My old PC was struggling to run 2024.  I had an old 3070 which wasn't exactly ancient, but it was quite obvious that it was not going to run 2024.  In 2020, I ran on high (below ultra) with great fps.  

In 2024, just flying a 172 around generic areas was struggling for FPS.  

I knew I was due for an upgrade anyway so I didn't waste much time with it.  

I upgraded to a new PC with a 4080 super and I'm running great now.  Many people (including Youtubers) complain about blurry textures and/or stutters, but once I upgraded I have not had any problems with pertormance.  

6 hours ago, bigifooti said:

 My trick is to reduce (setting it to low) the airport traffic. 

I tried this as my smaller airports are unrealistically teaming with traffic but does this not also reduce the quality of the airport traffic though - as quality and volume seem to be tied to the same slider?

Edited December 28, 20241 yr by CBass

1 hour ago, Pegaso said:

Russell is right of course, however a basic condition is your internet connection; mine (western germany) is absolutely stable 250 Gbit. MSFS 2024 needs 16-17 min. loading time, then mourns about low bandwidth and maintains incomplete textures: unusable/-enjoyable. Not happy with 2020, so ended with XP12.... 🤔

It’s so weird how it varies drastically from user to user.

I’m on BT’s bog-standard 60mb broadband, the first couple of days after release it was a disaster but since then I can load the sim and be on the runway with engines running in about three and a half minutes….

2 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

I’m on BT’s bog-standard 60mb broadband, the first couple of days after release it was a disaster but since then I can load the sim and be on the runway with engines running in about three and a half minutes….

I have just changed provider and gone from 29 Mbps to 200 Mbps and it has made virtually no difference to the way that MSFS 2024 works,
for me, that is.

Even with so much bandwidth available, it seems to just trickle in at a few hundred KBps with the occasional spike to anything between
6 and 14 MBps.

I still have to wait on a runway for the airport and scenery to be "streamed", or the takeoff is in spurts of a few metres, followed by a long
pause while very little is downloaded.
It is the same when arriving at an airport.

1 minute ago, Reader said:

I still have to wait on a runway for the airport and scenery to be "streamed", or the takeoff is in spurts of a few metres, followed by a long
pause while very little is downloaded.
It is the same when arriving at an airport.

Yes, I often have to wait a few seconds for textures to load - not always though - and last night I flew the 737 Max for the first time and it took a couple of minutes for the textures to sort themselves out.

 I think Asobo would be doing themselves and everyone else a favour by at least allowing the aircraft to exist on our hard drives.

However, since last weeks patch the feeling of everything being on a knife edge when it comes to the streaming has diminished…

…at least for me. It’s quite obvious that everyone’s experience varies wildly.

I think a big factor is broadband, and the speed of the users connection, despite what they claimed being suitable, i would'nt be surprised if they were way out. An example being, i have 1gb FTTP , and apart from the first two days of server issues, mine has run flawlessly, no stutters, no freezing for seconds at a time, textures are far improved over 2020.

3 hours ago, sloppysmusic said:

Good question to ask but I'd be interested in everyone running the same scenario as each other in both sims on the same day, or else it's completely subjective. 

Absolutely 👍🏻 I’ve been meaning to do an objective comparison, and this could be a good time to do it now that the sim is a lot more stable (well, in terms of streaming I mean). I just wish CapFrameX would capture 2024, as otherwise I have no means of getting those important stats like average fps and the even more important %lows, frame time variability etc. 

Another great thing about CapFrameX is sensor data e.g. avg CPU and GPU load, RAM, VRAM and much more.

Ive still got 2020 installed. Just need to find a way of doing an objective comparison. I think maybe MSI Afterburner could work, hmmm….

I posted this in another thread , but my feeling is airports that were "a tad heavy on frames" in 2020 are "very heavy on frames" in 2024.

I haven't voted on this one yet. It's a tough one to prove out for me.

14 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Absolutely 👍🏻 I’ve been meaning to do an objective comparison, and this could be a good time to do it now that the sim is a lot more stable (well, in terms of streaming I mean). I just wish CapFrameX would capture 2024, as otherwise I have no means of getting those important stats like average fps and the even more important %lows, frame time variability etc. 

Another great thing about CapFrameX is sensor data e.g. avg CPU and GPU load, RAM, VRAM and much more.

Ive still got 2020 installed. Just need to find a way of doing an objective comparison. I think maybe MSI Afterburner could work, hmmm….

You looked into PresentMon? Seems to be the premier suite for that stuff these days. 

17 minutes ago, Sethos said:

You looked into PresentMon? Seems to be the premier suite for that stuff these days. 

Don't think I have. But I just realized that CapFrameX is working after all. User error!

Don't know what's up here... never seen this high RAM usage! Flying from LSGG to LOWW in the Fenix A320 with FSHud ATC (max 50 active max 50 parked), AIG models. 

Edited December 28, 20241 yr by Cpt_Piett

19 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

never seen this high RAM usage!

I think this is the cause of so many inconsistent performance reports. There is something weird with RAM usage I think.

Also, I appreciate your scientific approach to this.

6 minutes ago, BrammyH said:

I think this is the cause of so many inconsistent performance reports. There is something weird with RAM usage I think.

Also, I appreciate your scientific approach to this.

What I don't get, is why from 2020-2024, the ram requirement ( suggested )goes up to 64 GB. Most games recommend 16-32 gb. 

8 minutes ago, BrammyH said:

There is something weird with RAM usage I think.

I think so too. I'll try the same flight without FSHud. 

10 hours ago, MrFuzzy said:

Exactly, the poll just says (as of now) that ~60% of the users were CPU/main thread limited and ~30% were GPU limited in MSFS.

~10% have a more or less balanced system.

I was already GPU limited and FS2024 gave the final blow to my 3090. Can't wait to put my hands on a 5090...

I don't understand why a 5000 series video card will see a significate difference in performance over what you have already.