6 hours ago, Fielder said:

it will stutter a little bit.  At 60  fps it's smooth as glass.

that's because you and me and many others suffer from:

"FPS fixation which is a status myth perpetrated by those who have paid for the latest tech in order to justify the ridiculous price" you and me and many others have forked out. 😀

I suffered from below 30 fps frustration in VR (which I use exclusively) on my previous RTX 3090, but now absolutely enjoy mostly 50-60 smooth fps in above 4K in VR after I "forked out" the admittedly ridiculous 4090's price and, to make things worse I paid an additional ridiculous $ 450 for the AMD 7800X3D cpu. it is all so ridiculously fluid now that I don't even overclock anything or check my fps, except for some rare benchmarking.

and like Captain Piett, I don't plan on upgrading my hardware anytime soon, come what GPU/CPU may in the next 12 months, or 6. 😀

Edited April 2, 20242 yr by turbomax

I leveled up to FG and double framerates with a 4070 gpu. And to a 5800X3D cpu. $550 for gpu and $280 for cpu. Did not have to upgrade power supply, nor motherboard, nor RAM. 65 to 100 fps is good enough for me. (Ultra preset, LOD's at 170, DLSS Super Quality). 32 to 50 is not good enough. Without FG that's what I would have.

15 hours ago, St Mawgan said:

Usually, and by pure coincidence, those who have spent significant amounts of money on the very latest hardware swear they can tell the difference.

I can't 😊

The value I have seen from higher FPS is the margin between the higher frame rate provides more FPS headroom before FPS gets eroded into jerkiness and stutters in  high scenery density areas.  With an RTX 3080 I was running at DX12 and true 4K with some Ultra, but mostly high high settings. TLOD at 200 and OLOD at 100, V-Sync On, other settngs set in the middle portion of their range.  I would routinely see steady 40-45 FPS during my flights, most with the Hjet or Blacksquare Baron.  But when engaging higher density scenery areas and payware airports in metro areas, I would encounter FRs in the low 20's and worse yet experienced stutters with FRs in the 30s.  So I was losing all the headroom my system could muster with those settings.

Now with the the FG mod and with AutoFPS, I have my settings dialed up to Ultra across the board, the numeric settings like shadow maps and terrain shadows, etc maxed out.  I am seeing FPS around 80 with FG and AutoFPS, with falloff only into the mid-70's as AutoFPS manages my TLOD and OLOD to hold on to my FPS target.  That without lowering settings in MSFS General Options.  I don't even think about FPS now.  I just fly and don't have to worry about it.

Oh. A footnote here after reading a couple of new posts.  My system specs are in my footer below.  Despite the components model numbers, I do zero overclocking.

Edited April 3, 20242 yr by fppilot

1 hour ago, s0cks said:

This topic always makes me laugh. I would get your eyes checked if you can't tell the difference imo. And I say that as someone who has no choice but to run the sim @ 30fps if i want it to look pretty. 30fps is fine for me, and I even use head tracking. But there is a fairly obvious difference between 30 and 60. One day I'll upgrade my GPU so I can run it at 60, but for now I'm happy with 30 and waiting to see what MSFS2024 and nVidia brings to the table at the end of the year.

I would say there is a difference between 30 and 38, but a much smaller difference between 38 and 60. 

4 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Always! This is Avsim, after all. Hairs cannot be split into tiny enough pieces 😅

I enter this discussion the with utmost caution, as it is the seriousest of Avsim topics, even more so than the dreaded simulated cockpit door discussion (why don't PMDG have it yet?!).  

My 5 cents: the difference is there, I have no trouble discerning it, and it's more pronounced the faster things move. 

I made a quick video in an attempt to show the difference:

 

This video reminds me of the post about turbulence being so bad that the sim was unflyable, yet when video evidence was provided there was virtually no turbulence at all.  Same with this comparison - the difference is there, but the 30fps doesn't look jerky to me at all.  I shift my eyes between them and see little difference.  The difference that is there would not prompt me to sacrifice visuals to get this 'huge' difference in jerkiness.

I find what bothers me the most is unstable frame times. if Frame time variance is perfectly smooth, precepted jerkiness in movement is going to be minimized. and I'll happily trade fps for that smoothness & detail levels.  I can run the FG mod and get perfectly smooth 60fps with good FTV, but cannot stand the drawbacks that come with that mod.

If the comparison was made in normal flight, and not rotating like a fairground ride, the differences would be even less perceivable.

Edited April 3, 20242 yr by MrBitstFlyer

30 fps = 🤢🤮

60 fps = 😍👌

Videos probably aren't the best at showing it, as codecs will mess with how it appears compared to in person. Even so, I can see the difference there.

Edited April 3, 20242 yr by s0cks

I can see the difference between 30 - 45 - 60 - 75 - 90 FPS in MSFS. I never fly without TrackIR so that's probably part of the reason.

Maybe higher, but my monitor is limited to 90 Hz.

It's really interesting that people are different in their perception of flickering.

I know some animals react differently to different Hz light. Dogs see most TVs as flickering, which can be part of the reason they don't always see what you see on the screen. If you have a 120 HZ TV your dog would probably see it not flickering.

Same thing with modern light bulbs. Your poor Chihuahua might live in a techno concert all his life and you don't know. 

Yes I can most definitely see and feel a difference between 30 and 60fps in MSFS. Especially during take off and landing, and the movement of AI planes and traffic. It is a lot smoother.

I think stuttering (having the game, sim, or a rotating camera while turning around in a first person shooter always hung and stuck for the fracture of a second in intervals) is way worse than lower FPS 🙂

I don´t really care about FPS... 30 FPS is allright especially for "slow" relax-games like SnowRunner or Flight Sim, 45 FPS is perfectly fluid for games. Most important factor is having the graphics card saving as much power as it can and the whole computer running ultrasilent - below 50 watts and with no fans if possible for the graphics card, and below 50 watts for the CPU with idling fans on the cooling tower.

Edited April 3, 20242 yr by JetCat

2 minutes ago, JetCat said:

Most important factor is having the graphics card saving as much power as it can and the whole computer running ultrasilent - below 50 watts and with no fans if possible for the graphics card, and below 50 watts for the CPU with idling fans on the cooling tower.

Oh gosh yes. I would love a silent PC. I've actually just ordered a Noctua CPU cooler to rid myself of Intel's terrible stock cooler that hits something like 49dB every time I play MSFS. Not sure you could get a gfx card to run under 50w tho!

1 hour ago, s0cks said:

Oh gosh yes. I would love a silent PC. I've actually just ordered a Noctua CPU cooler to rid myself of Intel's terrible stock cooler that hits something like 49dB every time I play MSFS. Not sure you could get a gfx card to run under 50w tho!

Some time ago when I was into the whole overclocking thing my PC sounded  like a B36 on climbout I came across the perfect solution...

...I bought a load of cable extensions - punched a whole in a wall...and put the word not allowed thing in another room.😁

Apparently D.a.m.n is that bad a word??, perhaps a cultural difference thing in the USA?

 

Edited April 3, 20242 yr by Lonesome Cowboy Burt

7 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I would say there is a difference between 30 and 38, but a much smaller difference between 38 and 60. 

You are right, I used to use 38fps before I upgraded my computer, now I use 97fps, sure there is a difference, but not as big as between 30 and 38fps.

57 minutes ago, Ixoye said:

You are right, I used to use 38fps before I upgraded my computer, now I use 97fps, sure there is a difference, but not as big as between 30 and 38fps.

Interesting!  Why 97fps? 

Because 96 would be ridiculous?