29 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

Well everyone's expectations are different I suppose.  I can hit 28-29 fps as well, but for me that is a performance hit!   

This is because in the beta I am getting excellent performance everywhere else. Mainly 60 FPS at my settings believe it or not. 

I doubt there are many people able to reach stable 60 fps under VR in any scenery, but if so I would be very happy for them.

60 fps on 2D, yes, thats well possible.

Kind regards, Michael

3 hours ago, HybridNz said:

AMD CPUs dont have the single thread performance where as intel CPUs do.

and that explains nearly 50% fps drop at NZMF - serious? please provide some sort of scenery config tool or some such like other scenery developers do instead of blaming it on "single thread performance", which if true, would have to affect other sceneries as well.

15 minutes ago, pmb said:

I doubt there are many people able to reach stable 60 fps under VR in any scenery,

1 hour ago, pmb said:

I doubt there are many people able to reach stable 60 fps under VR in any scenery, but if so I would be very happy for them.

60 fps on 2D, yes, thats well possible.

Kind regards, Michael

Yes Michael.  Sorry if there is any confusion, but I am not on VR, and I would be mad to expect that kind of performance on VR (One day maybe! ).  Edit:  Although I just read Turbo's post above.  So just to confirm, I am on 2D.   

My main point still stands though, I am talking about a significant performance drop in just this scenery. 
The only other scenery where I had this problem was Aerosoft Antarctica, which I deleted a long while ago.

Edited September 14, 20232 yr by bobcat999

2 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

and I would be mad to expect that kind of performance on VR

you mean like me and my 90 fps in VR? I admit, not always and not everywhere, and not necessary anyway. but around 60 fps in VR ought to be enough (Bill Gates, 1975)😃

10 minutes ago, turbomax said:

you mean like me and my 90 fps in VR? I admit, not always and not everywhere, and not necessary anyway. but around 60 fps in VR ought to be enough (Bill Gates, 1975)😃

That's fine and I really would enjoy it, but from the numerous threads on the official forum I am afraid you are in a minority. Besides, it depends on the detailed settings, notably TLOD (155  under VR in my case at present).

And yes, I know some bad stutterers on my system as well. ORBX Van Nuys is virtually unusable for me.

Kind regards, Michael

4 hours ago, HybridNz said:

To backup some comments I said earlier, it seems to be AMD CPUs dont have the single thread performance where as intel CPUs do.

It's actually the opposite, especially AMD's X3D CPUs have better single ended performance than Intel CPUs, they are ranked as the best CPUs for MFSF.

1 hour ago, Ixoye said:

It's actually the opposite, especially AMD's X3D CPUs have better single ended performance than Intel CPUs, they are ranked as the best CPUs for MFSF.

Yes, the much larger 3D cache has been proven to really give MSFS a boost, even if the core clock speed can be lower than the equivalent Intels.

Edited September 14, 20232 yr by bobcat999

1 hour ago, pmb said:

...Besides, it depends on the detailed settings, notably TLOD (155  under VR in my case at present)...

Yes, it is proven that the LOD's (especially the Terrain) can hit the CPU hard.
Can I ask why you set yours at 155?   That just seems a bit of an odd number, and quite high.   
Is it just based on your judgement of what you see on screen and what you are happy with?

 

2 hours ago, turbomax said:

and that explains nearly 50% fps drop at NZMF - serious? please provide some sort of scenery config tool or some such like other scenery developers do instead of blaming it on "single thread performance", which if true, would have to affect other sceneries as well.

No that was a different comment, if you track back a little we will be looking exactly at that a way to rename BGLs as you please for what you want to remove. Just a note the scenery was fully tested on all sorts of systems including my old test rig and was above the threshold. We actually had a lot more in there but removed it for performance reasons. As there is abug logged with asobo with vector placement tooling. Pyreege and myself have been pushing asobo hard on this one as its a big cause of issues. We all just stopped using it. 

1 hour ago, Ixoye said:

It's actually the opposite, especially AMD's X3D CPUs have better single ended performance than Intel CPUs, they are ranked as the best CPUs for MFSF.

Unfortunately our stats are showing the oppersite. Its just what were observing. Those tests would of been done on a regular stock situation. Not someone running one of the big three WASM aircraft on a complex scenery and photogram and all sliders over subscribed for the situation. The solution will be here next year with better multithread support so its only around the corner which will provide relief for all.
Anyways rest assured we will offer some optioning for people soon.

Edited September 14, 20232 yr by HybridNz

3 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

Can I ask why you set yours at 155?   That just seems a bit of an odd number, and quite high.   
Is it just based on your judgement of what you see on screen and what you are happy with?

I find 100 pretty low with objects in the distance too blurry.

A few months ago, there was a thread on the Official Forum where someone made a careful investigation to detect visual quality gain doesn't scale linearly with LOD but there are steps where you get an immediate increase in visual quality with a slightly higher LOD. One such step was (I think) 155 which I've been using since.

Unfortunately, I didn't find the thread in a quick search right now (or does someone else recall?) and it's out of this topic anyway. I'll open a new topic should I find it when I have a bit more time for search.

Kind regards, Michael

1 hour ago, HybridNz said:

Anyways rest assured we will offer some optioning for people soon.

Excellent!  

This is just discussion based around what some of us are seeing and just reporting back, so please don't see it as being over critical in some way.
We all know NZA are classed as being part of the good group of MSFS developers.

A lot of us have been trying to optimise performance in the sim for the last three years (including Asobo), so I understand the issues you are talking about.
We all just want to make things as good as we can.  Patience is needed while you do what you can to help optimise things, within the limitations of the sim of course.  

Edited September 14, 20232 yr by bobcat999

40 minutes ago, pmb said:

I find 100 pretty low with objects in the distance too blurry.

A few months ago, there was a thread on the Official Forum where someone made a careful investigation to detect visual quality gain doesn't scale linearly with LOD but there are steps where you get an immediate increase in visual quality with a slightly higher LOD. One such step was (I think) 155 which I've been using since.

...

Kind regards, Michael

Thanks Michael, I didn't know that.  I might experiment myself.  I have been using 125 just recently.

9 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

Excellent!  

This is just discussion based around what some of us are seeing and just reporting back, so please don't see it as being over critical in some way.
We all know NZA are classed as being part of the good group of MSFS developers.

A lot of us have been trying to optimise performance in the sim for the last three years (including Asobo), so I understand the issues you are talking about.
We all just want to make things as good as we can.  Patience is needed while you do what you can to help optimise things, within the limitations of the sim of course.  

Thank yes, we are listening and trying to offer helpful advice based on a lot of trail and error and what have learnt with this engine and its limitations and our customers setups with working with a lot of support calls. We base our comments on our experiences with all of this. 
We understand the communities frustrations, Its the nature of catering for pushing the boundaries of what's possible, keeping a balance on performance and trying to cater for a wide audience. Not always the triangle of items that agree with each other, but its the game we're in.