I posted on another thread a scientific study by MIT that the human eye cannot detect more than 75 fps…

… so more is waste.

And if it looks smooth without stuttering that should be enough!

Edited November 26, 20241 yr by Los

38 minutes ago, RNAVV19R said:

the GPU is definitely the bottleneck at 4K and everything maxed out.

same for me, but isn't that exactly what we were demanding all that time, maximum load by MSFS to use the hardware to the max? and while we now have 60+ fps and smooth performance, all is well, for me at least. now looking forward for my CPU load to go up from 50% to 90% 😄

Edited November 26, 20241 yr by turbomax

Just now, mistolip said:

Does any of the satisfied users run the sim at flat out Ultra? 

Yes, Ultra settings at default except for motion blur which I turn off (for visual effect not performance.)

No add-ons yet...

1 minute ago, turbomax said:

same for me, but isn't that exactly what we were demanding all that time? and while we now have 60+ fps and smooth performance, all is well, for me at least. now looking forward for my CPU load to go up from 50 to 90% 😄

For sure. I don't understand why some people are complaining. It's much better to be GPU limited than CPU limited.

Definitely looking forward to the 5090, though!

2 hours ago, desbean said:

I would wait a couple of months.

If you're going to buy hardware anyway, the time to buy is now.  It's the week of Black Friday, the BIGGEST sale day of the year in the US.

Hence, the reason to jump into MSFS 2024 now, find out if you need an upgrade and buy when pricing is at its lowest for computers.

16 minutes ago, brinx said:

I have better performance in 2024 than 2020.

Same number of addons?

 

24 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

If you have a capable CPU, GPU running at 99% is not surprising. 

Yep, it also depends on the where you're flying and the weather.  In 2020 with "just" an aging 5950X I've managed to get my 4090 to hit 90%+ at 3440x1440 ultrawide "2K' resolution over England (not London) with some heavy real world clouds going on.  Although I also typically run at 115% render scale.

2 hours ago, mistolip said:

So coming december or january I will be shopping for a new PC. Yihaaaa! 

What download speeds are you achieving? Some folk might be better off investing in either a fibre or satellite ISP.

8 minutes ago, Los said:

I posted on another thread a scientific study by MIT that the human eye cannot detect more than 75 fps…

… so more is waste.

And if it looks smooth without stuttering that should be enough!

I've read even less fps is required for the human eye.  There is a reason why traditionally movies are still shot at 24 frames per second and tv shows are broadcast at 29.97 fps. See: High frame rate - Wikipedia

28 minutes ago, bofhlusr said:

There is a reason why traditionally movies are still shot at 24 frames per second and tv shows are broadcast at 29.97 fps.

that is totally not relevant here. fuzziness caused by motion captured in between movie frames is different from how animation in computer games is generated. in other words: there is a reason professional simulators run at 60 fps. which is more important than scenery quality that we expect and take for granted. you can not have animation of fine text and sharp instrument needles where adjacent pixels may have a totally different colors at 24 fps, unless you introduce fuzzy frames in between.

Edited November 26, 20241 yr by turbomax

1 hour ago, mistolip said:

It struggles with 2024 while 2020 was great.

2024 runs even better than 2020 for me. Yes, not all is on ultra (yet) but high gives me a near perfect experience already, even in the ini/Fenix/FBW A320s. I would wait until the teething problems are covered by the next few patches - unless you just need a justification for getting new hardware…

26 minutes ago, flyingscampi said:

Yes, Ultra settings at default except for motion blur which I turn off (for visual effect not performance.)

No add-ons yet...

Curious what your PC specs are!

Have one already, but bought for MSFS2020 because my last PC was getting to old and he definitely became too weak on the chest. But that will also be enough for MSFS2024 hopefully, see my specs..

So after some months i will jump in to MSFS2024 but until that i will stay at MSFS2020 !

cheers 😉

I was going to buy a new bundle based on the 9800X3D, but I’m going to wait to see what the 9950X3D brings to the table.

gpu wise the 5070/5070ti maybe the one to go for this generation 

whatever you do don’t buy a 4090 now - it’s a terrible purchase and not good value at all. 
 

 

I have far better performance in 2024 compared to 2020. Where i had to run auto-fps, ,and would drop to 30 fps at the likes of KJFK or EGLL. (2K) Now on MSFS2024, i am getting 60-68fps, no stuttering, no freezing for 4-5 seconds, Even running GSX from today as it's now compatible. Scenery is stunning, weather is stunning.

PC Specs (same for both)

AMD 7800x3d, MSI Tomahawk M/Board, Radeaon RX6800 12 gb GPU, 64gb DDR5 6000mhz Ram, 2x 2tb nvMe, 2 x4tb nvme's  And probably the biggest help with a Cloud based sim is 1gb Full Fibre.