting to see what happens if the software that was mentioned on another thread here about being able to have a dynamic TLOD works. I just find anything less than 250 extremely unsatisfactory in the sim these days as you can really see the edge of the detailed terrain and it just looks nasty in my opinion. But all performance issues are on the ground, where TLOD is less important visually, so it would be incredible if that software worked and could really reduce the TLOD a couple hundred feet above the runway so it was nice and smooth on final approach and when on the ground taxiing or at the stand...

But the buggy vnav still kind of puts me off the Fenix even disregarding the performance sadly.

with all the complaining and crying about PMDG, in  my opinion they are still the #1 developer in flight simming.  They have been around for over 20 years, and no product is ever going to be perfect.  We all have different hardware and software, and people that are complaining, and wining, should try to put their setting in their signature.

When I fly with the P,MDG 737 most of my setting are on Ultra and high.  I have frames locked at 30, with Vsync on, and TLOD, most of the time at 200, or even 150.  My frames usually  get around 25 or so, sometimes even less 20 or so. flying into airports such as KEWR, KLAX, KORD, KSEA, CYYZ, KBOS KFFL, KLAX. CYVR, just to name a few.

Bottom line, I get enjoyment flying the 737, and I really don't give a heck on how many frames I get, its all about a SMOOTH flight experience.!!!

40 minutes ago, Sunshine13 said:

with all the complaining and crying about PMDG, in  my opinion they are still the #1 developer in flight simming.  They have been around for over 20 years, and no product is ever going to be perfect.  We all have different hardware and software, and people that are complaining, and wining, should try to put their setting in their signature.

When I fly with the P,MDG 737 most of my setting are on Ultra and high.  I have frames locked at 30, with Vsync on, and TLOD, most of the time at 200, or even 150.  My frames usually  get around 25 or so, sometimes even less 20 or so. flying into airports such as KEWR, KLAX, KORD, KSEA, CYYZ, KBOS KFFL, KLAX. CYVR, just to name a few.

Bottom line, I get enjoyment flying the 737, and I really don't give a heck on how many frames I get, its all about a SMOOTH flight experience.!!!

Oh yeah all told, in my opinion, the PMDG 737 is hands down the best airliner for MSFS, the reliability of the systems and the performance combined is just awesome. Yes there are minor niggles, but nothing compared to its main competitor.

10 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

You need to set up the simbrief downloader first. It's just an additional extra step

only  need  to  set it up once

Edited January 3, 20233 yr by pete_auau

2 hours ago, abennett said:

But the buggy vnav still kind of puts me off the Fenix even disregarding the performance sadly.

Could you expand on the buggy VNAV? Curious to see what you mean.

6 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Your “explanation” was, quote, “lack of sim brief integration”. Which is flat out wrong, so no need to twist anything. 

Sorry, but he’s got a point. If I want to do a flight in the Fenix, FBW, A310, Salty 747 or Heavy 787 I just generate a flight plan on the simbrief website and I’m good to go — literally nothing to download to my computer, the flight plan is on the simbrief server only. Then I hit the “request” button in the in-sim FMS and it “just works.” To me, that’s what “simbrief integration” means. As I understand it, getting it to work in the 737 involves not just setting up the simbrief downloader, but also then downloading the OFP every time I want to fly, right? I’m not saying that’s the end of the world, but it’s not really “integration” as much as “export” in that case.

(FWIW, I’m a fan of PMDG’s 737. Performance is super smooth and it’s a fun plane to fly. But true simbrief integration would be nice! I understand perhaps not possible with the design decisions PMDG has made…)

James

8 hours ago, abennett said:

I would love to fly the Fenix but also the FPS is just so bad compared to the PMDG it is just not worth it, and I'm on a 5800X3D which some say is the best CPU for MSFS. 

The managed descent in the Fenix is also pretty unreliable, it cannot cope with changing speed constraints, frequently the path is incorrect, decel in the wrong place, the path will change when going to selected speed when if this is the same as managed speed it should stay the same, it doesn't give enough time to slow to a speed constraint, if there are no altitude constraints it should be able to do this perfectly as there are no other factors determining when in can shallow the decent to slow, but still it will burst these constraints, same with the 250/FL100, if there are no constraints before this it can slow down in enough time, but still smashes through it.

 

These and the poor performance really make it not enjoyable for me to fly such a shame.

are all your drives SSD/NVME?

31 minutes ago, honanhal said:

Sorry, but he’s got a point. If I want to do a flight in the Fenix, FBW, A310, Salty 747 or Heavy 787 I just generate a flight plan on the simbrief website and I’m good to go — literally nothing to download to my computer, the flight plan is on the simbrief server only. Then I hit the “request” button in the in-sim FMS and it “just works.” To me, that’s what “simbrief integration” means. As I understand it, getting it to work in the 737 involves not just setting up the simbrief downloader, but also then downloading the OFP every time I want to fly, right? I’m not saying that’s the end of the world, but it’s not really “integration” as much as “export” in that case.

(FWIW, I’m a fan of PMDG’s 737. Performance is super smooth and it’s a fun plane to fly. But true simbrief integration would be nice! I understand perhaps not possible with the design decisions PMDG has made…)

James

Yes, he does have a (minor) point in that the integration isn't as slick as the others.

However, it's more than semantic differences when he classifies that as both a "glaring issue" and a "lack of...". Those assertions are, respectively, hyperbole and incorrect.

Then he goes on to bemoan unrealistic "low rez [sic]" textures in rather out of the way locations (like the galley - lmao!). Like I said, did he ever even sim before MSFS...?

Then he piles on with the greatly delayed progress on what will be an UNrealistic EFB (which all of them are...). And oh, the irony of that...!

So, yes, those (minor) issues do indeed exist, but I just can't take a guy like that seriously.