27 minutes ago, ark4diusz said:

Hello, I am giving a shot for this app thank you Reset XPDR for the tremendeous work. 

Its difficult to read all thread, so have one question. What target FPS / Auto target FPS should I use in app if I have RTX 4080 (so native frame generation) and G-SYNC ultimate 144 Hz monitor?

Auto target FPS will calculate it for you and is probably best to use if you don't know what to otherwise set. Version 0.4.2 will formally release tomorrow and will have more optimised auto target FPS code than previous test versions, so I suggest you wait for that.

50 minutes ago, ark4diusz said:

What target FPS / Auto target FPS should I use in app if I have RTX 4080 (so native frame generation) and G-SYNC ultimate 144 Hz monitor?

I'd like to add to what Reset wrote above that if you're planning to NOT use auto target FPS, I'd suggest you set a value that gives you decent performance in most situations. 

E.g. I have a 4090 and have set target FPS to 80 which gives me very good performance - and also the opportunity to get very nice TLODs up at altitude. 

If your target FPS value is too high, you will see that the app will show several sim values in red as it cannot reach the target FPS even with the lowest TLOD, OLOD and cloud quality. 

Edited March 15, 20242 yr by Cpt_Piett

Sorry for another long post. And for possibly derailing the thread with my possibly unreasonable expectations. But as many may have gathered, for me the beauty of AutoFPS is not just getting decent FPS, but also being able to run higher LODs than default under optimal conditions. 

I'm in the Fenix at the gate at M'M Simulation's ENTC in the city of Tromsø in Northern Norway, which has some very scenic mountains in the near vicinity. This made me think of how to allow the sim to render the mountains in as much detail as possible. 

Obviously setting an unreasonably high TLOD Min in expert mode will result in target FPS not being reached. As such, I've found that in this particular situation I can get away with TLOD Min of 200 and still getting FPS around my target of 76. 

Using non-expert mode I will get TLOD 200 priority which is basically the same. I guess MSFS menu setting must be 400 for this to happen. If I understand things correctly, it would have been 300 if I set 600 in usercfg.opt. 

Then I remembered that in a test build a few days ago (I think), I was in Auto Target FPS mode and got TLOD 600 on ground with ØFPS 60. The status line read "TLOD + 600 Priority". So now I'm trying to wrap my head around how this happened. 

This was at the small, Asobo-handcrafted airport of ENRA in the small community of Mo i Rana in Northern Norway, using a GA aircraft. Hence not the most demanding situation. 

Part of the reason I'm having these thoughts is that I just re-read the topic in the official forum re: exposing TLOD/OLOD/Clouds/etc via Simconnect L:vars. Here I think the topic author makes some important points, e.g.: 

Quote

For instance, of course setting TLOD to 800 at an airport is unreasonable but up at FL200+, with capable hardware, it’s glorious. But in order to achieve that in a semi-acceptable way, I have to manually tweak the Usercfg.opt file. It’s out of slider range in the user interface. But I’ve done it and it’s awesome! Similarly, if I set TLOD to 100 and OLOD to 600 on the ground at an airport, it’s similarly awesome. That too is out of range on the user interface.

TL;DR: What is the best way to obtain a very high TLOD ground when flying GA in remote locations?

Do you really see a difference when sitting on ground using that high TLOD and OLOD values compared to "normal" ones like TLOD and OLOD at 200?

18 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Do you really see a difference when sitting on ground using that high TLOD and OLOD values compared to "normal" ones like TLOD and OLOD at 200?

Good question. I do. But ONLY if there's mountains in the vicinity. With mostly flat terrain, a high TLOD ground is pretty useless as you won't be able to see much past the airport anyway. Most of the time I have TLOD min/ground at 100 as I mostly fly into larger cities in airliners. 

If you're interested to judge the difference for yourself, I'd suggest to start the sim at a remote, mountainous airport and test the difference between TLOD 100 and 400. Or go up to 600 if you can. 

Actually, I'll just share this image (ENSH). To my eyes the nearby mountains look very good with a high TLOD. It's probably a poor example though as I didn't include AutoFPS in the screenshot, hence I don't know the exact TLOD at the time. I'm pretty sure it wasn't 100 though.

If someone's really interested I'll make some comparison screenshots. 

Of course, up high, a high TLOD is simply stunning. There is a rather large difference between 400 and say 600 in my opinion. This is TLOD 1400:

Edited March 15, 20242 yr by Cpt_Piett

Is there a way to make this start with MSFS? 

4 minutes ago, RobJC said:

Is there a way to make this start with MSFS? 

Easiest way is to tick the option when installing the app. If you've already installed it, just download the installer and do a re-install. 

Edited March 15, 20242 yr by Cpt_Piett

1 hour ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Good question. I do. But ONLY if there's mountains in the vicinity. With mostly flat terrain, a high TLOD ground is pretty useless as you won't be able to see much past the airport anyway. Most of the time I have TLOD min/ground at 100 as I mostly fly into larger cities in airliners. 

I will do some tests on my side, but as a matter of fact: yes, with a side by side comparison, you will be able to judge if the mountain tops are defined and "sharp" in the distance, but when you are not comparing, I doubt that you will notice if the mountain at the horizon is rounded because of the lower LOD or because of the simple fact that it actually is rounded also in RL. Unless you know the terrain very good because it is your hometown/region, of course. Swiss Alps will be my playground, because I exactly know how the panorama should look like e.g. when sitting on the tarmac in LSZB. But if I am flying e.g. in NZ, I am not familiar enough with the mountain shapes I could potentially judge if the panorama looks right when sitting in Queenstown. 

9 hours ago, GSalden said:

LOL  It was meant cynical.

Just a few pages ago it was said that this thread went very well with good contributions and no “fighting” about things.

SO!!  You are trying to start trouble huh?  I'd better keep an eye on you - always suspicious of people with more than two monitors!!

😁😁😁

Not only does he have two monitors, but I think he also has two PC’s 😅 I’d go insane trying to build a setup like that (in other words, I’m a little bit impressed haha)

25 minutes ago, AnkH said:

I will do some tests on my side, but as a matter of fact: yes, with a side by side comparison, you will be able to judge if the mountain tops are defined and "sharp" in the distance, but when you are not comparing, I doubt that you will notice if the mountain at the horizon is rounded because of the lower LOD or because of the simple fact that it actually is rounded also in RL.

Good point! I tend to crank up TLOD in areas I’m familiar with. Sometimes I’m willing to sacrifice much lower FPS just for the sake of seeing the mountains clearly in all their glory.

I'm using the Adaptive Lod app and getting good results but I've a novice question here - For this app do I set my target FPS to what the sim would normally give me without the Frame Gen Mod or a target with the FGM?

Edited March 15, 20242 yr by El Diablito

13 minutes ago, El Diablito said:

I'm using the Adaptive Lod app and getting good results but I've a novice question here - For this app do I set my target FPS to what the sim would normally give me without the Frame Gen Mod or a target with the FGM?

You're not the only one to get confused about this 🙂 Set target in the app to what the sim gives you with the FGM. 

6 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

You're not the only one to get confused about this 🙂 Set target in the app to what the sim gives you with the FGM. 

Gotcha! I'll give it a go after tomorrow's new version surfaces. Thanks, Cpt.

1 hour ago, AnkH said:

I will do some tests on my side, but as a matter of fact: yes, with a side by side comparison, you will be able to judge if the mountain tops are defined and "sharp" in the distance, but when you are not comparing, I doubt that you will notice if the mountain at the horizon is rounded because of the lower LOD or because of the simple fact that it actually is rounded also in RL. Unless you know the terrain very good because it is your hometown/region, of course. Swiss Alps will be my playground, because I exactly know how the panorama should look like e.g. when sitting on the tarmac in LSZB. But if I am flying e.g. in NZ, I am not familiar enough with the mountain shapes I could potentially judge if the panorama looks right when sitting in Queenstown. 

Noticed exactly this while testing the other day. Flying over both mountains, and areas with snow are really impacted. Especially coupled with weather (ultra/high cloud snow/rain settings). Rounded mountains and dry blurry runways (until rollout) become common.