5 minutes ago, brucewtb said:

It would seem so.  I'm a happy simmer if my FPS never drops below 30 FPS. Now I do concede  60 FPS is desirable but not essential and as for 100 plus FPS in a flight sim what is the point?

Bruce

OK but the fact that you're happy with 30 doesn't mean that there's no difference with 60, as Sunshine wrote before.

Personally, I am happy with 48 fps and GSync. Maybe 60 are optimal for Reno races but I don't have it.

2 hours ago, brucewtb said:

It would seem so.  I'm a happy simmer if my FPS never drops below 30 FPS. Now I do concede  60 FPS is desirable but not essential and as for 100 plus FPS in a flight sim what is the point?

Bruce

I was fairly happy with 30 until I got a head tracker, then when turning my head, and especially when looking out of a side window at low level, it looks 'choppy', and the ground goes by in steps rather than smoothly.  The bigger the screen you have the worse it gets, as the scenery only has 30 steps to get across the screen in a second, if that makes sense.  So I suppose this could be an individual thing down to your personal hardware.

At 60fps, this problem is very much alleviated.  I don't know about 100fps, but I couldn't run at that anyway at 4k, but 60 seems good enough to stop the 'choppyness' problem, for me at least! 

No doubt some people will say, that's the problem with a big screen and using head tracking! 

Edited August 25, 20232 yr by bobcat999

I don't have a head tracker but I do pan around an awful lot while flying. I've never noticed any stuttering or jumping at 30fps, it's actually remarkably smooth. I'm at 4k, twin 32 inch screens, one for flying, the other for work, etc, everything at Ultra, TLOD 280 🙂

1 hour ago, St Mawgan said:

I don't have a head tracker but I do pan around an awful lot while flying. I've never noticed any stuttering or jumping at 30fps, it's actually remarkably smooth. I'm at 4k, twin 32 inch screens, one for flying, the other for work, etc, everything at Ultra, TLOD 280 🙂

Well everyone's perception can be slightly different as well I suppose, but I think I didn't make myself clear.  I didn't have any stuttering or jumping, and as you say, 30fps can be remarkably smooth.

The issue is simply this - when you look sideways at low level, the scenery moves in perceptible 'steps' across the screen.  It is not the sims fault, or the hardware, it is simply a limitation of watching at 30FPS.   

Say for instance you have just taken off and you glance 90 degrees to the left, a lighthouse comes into view at the front edge of the screen.  At the speed you are travelling, it will clear your field of view in a second.  Say your screen is 30 inches in the horizontal dimension.  At 30 FPS, the lighthouse has to get across the screen in basically thirty jumps of one inch in a second.  They are steps, not stuttering, a completely different thing.  And there is no other way without breaking the law of physics.  I see it because my vision picks it up easily.  60FPS / Hz is much better.  

If you don't see it, maybe isn't perceptible to your vision, or maybe your screen uses 'smoothing', which is like frame interpolation or frame generation built in.
My 85 inch QLED has it, and everything looks silky smooth on it, but my better half won't let me use it for 'gaming'.  

With a few tweaks and on my new 4080, I can now hold 60FPS on my 60Hz monitor, 4k, ultra, LODS 150 (this is more of a CPU limitation).
I use DLSS, as it won't quite do TAA in all situations.   Also, DX11.  I know FG is available for my card in DX12, but I really don't like DX12 for a number of reasons.

Edited August 25, 20232 yr by bobcat999

4 hours ago, MrFuzzy said:

OK but the fact that you're happy with 30 doesn't mean that there's no difference with 60, as Sunshine wrote before.

Personally, I am happy with 48 fps and GSync. Maybe 60 are optimal for Reno races but I don't have it.

I am happy with 48 fps and GSync also, the difference between 48 and 60 is negligible, if anything at all.

7 minutes ago, Ixoye said:

I am happy with 48 fps and GSync also, the difference between 48 and 60 is negligible, if anything at all.

48 is acceptable for me with my cheap freesync monitor, and the difference is negligible as you say, but my card can hold 60 without much sweat on DLSS.  
I prefer this as I do get some occasional shimmer using freesync (a known effect).  Gsync monitors are a lot more expensive, for a reason obviously! 

So 60fps on 60Hz for me, freesync switched off, no issues.  

Edited August 25, 20232 yr by bobcat999

And I do look sideways, left, right and behind me. As I said, I pan around pretty constantly. I just do not see 'perceptible steps' - I would hate it if I did.  I do fly low and slow 90% of the time but if I am ever tempted to fly anything faster then I don't see it then either. I simply wouldn't ever fire up MSFS if it wasn't as good as it is and yes, I have tried 60 and 90fps but other than my 3090 kicking out a lot more heat I really see no difference. 

11 minutes ago, St Mawgan said:

And I do look sideways, left, right and behind me. As I said, I pan around pretty constantly. I just do not see 'perceptible steps' - I would hate it if I did.  I do fly low and slow 90% of the time but if I am ever tempted to fly anything faster then I don't see it then either. I simply wouldn't ever fire up MSFS if it wasn't as good as it is and yes, I have tried 60 and 90fps but other than my 3090 kicking out a lot more heat I really see no difference. 

OK then.  As long as you are happy.  All good.

35 minutes ago, St Mawgan said:

And I do look sideways, left, right and behind me. As I said, I pan around pretty constantly. I just do not see 'perceptible steps' - I would hate it if I did.  I do fly low and slow 90% of the time but if I am ever tempted to fly anything faster then I don't see it then either. I simply wouldn't ever fire up MSFS if it wasn't as good as it is and yes, I have tried 60 and 90fps but other than my 3090 kicking out a lot more heat I really see no difference. 

No difference between 30, 60 and 90? I think we're just dealing with an eyesight issue more than anything at that point 😅 But more power to you, being able to enjoy 30 I guess.

I'm so grateful to those who are happy that I'm happy 😐

14 minutes ago, Sethos said:

No difference between 30, 60 and 90? I think we're just dealing with an eyesight issue more than anything at that point 😅 But more power to you, being able to enjoy 30 I guess.

I am happy with 30 FPS in VR changing view direction constantly like you would IRL too I gues (Quest 2 via link, RTX3090, 5800X3D, 32 Gb RAM).

No complaints here either. An occassional drop to 20 FPS now and then I can live with as well as long as those are very brief.

Besides ... FPS is not everything . In case Asynchronic spacewarp is enabled in the Oculus Debug tool it will be very uncomfortable panning around while FPS remains the same. Turning that (ASW) off is a bigger factor. And there are probably other factors as well.

Edited August 25, 20232 yr by avhpilot

27 minutes ago, St Mawgan said:

I'm so grateful to those who are happy that I'm happy 😐

Well I am elated you are grateful!  

13 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

Then it's not actually 4k though right?  1620p or something? 

Yes. You're right.  But I sometimes forget to turn down the scaling and put it on DLSS and use Quality or Balanced mode and see little difference but some FPS improvement. Sometimes I change it back to TAA (which is best) and often leave it as is with no performance loss. Though by habit I just turn the scaling down in case I fly into an area that can cause an FPS loss.

In other words: Having bigger, better/faster equipment will improve your experience but for some of us with outdated systems/hardware are kind of used to having "lower" specs and we learned to try to keep everything smooth. We deal with it and usually have decent performance. I gather advice from people with similar specs and its usually TLOD and traffic that is the cause for your CPU being hammered. Solution? Turn down TLOD and traffic. Compromise? Improved taxing/takeoff and approach/landing performance. Locking at 30fps keeps it fairly smooth and enough to ignore a few stutters. 

Yes. For KJFK (I have the premium deluxe), 20% AIG traffic, 8% general aviation traffic (with a mod), TLOD 100-120, LOD 150 and virtually all settings at Ultra except a few (like avionics is at medium for example). Nvidia filters on. High fidelity plane with DC6 or 737-900. I often fly with the FlightSimStudios Embraer 175 as well that its not exactly optimized fully and get/keep around 30fps at KJFK. Multiplayer is also on because I love watching other planes slide off the runway haha. One 4k monitor and a second 1080 monitor for pilot2atc, navigraph charts etc. 

Oh, I also have head tracking. 30 fps is just fine for flight sim. 

 

Edited August 25, 20232 yr by Sonosusto

7 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

No doubt some people will say, that's the problem with a big screen and using head tracking! 

I have found 40 to be fluid enough with Trackir.

10 hours ago, brucewtb said:

It would seem so.  I'm a happy simmer if my FPS never drops below 30 FPS. Now I do concede  60 FPS is desirable but not essential and as for 100 plus FPS in a flight sim what is the point?

Bruce

Well… with my 7800x3D and 4090, at 4K and TLOD 300, I’m lucky to get 40-45FPS at a busy high quality airport in the Kodiak with AI traffic, live weather, and other bits turned on. It will even occasionally drop lower when loading in on final. And I haven’t tried the Fenix yet. 😞

Thankfully, frame generation doubles that which means I’m consistently above 60FPS but  when flying without much for the CPU to do, it means I’m hitting my refresh rate limit of 116FPS.

So the point is, the FPS fluctuates wildly in this game. To stay above a certain minimum threshold (whether that’s 30, 40, or 60) consistently, means there are going to be times when your FPS is (or could be) over double your minimum. That’s how much head room you need for a butter smooth flight 😝