3 hours ago, OzWhitey said:

7950X3D upgrade

not the best choice for MSFS, for MSFS exclusive use ( as in my case) 7800x3D is preferable.

I admit my fps are less than 100 with everything max @ 4K: only 70 fps in 2D, only 65 fps @ 8K in VR HP G2, low density airport, no traffic tools, without FrameGeneration:

 

Edited May 19, 20233 yr by turbomax

5 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

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

Last I checked, it wasn’t clear if that was true, even though some people were claiming it - the data I’ve seen was unconvincing. They’re both great chips and the price difference is not much in the scheme of the total build. 

12 minutes ago, turbomax said:

not the best choice for MSFS, for MSFS exclusive ( as in my case) 7800x3D is preferable.

I admit my fps are less than 100 with everything max @ 4K: only 70 fps in 2D, only 65 fps @ 8K in VR HP G2, low density airport, no traffic tools:

 

Nice, 65 FPS with the G2 is decent though as I said before good luck getting that in the Fenix at iniBuilds EGLL! 
 

That’s what I mean by not quite there yet, even with state of the art gear you need to fly a simple plane or accept that you’re not going hit the native refresh rate. Maybe with the next sim, or maybe the 5090 will finally do the trick.

Edited May 19, 20233 yr by OzWhitey

EGLL @ 4K in 2D. Nvidia FrameGeneration ON, default B787 with AAU2 beta, no traffic tools, mostly MAX settings:

72 fps, "not quite there yet" 😄

have to learn to live with that for the next 2 years.

Edited May 19, 20233 yr by turbomax

3 minutes ago, turbomax said:

EGLL @ 4K in 2D. Nvidia FrameGeneration ON, default B787 with AAU2 beta, no traffic tools, mostly MAX settings:

65 fps,

have to learn to live with that for the next 2 years.

I'll have to test with that on my new 7800X3D rig, but I can tell you, unless I was dreaming, I was getting 130-140 fps smooth at 4K Ultra the other night with the Flysimware C414 with LatinVFR SCEL and FSLTL AI.

Granted that's not the 787 or Fenix and it's not New York or London, but I'm very impressed in the limited amount of testing i've done so far.

And this is without any PBO or EXPO profiles.   (!) 

48 minutes ago, Mace said:

I was getting 130-140 fps smooth at 4K Ultra

that's exactly what I am getting with FrameGeneration ON mostly in GA aircraft, but he insisted on Fenix at EGLL. that's why I chose the 787 with AAU2 beta. my TV monitor does "only" 60 Hz, my HP G2 in VR does 90 Hz.😄

most of my time I spend in the main menu anyway, that's where I am getting acceptable fps, stutter free @ 410 fps.

Edited May 19, 20233 yr by turbomax

9 hours ago, OzWhitey said:

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

And do you think calling people mean girls and insisting Jan 2023 - Apr 2023 average Steam users is proof of mediocre performance significantly adds to the quality of the debate?

Edited May 20, 20233 yr by scotchegg

So, how is everybody doing?

5 hours ago, Rimshot said:

So, how is everybody doing?

Pretty good, Bert. Though I think things got a little out of hand in this thread. 🙂

If #OccupyRedmond3 goes ahead, I’ll give you a call, cos we’ll need some hot cocoa. 

On 5/18/2023 at 3:09 PM, Noel said:

Uh, no we're making a rhetorical comment about how virtually no one cares about "FAA Certification" for MSFS.

Of course not, its a game

 

 

...let me put some meat on that.:

The majority of users here who profess the need for high fidelity this and that are Tubeliner types or into complex private aircraft and there are lots and lots of that type of user...so how many of you are using MSFS as part of your ATPL Training or even an IFR rating on your PPL?.

I'll bet I get a number for the former that's not much above zero, the latter?, go on surprise me.

Edited May 20, 20233 yr by Pathfinder633

4 hours ago, Pathfinder633 said:

Of course not, its a game

 

 

...let me put some meat on that.:

The majority of users here who profess the need for high fidelity this and that are Tubeliner types or into complex private aircraft and there are lots and lots of that type of user...so how many of you are using MSFS as part of your ATPL Training or even an IFR rating on your PPL?.

I'll bet I get a number for the former that's not much above zero, the latter?, go on surprise me.

I wonder why any discussion of how good MSFS is, seems to instantly attract XP Trolls?

4 hours ago, Pathfinder633 said:

user...so how many of you are using MSFS as part of your ATPL Training or even an IFR rating on your PPL?.

I'm about to upgrade PPL to IR rating next spring. I use the WT G1000NXI all the time in the sim. Last week for instance I practiced en route holdings via OBS inbound/HDG select outbound in MSFS, and did the same practice the day after in a real plane with G1000. (In VMC, uncontrolled airspace)

No difference whatsoever. Building avionics proficiency is very easy when you have the WT G1000 at your disposal and are aware of the shortcomings & simulator quirks.

Edited May 20, 20233 yr by SAS443

26 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I wonder why any discussion of how good MSFS is, seems to instantly attract XP Trolls?

A weird insecurity I guess... especially when it comes to flight dynamics/realism where a certain few are under the delusion that only their "precious" does it well, and that MSFS is only for visuals 🙂 (repeating that talking point to others and to themselves is comforting to them seems like 🤷‍♂️). I find it more amusing than anything else these days, especially given where and what MSFS is at present.
 

Edited May 20, 20233 yr by lwt1971

27 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

A weird insecurity I guess... especially when it comes to flight dynamics/realism where a certain few are under the delusion that only their "precious" does it well, and that MSFS is only for visuals 🙂 (repeating that talking point to others and to themselves is comforting to them seems like 🤷‍♂️). I find it more amusing than anything else these days, especially given where and what MSFS is at present.
 

Not to mention all the professional pilots that now use MSFS. 

50 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I wonder why any discussion of how good MSFS is, seems to instantly attract XP Trolls?

Because they understand all they can hang their caps on is FAA certification esoterica and it's really really important to maintain that elite clique they live for?