What Does MSFS Do Best?

[OzWhitey 3,353]

7 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

FYI, if you don't specify the currency, the default currency in most English international forums is USD. If you meant a different currency other than USD, you should probably have specified it.

No it's not. You can make up stupid rules if you like, but that doesn't make them real. But the point is not the exact cost (which is high - its not just the currency, the absolute cost is a lot higher in than the US in many countries), it's that a lot of us are building insanely expensive rigs to try and get MSFS to run well.

MSFS performance is "OK", but it's certainly not "great". 

Anyway, stupid thread with way too many low-effort posts and a whole heap of snarkiness, I've got no idea why I bothered posting here last night. Some people have asked me why - not sure, I think I was hoping that the "mean girls" MSFS clique might actually look at the data and reflect on it rather than resorting to child ad hominem attacks and repetitive straw man fallacies. 

Meh, it's Avsim, I guess I should expect this low standard of debate by now. <shrug>

[abrams_tank 7,393]

1 minute ago, OzWhitey said:

No it's not. You can make up stupid rules if you like, but that doesn't make them real. But the point is not the exact cost (which is high - its not just the currency, the absolute cost is a lot higher in than the US in many countries), it's that a lot of us are building insanely expensive rigs to try and get MSFS to run well.

MSFS performance is "OK", but it's certainly not "great". 

Anyway, stupid thread with way too many low-effort posts and a whole heap of snarkiness, I've got no idea why I bothered posting here last night. Some people have asked me why - not sure, I think I was hoping that the "mean girls" MSFS clique might actually look at the data and reflect on it rather than resorting to child ad hominem attacks and repetitive straw man fallacies. 

Meh, it's Avsim, I guess I should expect this low standard of debate by now. <shrug>

No need to get angry. I asked if you want to post your components of your computer, because if you really spent 6K USD on your components and you are not getting good performance in MSFS, then something is not right and you are definitely under achieving with what you spent.

Calm down, if you don't want to list your components, you don't have to get so angry all of a sudden.

[turbomax 3,269]

17 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

Of course, X-plane, P3D and DCS are not well optimised either

using Windows 11 and its improved thread scheduler, MSFS looks pretty well optimised looking at task manager and going by how many cores are sizzling evenly, more so than when I was using Windows 10. it feels snappier and less stuttery than before. I did not expect this performance increase when MSFS launched in 2020. I couldn't be happier with MSFS. Somehow all that doesn't impress the wife though with all those upgrade bills ..... I keep telling her "this will be the last time ..." and how I could spend the same going to pubs instead or worse, and the discussion is over immediately. 😊

Edited May 19, 2023 by turbomax

[OzWhitey 3,353]

Just now, turbomax said:

using Windows 11 and its improved thread scheduler, MSFS looks pretty well optimised looking at task manager and going by how many cores are sizzling evenly, more so than when I was using Windows 10. it feels snappier and less stuttery than before. I did not expect this performance increase when MSFS launched in 2020. I couldn't be happier with MSFS.

Snappier and less stuttery is good...

I'm still on Win 10, haven't really seen a consistent theme that Win 11 is better for the sim. Might try it sometime soon.

Despite the (rather extreme) snark around here when you're perceived to be criticising the sim, overall I fall into the "very happy" category. But I could definitely be happier, I still have to make way too many compromises for my liking. I currently have $2831 worth of extra components in my PC Case Gear shopping cart for the MSFS upgrade, maybe I'll be up to "couldn't be happier" once that's all installed!

On a random note, I just finished building a second sim PC yesterday which is a 486, I'm going to use it for MSFS for Win 95, we'll see how the frame rates go on that one. 🙂

[turbomax 3,269]

20 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

MSFS performance is "OK", but it's certainly not "great". 

100 fps in 2D, 60-70 fps in VR, I agree is certainly not great, only funtastic.

Edited May 19, 2023 by turbomax

[turbomax 3,269]

3 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

I'm going to use it for MSFS for Win 95, we'll see how the frame rates go on that one.

zer0.

[Ricardo41 5,935]

On my "middle of the road" rig - 30-50 fps with all settings on high, including gauge refresh rate on high, all 4k liveries at heavy duty airports, yeah, MSFS runs like a lame duck. Asobo, where's my refund?😃

I guess, after the "data" attack didn't achieve the hoped for results, a fresh approach was needed, but that, too, fell flat......😁

[OzWhitey 3,353]

1 minute ago, Ricardo41 said:

On my "middle of the road" rig - 30-50 fps with all settings on high, including gauge refresh rate on high, all 4k liveries at heavy duty airports, yeah, MSFS runs like a lame duck. Asobo, where's my refund?😃

I guess, after the "data" attack didn't achieve the hoped for results, a fresh approach was needed, but that, too, fell flat......😁

You have got to be the most childish poster on this forum Ricardo41, and that is saying something. Every one of your posts is a weak ad hominem attack coated in an extra layer of snark.

Did you actually look up "straw man fallacy" like I told you to yesterday? It would seem not.

There was no "data attack". I posted the Steam stats in response to the hyperbolic post you made. I'm stupid enough to waste time actually trying to explain my posts to you, but it's clearly a losing battle.

Why don't you try actually addressing something that I wrote, rather than aiming to get for the world record for most (and stupidest) straw man posts in a single Avsim thread? Because - hurrah! - I suspect you already reached that lofty goal.

[OzWhitey 3,353]

35 minutes ago, turbomax said:

100 fps in 2D, 60-70 fps in VR, I agree is certainly not great, only funtastic.

You'll struggle to get 70 fps on a decent HMD (G2/Varjo/etc). I mean, I'd love to be getting that but I'm not even close in an airliner/complex airport/traffic. Maybe 20-25 FPS, and not exactly smooth once the traffic is turned on. As I said, still too many compromises needed for this to count as sim nirvana.

Also, I'm aiming for more than 0 FPS with the 486, though I was going to try my copy of MSFS 2002 last night but it's not supported. Maybe if I can adapt the old RTX 3090 to VLB I'll get it running. 

[cobalt 798]

8 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

You have got to be the most childish poster on this forum Ricardo41, and that is saying something. Every one of your posts is a weak ad hominem attack coated in an extra layer of snark.

Did you actually look up "straw man fallacy" like I told you to yesterday? It would seem not.

There was no "data attack". I posted the Steam stats in response to the hyperbolic post you made. I'm stupid enough to waste time actually trying to explain my posts to you, but it's clearly a losing battle.

Why don't you try actually addressing something that I wrote, rather than aiming to get for the world record for most (and stupidest) straw man posts in a single Avsim thread? Because - hurrah! - I suspect you already reached that lofty goal.

The irony of this post is striking. Wow..

[OzWhitey 3,353]

8 minutes ago, cobalt said:

The irony of this post is striking. Wow..

You're not exactly raising the tone of the conversation with sarcasm like that, Cobalt.

All I'm doing here is clearing my inbox of a rather large number of stupid posts directed at me after I posted a link to the Steam stats for MSFS about 10 pages back. Yes, I probably should just ignore them, but if people are going to quote me I'll respond to them. Yes, even people like you who a make a low-effort post like that.

[DD_Arthur 1,048]

16 minutes ago, cobalt said:

The irony of this post is striking. Wow..

It’s the old “I’ve got a shovel so I’m gonna keep digging”

[turbomax 3,269]

24 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

I'd love to be getting that but I'm not even close in an airliner/complex airport/traffic. Maybe 20-25 FPS

same here, but the RTX 4090 - AMD 7800x3D -Windows 11 upgrade changed all that. I had not expected that much of a performance increase. anybody complaining about performance: you get what you didn't pay for. (hardware upgrade)

[OzWhitey 3,353]

14 minutes ago, turbomax said:

same here, but the RTX 4090 - AMD 7800x3D -Windows 11 upgrade changed all that. I had not expected that much of a performance increase. anybody complaining about performance: you get what you didn't pay for. (hardware upgrade)

Yeah, RTX 4090 helped quite a bit for me. But my 7950X3D upgrade is still pending, should happen in the next few weeks. Will be interesting to see if I still need to compromise much once that’s in.

[Lucky38i 1,094]

50 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

Yeah, RTX 4090 helped quite a bit for me. But my 7950X3D upgrade is still pending, should happen in the next few weeks. Will be interesting to see if I still need to compromise much once that’s in.

You’re going to get regressive results on a 7950X3D compared to a 7800X3D because of the split CCD. Not sure why people buy components just because it’s the most expensive as opposed to their needs. 
 

also why is this topic still open? It’s been on a tangent for several pages now, I’m sure OP’s answer has been answered ages ago. It’s just constants spats at this point