I feel like one of Norman Wisdom's characters of the PC world. WILDBLUE , you asked if my TV was actually running in 120hz, it wasn't, so I changed my TV settings to 120hz, but now all my Desktop Icons are massive, even though its set at 3840 x 2860, CTRL middle mouse down made no difference. I feel like a real short sighted dude, lmao. 

I think this kind sums up my life hahahahahaha!!!!!

 

11 hours ago, Jazz said:

This, check this. I have seen this mistake more times than I care to remember.

Way past my bedtime as I am in work really early, gotta be up at 4am, but, YES, definitely plugged into my 3090Ti, I am daft, but not THAT daft 🙂

And thanks again guys for all the help. 

21 minutes ago, BlodhemnUK said:

Way past my bedtime as I am in work really early, gotta be up at 4am, but, YES, definitely plugged into my 3090Ti, I am daft, but not THAT daft 🙂

And thanks again guys for all the help. 

Maybe this was already asked - but do you have onboard video ?  Sometimes software will try to use that instead of the GPU.  You may to disable it in bios.

28 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

do you have onboard video ?

Can you even get 20 FPS in MSFS from on-board graphics?

Someone has already suggested this and was confirmed by OP that he hasn't done this.

7 hours ago, BlodhemnUK said:

Again, all seems to be ok, although I noted Virtualization is on. Did someonemention turning OFF virtualization?

Yes, shut off virtualization!

If that doesn't fix it, and apparently things were better previously so doubtful it will unless you enabled virtualization, you might consider starting fresh.  By the time you check every possible idea presented here for days you could have reinstalled Windows fresh.  After getting the basic system functioning w/ fresh clean chipset and GPU drivers installed, run the benchmarks and see where you stack up.  Your CPU is every bit as capable as mine, and the main thread is stifled if you're not seeing clock speeds up where that CPU can manage, so like most or many here do learn how to get the most out of your CPU by safe overclocking practices.  The sim is absolutely main thread limited for most everyone and most of those are overclocked, so you're that much worse off.   Once you've got your hardware in tip top shape in a clean fresh OS you're ready to get what your hardware deserves--with some modest tuning.

When i decided to read this thread i had no idea what was going to come out of it. Out of curiosity i decided to run some benchmarks, and to my surprise my m.2 ssd wasn’t performing well at all. First I discovered that the PC builder i bought my computer from did not install the storage controller for my SSD. I installed it but found that performance was only a little better. Then i ran across a tool that told me i was running my m.2 ssd using 2 pcie lanes instead of 4. And that caused me to move my m.2 SSD to a different spot on my motherboard. My SSD performance went from 1400 to 2200 (read speed) and MSFS is now incredibly light and smooth. It is like a strain on my system was lifted. These pc builders. Jeez. 
 

One more observation. Even when my fps dips below 30 it is still buttery smooth. 

Edited January 8, 20233 yr by RobJC

1 hour ago, RobJC said:

My SSD performance went from 1400 to 2200 (read speed) and MSFS is now incredibly light and smooth.

MSFS average read transfer speeds are typically very low (way below 100 MB/s) compared to what even an M.2 NVMe SSD PCIe Gen3 drive in only an x2 slot (2 lanes) provides: 2 GB/s . PCIe Gen 3 in an x4 (4 lanes) slot should give you nearly 4 GB/s. all this is already overkill by a factor of 10 or more for MSFS, except during initial loading of the game where I could  observe 1.4 GB/s max. for just a second. nevertheless, inserting an x4 capable device in an x2 slot doesn't show much competence from your pc builder 😊. I doubt though you would see even a single fps performance difference during flight. As I have demonstrated earlier in another thread, everybody can check this out using nothing more than task manager, under Performance, then select your MSFS or Community's folders drive while MSFS is running.

https://www.kingston.com/en/blog/pc-performance/pcie-gen-4-explained

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express

 

 

 

Edited January 9, 20233 yr by turbomax

Yeah the pc builder was word not allowed. But the performance improvement is real. I read that it made no difference which m.2 slot i used, but what do you know. Huge boost. You are right there is no fps boost, but msfs feels so much more responsive. It could be the ai models being loaded? No idea, but there’s a whole lot of data on my ssd drive i installed for this sim, and unless it is there simply to consume space that stuff needs to get loaded before and during flight. My assumption is that data loading much faster is showing up in the feel of the sim. 

35 minutes ago, RobJC said:

Yeah the pc builder was word not allowed. But the performance improvement is real. I read that it made no difference which m.2 slot i used, but what do you know. Huge boost. 

It sounds like you are ready to build your own, you are inquisitive and knowledgeable and your pc builder isn't. 

6 minutes ago, Mace said:

It sounds like you are ready to build your own, you are inquisitive and knowledgeable and your pc builder isn't. 

Thanks! I have always built my own rigs but the graphics card shortage forced me to buy one already built. Not that impressed at this point. 

8 hours ago, RobJC said:

It could be the ai models being loaded?

interesting aspect, I don't use those. therefore AI "traffic is no factor" as they say, in my testing at least. just try for yourself and check with task manager. and make sure to exclude MSFS and Community folder from any anti virus real time protection. the pc builder might have used the x2 slot because the x4 was already covered by the GPU as in my motherboard, and he was too lazy or was concerned with better heat dissipation, but again, that shouldn't be a factor. NVMe m.2 shares PCIe lanes with your SATA drives, but since you don't have any ....

Edited January 9, 20233 yr by turbomax

I have ran into almost the same problem as the OP. I swapped out a 6800XT for a GTX4080 on Saturday afternoon. Before changing out the cards I set up a test flight as follows: H-Jet sitting oon end of runway at Sea-Tac in a rain squal, all Ultra with 200/200 LOD's, res at 2560/1440. The 6800XT showed 46-48 FPS. I then removed all the AMD drivers with DDU in Safe-Mode and then swapped out the GPU's. I then installed the 527 something drivers and went into MSFS and set up the same flight. Imagine my surprise to only see 30-32 FPS with the 4080. I was running the 6800XT with FSR2, and the 4080 is using DLSS. I didn't play around with it as I was so disgusted on Saturday and watched Footbal and Golf instead, then wasn't home yesterday. I will get into it this afternoon though. My CPU is a 5800x3D, 32 gig PC3600 ram, Samsung Evo 970 ssd. For some reason it looked like the CPU was getting hit harder with the 4080 than it was with the 6800 but I have no idea why that would be. It has been quite some time since I have had an nVidia card so I am having to learn things all over again, it would seem. Any suggestions on where to look 1st will be appreciated.

6 hours ago, turbomax said:

interesting aspect, I don't use those. therefore AI "traffic is no factor" as they say, in my testing at least. just try for yourself and check with task manager. and make sure to exclude MSFS and Community folder from any anti virus real time protection. the pc builder might have used the x2 slot because the x4 was already covered by the GPU as in my motherboard, and he was too lazy or was concerned with better heat dissipation, but again, that shouldn't be a factor. NVMe m.2 shares PCIe lanes with your SATA drives, but since you don't have any ....

Not sure if it is AI traffic or any other objects being loaded. This sim takes a lot of disk space, so something is getting loaded. It could also be non MSFS requests that are being served. The second m.2 was covered under the gpu, but my vote is they were lazy. But i believe your testing doesn’t show it being a factor, but i am not sure if it picks up these oh so tiny impacts. I am not ruling out your findings. I will do more testing! 

19 hours ago, RobJC said:

My SSD performance went from 1400 to 2200 (read speed)

2.2 GB/s read speed would still be way below the PCI3 x4 standard, which is about 3.9 GB theoretical max. make sure your NVMe doesn't run into thermal throttling, you might need a passive heat sink on them. here my Samsung NVMe results, a PCI3 device in a x4 slot:

3 hours ago, Mikeingreen said:

I have ran into almost the same problem as the OP. I swapped out a 6800XT for a GTX4080 on Saturday afternoon. Before changing out the cards I set up a test flight as follows: H-Jet sitting oon end of runway at Sea-Tac in a rain squal, all Ultra with 200/200 LOD's, res at 2560/1440. The 6800XT showed 46-48 FPS. I then removed all the AMD drivers with DDU in Safe-Mode and then swapped out the GPU's. I then installed the 527 something drivers and went into MSFS and set up the same flight. Imagine my surprise to only see 30-32 FPS with the 4080. I was running the 6800XT with FSR2, and the 4080 is using DLSS. I didn't play around with it as I was so disgusted on Saturday and watched Footbal and Golf instead, then wasn't home yesterday. I will get into it this afternoon though. My CPU is a 5800x3D, 32 gig PC3600 ram, Samsung Evo 970 ssd. For some reason it looked like the CPU was getting hit harder with the 4080 than it was with the 6800 but I have no idea why that would be. It has been quite some time since I have had an nVidia card so I am having to learn things all over again, it would seem. Any suggestions on where to look 1st will be appreciated.

What are you using to measure fps?