9 hours ago, FBW737 said:

In my case its not a lot. Sure if you go looking for it you will see that the deliberate movement of a joystick using frame interpolation at 24hz is out of sync with its onscreen counterpart by a small fraction of a second. If the computation of the interpolated frame is instantaneous I think the lag would be about 1/24 of a second. maybe its a bit more and as I've said if you go looking for it you can see it but if your not setting out to find it, it might as well not be there. It is pros and cons. Likewise with 4000 series GPU's frame generation must cause a lag too. How can you interpolate a point between two given sequential points without waiting for the second point?

It's different technology. FG generally has less than half the input lag of TV interpolation, and with nVidia Relfex input lag is even further reduced. It's all about the speed between the CPU and GPU. With a TV you don't have that - it's all on the TV to do what it can with the input signal. It also means TV interpolation varies a lot between brands and models. I know on my old Samsung it was just horrid, and didn't look smooth at all, let alone the input lag - but that was quite an old TV.

YMMV of course. If it works for you that's great. I probably wouldn't recommend buying a TV for that purpose mind, but if you have it already, give it a try.

5 hours ago, garydpoole said:

Thanks for the info. Unfortunately, this won't be an easy trial as the 4K TV is currently hanging on the wall on one floor of the house with the flightsim rig being on another !

just watch some 24hz 24fps content on the TV with the Judder reduction slider on screen and then move the slider back and forth between 0 and 10 and you should be able to see what it does. If you have any PC connected to the TV you could use this flight sim video to showcase the method. Just make sure the PC is set to 24hz. If you see the difference in the video you'll see the same difference in Flight Sim:

 

12 hours ago, jmalfatti_BR said:

Well, I'm playing with a Jurassic i7 2600k/GTX 970/16GB with higher performance than I used to get with FSX, in terms of fps.

Great. My fears were baseless then. I knew msfs was initially relatively easy on the system but I figured after 12 World Updates, added weather enhancements an AI traffic  it has become performance killer suited only for newest generation of hardware.

On 4/11/2023 at 7:38 PM, elprim said:

...Is it worth even considering spending $60 to run MSFS on my 10+ years old pc?

I7 4770K (3.5 GHz), 16G memory, GTX 1660 Ti (6G) ... I have single monitor 24'' 1920x1200

If we're having a "top trumps" in this thread for who had the lowliest machine to run MFS, I winning that contest thus far (or at least drawing with @jmalfatti_BR)... i5 2500K [email protected] GHz, 16 GB RAM and a GTX 980 4GB.

And it ran just fine, not amazing, but more than playable typically maintaining 30 fps with settings generally around high. Oh and I was running 1440p resolution with no scaling and anti-aliasing enabled. You have nothing to worry about, truly. If I wasn't smart with settings and flew the most framerate heavy aircraft into the most complicated airports with loads of AI traffic and weather I could drop to 14 fps, but for most flying I stayed above 20 fps and things looked nice.

Edited April 14, 20233 yr by ckyliu