External lights like airport light poles almost do nothing in the VC unrealistically, like if it was a 2006 FSX, something I have thinking about and missed in those simulators, though there are improvements in internal lighting like in the F-18 when the gears lever is switched, its red light illuminate its surrounding not like FS20. In VR the raytraced shadows is greyed... haha.

3 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

I wonder if people who are using RT shadows have tried 'Shadows Size 6144' in the UserConfig instead.

Nice crisp shadows and no perceptible performance hit, unlike with RT shadows.  It makes RT in this case totally unnecessary.

I don't understand why Asobo aren't advising this.  It seems like they don't know their own sim sometimes as they have never mentioned it as far as I know.

I've had 6144 set in usercfg.opt for a long time now - I think it was based on something @bobcat999 suggested quite a while back 🙂

I've also had RT shadows on since I got MSFS2024 without thinking much about it. Seems that there's a significant performance hit even with my 4090. Here's two screenshots that I just took from the Fenix cockpit parked at MK Studios LIRF - no traffic. 

On the left side of the two images is RT shadows on - right side is off. Shadows size 6144 in both images. 

It would've been even better if I created these images using nVidia ICAT - but I don't know how to post the end result here on Avsim. 

3 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I've had 6144 set in usercfg.opt for a long time now - I think it was based on something @bobcat999 suggested quite a while back 🙂

I've also had RT shadows on since I got MSFS2024 without thinking much about it. Seems that there's a significant performance hit even with my 4090. Here's two screenshots that I just took from the Fenix cockpit parked at MK Studios LIRF - no traffic. 

On the left side of the two images is RT shadows on - right side is off. Shadows size 6144 in both images...

Sincere thanks for doing the comparison.  That performance hit isn't too bad for you actually Captain, with RT shadows on.  Probably because of your 4090. 

Still, if there is no perceptible difference in quality, I suppose it makes sense to just use Shadows 6144, turn RT off, and gain some extra frames. 
I am finding trees at medium is better for me as well (in terms of slightly better performance), and maybe more realistic, as there seems to be too many in general I think. 

PS. (and off topic a bit).  I am not really a massive SW fan, but I watched Rogue One the other week and really liked it.   Looking into the Mandalorian now as people are recommending it to me. 

I ended up going back to the RT shadows because I like them so much.👍👍

dd

Raytracing is amazing.  Inside the cockpit it just elevates the immersion level a notch.

Love seeing every switch and bezel cast shadows.  Adds realism.  Can't fly without it on.

Jase

Asobo is well aware RT shadows is a huge fps issue - have to wait to get it working well - currently I have it off on my 4080 super oc unfortunately 

Edited March 19, 20251 yr by Richard Sennett

I'll let you know if anything bad happens. 🙂

dd

Would love to have them on but the frame rate hit is way too much for my system and even if it wasn't, there are a lot of othr settings I would like to increase before I use raytraced shadows.  If ASOBO can solve the framerate hit, then that will be a different story and I may have a bit more headroom once I get my new GPU, whether it turns out to be a 4080 or 5080 remains to be seen based on cost and availability.

On my setup (3080) I can see easily the difference in the cockpit, with a static image. I didn't benchmark fluidity. With Raytraced Shadows ON, shadows are stronger and sharper.

Raytraced shadows OFF:

Raytraced shadows ON:

UserCfg.op "{Shadows MaxSliceCount 4 Size 6144" and Raytraced Shadows OFF:

 

Edited March 19, 20251 yr by vbazillio

Looks like 1644 appears to be a good mid point option for me until they address the VRAM issue with the full on shadows .. Mind you im playing in ultra presently and have no issue with frame rates at all but I would like a little more breathing room for the VRAM when i do indeed make a more substantial switch to 2024 and start flying more resource intensive jets.

2 hours ago, Maxis said:

Looks like 1644 appears to be a good mid point option for me until they address the VRAM issue with the full on shadows .. Mind you im playing in ultra presently and have no issue with frame rates at all but I would like a little more breathing room for the VRAM when i do indeed make a more substantial switch to 2024 and start flying more resource intensive jets.

It's nice to have options.  My 3060ti does nicely with VRAM in the 60s but I don't hang out at metros with tons of traffic.

dd

On 3/8/2025 at 2:59 PM, LIML2020 said:

Shadows in the cockpit only. 

 

Edited March 19, 20251 yr by DieselTen
image link not working

The way I understand it is that System Ram will be used to enhance VRAM depending on how much extra ram you have.  I have 32gb and never had a problem with VRAM depletion.

dd

Edited March 19, 20251 yr by Sky_Pilot071

My feeback after testing static and screenshots. I did some patterns at Santa Monica (KSMO) which is an heavy scenery with LAX close by. Raytraced Shadows OFF and 6144 set as advised previously.

I estimate VRAM consumption less by 10% and fps higher (~15%) with Raytraced Shadows OFF (10700K with 3080 on 3440x1440). From the cockpit, shadows seems more jaggy and less sharp than with Raytraced shadows ON. 

Any other feedback?

Edited March 20, 20251 yr by vbazillio

I can see the difference in the static pics, but I doubt that I would even notice while in flight unless I was really looking for it. If RT creates a fps hit, it seems not worth it to me with a 3080. You can really see the difference in the shadow of the knob to open the side vent.