1 hour ago, kevinfirth said:

I have 64Gb and struggle to use anything approaching that...unless I'm missing a trick somehow?

I gave up “tricks” (that was P3D days) … just don’t have time for it, set and forget in MSFS 2024.  The older I get the more valuable time becomes … I just like to enjoy a few flights.

Here is the RAM I’m using if you want to get some:

https://www.corsair.com/us/en/p/memory/cmk96gx5m2b6400c32/vengeance-96gb-2x48gb-ddr5-dram-6400mt-s-cl32-memory-kit-black-cmk96gx5m2b6400c32?srsltid=AfmBOorxoF1Ab_zYiTj7JWEYtgyMwvU9yiCnDAlVlOSKxcnpteWVNbs8

You can ignore the EXPO/XMP gibberish … most motherboards support both as does the CPU be it Intel or AMD.  It’s cheap, try it and see.

Numerous article regarding using 96GB and better performance with Low 1%:

https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/microsoft-says-64-gb-is-the-ideal-spec-for-flight-simulator-2024-but-ive-tested-it-with-96-gb-and-it-makes-a-big-difference/

One of many …

Not sure why so many have an aversion to more RAM?  It’s cheap relative to a GPU.

 

43 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

I gave up “tricks” (that was P3D days) … just don’t have time for it, set and forget in MSFS 2024.  The older I get the more valuable time becomes … I just like to enjoy a few flights.

Here is the RAM I’m using if you want to get some:

https://www.corsair.com/us/en/p/memory/cmk96gx5m2b6400c32/vengeance-96gb-2x48gb-ddr5-dram-6400mt-s-cl32-memory-kit-black-cmk96gx5m2b6400c32?srsltid=AfmBOorxoF1Ab_zYiTj7JWEYtgyMwvU9yiCnDAlVlOSKxcnpteWVNbs8

You can ignore the EXPO/XMP gibberish … most motherboards support both as does the CPU be it Intel or AMD.  It’s cheap, try it and see.

Numerous article regarding using 96GB and better performance with Low 1%:

https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/microsoft-says-64-gb-is-the-ideal-spec-for-flight-simulator-2024-but-ive-tested-it-with-96-gb-and-it-makes-a-big-difference/

One of many …

Not sure why so many have an aversion to more RAM?  It’s cheap relative to a GPU.

 

Didn't mean it as a trick literally, I'm just genuinely curious what's different enough to cause that use that I dont seem to be able to generate.

try 96GB and see

53 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

try 96GB and see

Thanks Rob, but I'm not going to buy another 96Gb of RAM purely speculatively without knowing exactly why I need to do this... 🤣

Too reduce pauses, like the article says, improves Low 1% … if more scenery is loaded into RAM it will be faster than going to SSD, nVME, HDD and swapping scenery in and out more frequently.  Scenery with PR uses a lot of memory … read the article … do you really think Asobo would load up the RAM just “because” they like to waste RAM?  That’s a bit of a stretch don’t you think?

Lol I already had a flight earlier today where the 0.01% low was the same as my max frame limit of 100.  Still only 30-odd GB RAM used though.

Ok so better not hear a word about long frames from you ever 😉 

 

I'm tapped out. Uninstalled 2020 and 2024. Too many issues. Typically, a 4:1 ratio of time fixing vs playing. SU3 has messed up too many things. 2020 big update was a mess as well.

1 minute ago, kungfufly said:

I'm tapped out. Uninstalled 2020 and 2024. Too many issues. Typically, a 4:1 ratio of time fixing vs playing. SU3 has messed up too many things. 2020 big update was a mess as well.

Yeah, this sim sucks balls. One endless Beta, whether you want to participate or not. Asobo is stuck in regression hell, while Laminar is working on cool stuff for XP12. Definitely going to be using that sim more often. 

2 hours ago, SayAgain said:

if more scenery is loaded into RAM it will be faster than going to SSD, nVME, HDD

Thanks Sayagain for that pcgamer article!

Still I am not convinced 96 GB over 64 GB will result in noticeably better performance/less stutter. SSD or NVMe transfer speeds are much higher than what MSFS needs/uses. same goes for PCIe5 or PCIE4 over PCIe 3. double bandwith sound fantastic but MSFS doesn't need that. I checked file transfers in MSFS from my NVMe using task manager a while ago when I was also obsessed with the fantastic NVMe transfer speeds over SSDs but concluded that high internet download speed is much more important. MSFS is constantly re-loading scenery in the background as you fly. I assume Asobo will just use and load in as much as there is free memory available, and why shouldn't they. but that doesn't necessarily mean it is required beyond 64 GB. Before I upgrade from 64 GB, I would have to see a few more benchmarks with obvious improvements.

quote from that pcgamer article:

"Update: Further testing has shown that while Flight Simulator 2024 is running, the total system RAM usage doesn't exceed 30 GB, regardless of the amount installed. So the use of 96 GB doesn't fully explain the performance gains over 64 GB; however, the frame rates were checked again and found to be the same."

 

Edited August 23, 2025Aug 23 by turbomax

2 hours ago, SayAgain said:

Ok so better not hear a word about long frames from you ever 😉 

 

LOL set myself up there didn't I! 🤣 I did not say every flight was like that though, it isn't...  But it does evidence that there are use cases where not having over 64Gb RAM doesn't negatively impact 0.01% frame times 😉

17 hours ago, MrFuzzy said:

Try to taxi and takeoff from EGLL with online traffic enabled and the A320v2 or the 737 Max, then you will change your mind.

We use the sim in different ways.

Just did it,  and no stutters at all again.- A complete flight with online real traffic and real weather from EGLL to LFPG which is also a complicate airport.

39 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

there are use cases where not having over 64Gb RAM doesn't negatively impact 0.01% frame times 😉

Says the guy that spent $2000+ on a GPU?  So the $350 for some good 96GB RAM 2x48GB would seem trivial for someone that wants the best 🙂 … but hey if you want to live in the sub-par world … hehe

EDIT: this is sarcasm, not to be taken seriously

Edited August 23, 2025Aug 23 by SayAgain

1 hour ago, turbomax said:

I assume Asobo will just use and load in as much as there is free memory available, and why shouldn't they. but that doesn't necessarily mean it is required beyond 64 GB

Never said it was “required”.  This came about because Jeff was having major stutters in LEMG (which is a VERY nice rendition BTW, including the interior) so I ran a few test in the drone and reported my findings.  I suggested that it might be because more than 64GB was being used and Jeff had 64GB in his signature.

PC Gamer isn’t the only reference/test to 96GB having better overall performance.  

Based on my use case and the facts, when I decided to build a new system for MSFS 2024 the cost difference between 64GB and 96GB was so minor as it was no brainer decision to go with 96GB (2X48GB).  I’m NOT trying to justify “value to performance” as I can’t for anyone else other than myself. 

Like I said before, my days of tweaking are over, build it, set it, forget it, go fly it  … I’m very happy with the performance of MSFS 2024 and actually glad to see it is using more than 64GB RAM … the planet’s a big place  it deserves some RAM love 🙂 

I thought I'd lose a little CAS latency going to 2x48...but *no*!   I'm now seeing 2x48 CL30 6000 sticks. 

I keep putting off the upgrade, but why, I spend that going to the grocery store two times.