On 8/12/2024 at 5:48 PM, toby23 said:

 I wish devs would offer a AAA version and an FPS friendly version without interiors.

indeed.....

i was watching a stream at the weekend where the guy was droning around the terminal saying, "hmmmm well, it's not great, not as good as Pyreegue" ....... *because the McDonalds menus weren't legible*

I think it's very cool how devs are making such detailed environments, but if it impacts performance then it's all going a bit far

2 hours ago, fluffyflops said:

ive got it and its another example of an unoptimised, yet hyped to hell by the kids pile of trash. 

It never ceases to amaze me that devs can churn out any old gash and so long as its hyped it will sell.

In the fenx panning around 23 frames.  another rubbish product.

I am at a loss for words  This airport is one of the very best that has ever been developed for flight simulation on the PC, and the performance is pretty good on my mediocre system. I really cannot understand how anyone could refer to it as an "unoptimised pile of trash", or "rubbish".

Edited August 19, 20241 yr by Christopher Low

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

I am at a loss for words  This airport is one of the very best that has ever been developed for flight simulation on the PC, and the performance is pretty good on my mediocre system. I really cannot understand how anyone could refer to it as an "unoptimised pile of trash", or "rubbish".

This guy is never pleased so ignore. Getting 40FPS no problem.

Edited August 19, 20241 yr by carlanthony24

2 hours ago, fluffyflops said:

an 9900k is hardly mediocre 

It was not at a certain time, but it is now: https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-Spiel-15259/Specials/CPU-Benchmark-Bottleneck-Comparsion-1434617/

They tested 43(!) different CPUs, the 10900K, notably slightly faster than your 9900K, is ranked 32nd amongst all 43 CPUs on this list. So yes, it is not mediocre, it is rather even on the low end side nowadays. 

So yes, complaining that one of the best sceneries available runs bad on such a CPU is nothing but whining. Turn down your settings and FPS are fine. And if you compare with other sceneries, you must put the bar on the same level. Doubt that any brand new scenery providing the same amount of eye candy runs notably better on such a potato CPU 🤣

15 minutes ago, AnkH said:

It was not at a certain time, but it is now: https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-Spiel-15259/Specials/CPU-Benchmark-Bottleneck-Comparsion-1434617/

They tested 43(!) different CPUs, the 10900K, notably slightly faster than your 9900K, is ranked 32nd amongst all 43 CPUs on this list. So yes, it is not mediocre, it is rather even on the low end side nowadays. 

So yes, complaining that one of the best sceneries available runs bad on such a CPU is nothing but whining. Turn down your settings and FPS are fine. And if you compare with other sceneries, you must put the bar on the same level. Doubt that any brand new scenery providing the same amount of eye candy runs notably better on such a potato CPU 🤣

9900K would be paradise for me, but it's not necessary as EGPH runs quite will on my old dog - Lossless Scaling app has breathed new life into my tired system. Lossless is not without drawbacks but 75-80 fps with TrackIR beats the 20-30 fps without Lossless.

3 minutes ago, somiller said:

Lossless Scaling app has breathed new life into my tired system.

The app has allowed me to be greedy on my not so tired system.

No drops below 40 FPS with the proverbial kitchen sink thrown at it –Fenix A320, iniBuilds KJFK, lots of AI traffic, SamScene3D's NYC, overcast weather, GAIST shipping *and* WeLoveVFR.

The DynamicLOD app was an improvement to FPS. Lossless Scaling really is a game changer.

9 hours ago, fluffyflops said:

ive got it and its another example of an unoptimised, yet hyped to hell by the kids pile of trash. 

It never ceases to amaze me that devs can churn out any old gash and so long as its hyped it will sell.

Can we close the book on 'Funniest Post of the Year'? I believe we've found our winner! 🤣

13 hours ago, fluffyflops said:

an 9900k is hardly mediocre

Unfortunately, in 2024 a 9900k coffee lake generation is nearly 6 years old and is substantially less robust than the current generation of chips out there; and in 5 years of use the chip will have naturally degraded from use, so I would describe it as a mediocre chip at best. I have a 10700k and I have seen its performance fall off this past 6 months and have adjusted all of my settings down to high-end from ultra.

This fall I hope to build out a new system just before 2024 releases.