Can we draw a general conclusion that for people with low-capacity internet connections, then downloading may be the best option, otherwise not?

When/if I purchase MSFS 2024, I will be using the download option. Streaming everything is not what I want, irrespective of what some people say. I will take the longer load times with pleasure. I am used to them with MSFS 2020.

17 hours ago, blueshark747 said:

I mean....well yea.....suure!🤣

It helps to have decent hardware 😉 and that was the point of the post.  All settings on Ultra, my 3440x display is render scaled to 140, and still able to land anywhere with nary a stutter, at all, it's amazing 😄. 

What about small updates to the streaming content. Will downloaded be updated per see? It is possible without us even knowing about it.

Michael Moe 

17 hours ago, blueshark747 said:

I mean....well yea.....suure!🤣

It helps to have decent hardware 😉 and that was the point of the post.  All settings on Ultra, my 3440x display is render scaled to 140, and still able to land anywhere with nary a stutter, at all, it's amazing 😄. 

50 minutes ago, Michael Moe said:

What about small updates to the streaming content.

I’m not sure yet, but my limited understanding is one gets notification on sim start … same as existing notification system.

I downloaded and installed everything last night, it took a couple of hours or so … about 380GB worth.

Edited September 5, 2025Sep 5 by SayAgain

1 hour ago, Noel said:

It helps to have decent hardware 😉 and that was the point of the post.  All settings on Ultra, my 3440x display is render scaled to 140, and still able to land anywhere with nary a stutter, at all, it's amazing 😄. 

The point of that post was, the whole "No PG No Problems" performance over visuals method is great for you and all, but lets not act like its some sort of huge flex or fix all solution, when you are indeed missing out on the better scenery visuals the sim has to offer. One should expect better  "performance perfection" while sacrificing the overall much more accurate quality visuals with PG OFF. 

Just thought boasting about "performance perfection & Done, complete, no stutters" by having to sacrifice PG was a weird flex that's all...😄

PG OFF

PG ON

Edited September 5, 2025Sep 5 by blueshark747

32 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

I downloaded and installed everything last night, it took a couple of hours or so … about 380GB worth.

And how long does 2024 to start now?

2 hours ago, Luis Hernandez said:

And how long does 2024 to start now?

To start MSFS 2024 from double click on desktop icon to Start "button" = 1 min 48 sec. 

From Free Flight, select KLAS (default), to Start Flight and fly = 23 sec

From Free Flight, select KLAX (add-on), to Start Flight and fly = 25 sec

From Free Flight, select EGLL (add-on), to Start Flight and fly = 31 sec

Ran all 3 times each to get an average.

EDIT: PSXT + AIG + Real Traffic was used in every test (along TDS GNT, GSX, FSLabs, Orbx, VSDG) 

Edited September 5, 2025Sep 5 by SayAgain

3 hours ago, Michael Moe said:

What about small updates to the streaming content. Will downloaded be updated per see? It is possible without us even knowing about it.

Michael Moe 

Whenever the server has updates available the downloaded files are marked with a yellow highlight that there is a new version available. Download the updated file and install... Done. 

Dang MSFS 2024 looks good ... you don't really need to "find" a great shot, they're all good.  So far, my limited testing of Streamed vs. Download seems to favor download as in less FPS fluctuation most noticeable in rapid view movement.

And another big shout out to PSXT + AIG + Real Traffic ... the aircraft actually taxi correctly and they wait at runway intersections for other landing aircraft (bravo).

KLAS (added Glideslope Pro - bumped load time to 25 sec)

KLAX

EGLL

 

Edited September 5, 2025Sep 5 by SayAgain

21 hours ago, Maxis said:

but complained like hell about not having a download option

Thank you for your persistence, much appreciated.

12 hours ago, Petraeus said:

Can we draw a general conclusion that for people with low-capacity internet connections, then downloading may be the best option, otherwise not?

Probably not. I have very average Internet connection; @60-65mbps and apart from one outlier - the Flightsimware C414 - there's no difference in streaming or downloading. 

I don't have stutters, blurred textures or jumping menus either. 

I do have the sim on a very fast M2 drive though and for some lucky, random reason Microsoft's servers seem to be kind to me.

7 hours ago, blueshark747 said:

Just thought boasting about "performance perfection & Done, complete, no stutters" by having to sacrifice PG was a weird flex that's all...😄

Only weird because you can't see another's POV.  I don't have PG off because I am trying to sacrifice something for performance's sake.  It's the fact it's just flat out a net loser in places I frequent w/ the melted buildings and obelisk trees etc.  And I find auto-gen is quite excellent in its own right.  In terms of performance the impact is really modest anyway.

And the 'boasting' is only to report that it is indeed possible to have essentially perfect performance w/ the hardware I'm using.  And that is for inspiration for those who still can't land w/o performance tanking.

Edited September 5, 2025Sep 5 by Noel

10 minutes ago, Noel said:

It's the fact it's just flat out a net loser in places I frequent w/ the melted buildings and obelisk trees etc.

But that's also why you don't want to stream.  Those "melted buildings" do eventually materialize into nice looking buildings (if you fly slow enough) but the streaming of data is 112X slower than when obtained from one's local storage.  Streaming also adds a level of reliance on MS servers and your internet connection.

But agree that PG is far from perfect, walled bridges for example, odd looking blobs for trees ... however, it's still my preferred choice when combined with 32GB rolling cache and all my content downloaded.  I'm not the FPS hunter that you are, I've tried 150 and it's just not visually as good as 200 ... I'll take the FPS hit so long as I can stay above 30 with all my add-ons.  Like you say, to each his or her own when it comes to priorities.