2024 does look tempting however my 2020 is just running at the sweet spot right now.

It is nice  to be able to crank up the Texture LOD to values like 520 with little or no performance loss. Any low altitude stuttering can be mitigated by using Dynamic LOD or AutoFPS ( i set my TextureLOD to 300 below 2000 feet to avoid stutters on landing) . Since we cannot use anymore 512 HD textures via the Map Enhancement tool , the only way to have the textures to look really good is to crank up Texture LOD to 500 or higher. 

No performance issues with FG , i9 13390k and 4090. Upgraded to 64GB since with those high LOD settings can eat up 32GB easily.  

Not being able to use the Nvidia filters is still a no-go for me.  Hopefully that functionality is coming soon. 

 

With the Nvidia Filters and REX Atmos settings , i can get the sim looking close to 2024. 

The trees in 2024 look really good. In 2020 , trees look like P3d or FSX. 

 

Edited December 10, 2025Dec 10 by planechaser
change

3 hours ago, planechaser said:

2024 does look tempting however my 2020 is just running at the sweet spot right now.

It is nice  to be able to crank up the Texture LOD to values like 520 with little or no performance loss. Any low altitude stuttering can be mitigated by using Dynamic LOD or AutoFPS ( i set my TextureLOD to 300 below 2000 feet to avoid stutters on landing) . Since we cannot use anymore 512 HD textures via the Map Enhancement tool , the only way to have the textures to look really good is to crank up Texture LOD to 500 or higher. 

No performance issues with FG , i9 13390k and 4090. Upgraded to 64GB since with those high LOD settings can eat up 32GB easily.  

Not being able to use the Nvidia filters is still a no-go for me.  Hopefully that functionality is coming soon. 

 

With the Nvidia Filters and REX Atmos settings , i can get the sim looking close to 2024. 

The trees in 2024 look really good. In 2020 , trees look like P3d or FSX. 

 

Texture LOD? Where do we edit that?  Never seen nor heard of that one.  Oops I see now you are referring to 2020

Edited December 10, 2025Dec 10 by cj-ibbotson

3 hours ago, planechaser said:

and REX Atmos settings , i can get the sim looking close to 2024. 

The trees in 2024 look really good. In 2020 , trees look like P3d or FSX. 

 

Same here - add one of the trees apps in 2020 and there is little difference with the graphics.  But hopefully other improvements to justify the switch which will be increasingly hard to avoid over time.

Bruce

9 hours ago, martinboehme said:

I'd caution though that the Navigraph survey skews towards advanced users and is likely not representative of the MSFS user base as a whole.

Hmm, maybe I should have clarified why I brought up the Navigraph results.  I agree with you that Navigraph  survey takers are much more hard core than the average Steam user of MSFS.

But when the Navigraph survey was announced for 2025, 52% said MSFS 2020 was their primary flight simulator software, while only 25% said MSFS 2024 was their primary flight simulator software.  Some people were surprised by this result, as they expected there would be more MSFS 2024 users than MSFS 2020 users for the Navigraph survey results.

I wasn't surprised by this result from Navigraph at all, because the SteamDB numbers was giving a big hint that more PC users of MSFS preferred to stay on MSFS 2020 rather than using MSFS 2024 as their primary choice of flight simulator.  Yes, it's possible that the Navigraph results could have showed it the other way around, where 52% said MSFS 2024 was their primary flight simulator software and 25% said MSFS 2020 was their primary flight simulator software.  But ultimately, the Navigraph survey results showed more users of MSFS preferred to stay on MSFS 2020, which was in line with the SteamDB numbers.

I'll also go out on a limb and predict the ratio of MSFS 2020 to MSFS 2024 users in the Navigraph results for 2026, will probably be close to the ratio of MSFS 2020 to MSFS 2024 users in SteamDB when we head into the survey for 2026.  I mean I could be wrong, but I guess we will see when the Navigraph results come out for 2026.

Having said that, for anybody that reads this, I believe Navigraph survey takers are not the same as your typical Steam user of MSFS.  Navigraph survey takers are generally the more hard core simmers, whereas Steam users of MSFS are a mix between casual to hard core simmers..

Edited December 10, 2025Dec 10 by abrams_tank

8 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

But when the Navigraph survey was announced for 2025, 52% said MSFS 2020 was their primary flight simulator software, while only 25% said MSFS 2024 was their primary flight simulator software.  Some people were surprised by this result, as they expected there would be more MSFS 2024 users than MSFS 2020 users for the Navigraph survey results.

It's important to remember when the survey was taken: very shortly after release when things were REALLY not working well. That definitely affected the numbers as well.

MSFS2020 is at a really nice sweet spot right now after the last update.

Nice little VR performance boost and all my old MSFS2020 addons still work.

No reason to fly anything else for now.

The new version of SeaFront for 2024 is the best reason to upgrade to MSFS 2024 now.

dd

I just switched to 2024 last week when I got a new PC. It may take time but the gap will continue to widen.

3 hours ago, blueshark747 said:

MSFS2020 is at a really nice sweet spot right now after the last update.

Nice little VR performance boost and all my old MSFS2020 addons still work.

No reason to fly anything else for now.

It's totally your choice and you don't need to justify that choice to anyone.   But..... imagine if people had said "I've got my Pentium IV set up perfectly now... no need to move to an i7".     Or, "I've got FSX set up perfectly now.  No need to move to MSFS".

As well as you might have MSFS 2020 set up, you're missing out on stacks of additional performance, visuals, new features and improved flight dynamics by sticking with 2020 and not migrating to 2024.   

I mean the thing is, isn't it inevitable?    So why put it off?

Edited December 11, 2025Dec 11 by JYW

Some people are reluctant to upgrade because they are afraid that there will be issues that they do not want with the new simulator. This is why I have resisted the temptation to upgrade, and it is also why I am a bit apprehensive now that I have decided to make the switch. If someone has everything running perfectly in MSFS 2020, then it is completely understandable if they are reluctant to "rock the boat". In my case, I have reached the "tipping point", because I want to be able to visit some "MSFS 2024 only" airports, and enjoy features like the improved night lighting, better depiction of dawn and dusk (more subtle red band on the horizon), the increased detail at ground level, and improved flight dynamics/ground handling with payware aircraft. I am just hoping that those reported issues that have concerned me in the past are not as bad as some people claim 

On 12/10/2025 at 2:25 AM, lwt1971 said:

As Jorg said in recent interviews, SU5 onwards in 2026 will bring improvements and new capabilities in addition to fixes, so the momentum is only going to build. And even more so as more and more of the notable aircraft devs start to release 2024 native versions of their aircraft.

Did he say something about going to the regularly schedulde program? As in doing a world update after a sim update and then a sim update after a world update and so on?

1 minute ago, Christopher Low said:

Some people are reluctant to upgrade because they are afraid that there will be issues that they do not want with the new simulator. This is why I have resisted the temptation to upgrade, and it is also why I am a bit apprehensive now that I have decided to make the switch. If someone has everything running perfectly in MSFS 2020, then it is completely understandable if they are reluctant to "rock the boat". In my case, I have reached the "tipping point", because I want to be able to visit some "MSFS 2024 only" airports, and enjoy features like the improved night lighting, better depiction of dawn and dusk (more subtle red band on the horizon), the increased detail at ground level, and improved flight dynamics/ground handling with payware aircraft. I am just hoping that those reported issues that have concerned me in the past are not as bad as some people claim 

I have both installed on my machine, with nary an issue. 
and v2024 takes up such little space it should be no problem to parallel install. 

due to a lack of free time, and a day job supporting high technology, I have little to no patience for misbehaving entertainment software. 

So fwiw, I wouldn’t continuously sing the praises of v2024 if it didn’t genuinely work well (the only thing I’ve avoided has been Career Mode, mainly due to a lack of interest).

I have zero interest in Career mode, so any problems with that are of no concern to me 

Edited December 11, 2025Dec 11 by Christopher Low

When anything hits a sweet spot then it is time to move on.

dd logic

On 12/10/2025 at 2:18 AM, sdirand said:

Even when msfs24 was quite bad when it was released, it was already painful to launch msfs2020. The only reason for me to keep using msfs2020 was the PMDG 737 but I was even too lazy to do it and I haven't flown the 737 during the last 2 months.

With the SU4, once the PMDG 737 will be available in the new sim, I might say goodbye to msfs2020 for good. Seems we will be a lot of simmers in that boat.

Fixed for you above for clarity.  I have always called both 2020 and 2024 "MSFS" because that's what they are ??  Like when you say "MSFS" to me that could be either sim.   It could get REALLY complicated when yet another version comes out if you wanna start calling them something else besides msfs.