Hi Everybody,

Downloading MS2024 onto my hard drive with SU5 beta, eliminating as much streaming as I can. I was never part of the beta prior to today, it looks like it will take a day to download close to 500 GB of data. I have a 2TB NVME so I'm not worried about space nor the additional load time.

I'm wondering if this will help with photogrammetry (I have a fast internet connection via fiber optic) showing half melted buildings as well as objects popping in while cruising the friendly skies.

Thanks
 

Hi Mike:

It might be worth testing that, but I’m not sure that would be a practical approach to render better PG scenery in MSFS2024.

First of all, which segments of World Scenery, you would download…(maybe you are thinking of localized regions, that you mostly fly in)? The total is incredibly vast…

What I know, in MSFS2024, the scenery is designed to work with Streaming for maximum efficiency, so, I’m not sure you will see any perceptible improvement.

Just my thought.

YMMV.

Cheers…!

I had it during SU3 was valid. I did not recognize any advantages in performance or quality. With SU4 I went back to pure streaming by a full uninstall reinstall procedure.

It won't make any difference but, it's something to do on a Sunday. 

Doesn't MS2024 offer an offline option? If so, I would imagine at the very least offline flying in 2024 will look better.

I thought the melted trees and all that were due to bad streaming. Downloaded a few regions I'm familiar with and.... it was just as bad. 
Tried again with the new cali update. Downloaded and flew it. Was still not happy with the quality of photogrammetry, at least when up close. 

Has a loooong way to go before its quality enough while flying low in VR.

2 minutes ago, Mike_CFII_MEL said:

Doesn't MS2024 offer an offline option? If so, I would imagine at the very least offline flying in 2024 will look better.

Mike:

I am thinking you’re digging yourself a deeper hole…🙂….I would never use MSFS2024 in an offline mode. It will be like my FSX…Deja Vu…

Let us know what you find.

59 minutes ago, Mike_CFII_MEL said:

Hi Everybody,

Downloading MS2024 onto my hard drive with SU5 beta, eliminating as much streaming as I can. I was never part of the beta prior to today, it looks like it will take a day to download close to 500 GB of data. I have a 2TB NVME so I'm not worried about space nor the additional load time.

I'm wondering if this will help with photogrammetry (I have a fast internet connection via fiber optic) showing half melted buildings as well as objects popping in while cruising the friendly skies.

Thanks
 

Photogrammetry can only be streamed. Its possible that it is stored in the rolling cache, so you might be better of with a huge cache file instead. 

7 minutes ago, MrRoper said:

Photogrammetry can only be streamed. Its possible that it is stored in the rolling cache, so you might be better of with a huge cache file instead. 

I believe it's set at 50GB if I remember correctly. Right now I'm at 82% download on the base content with the aircraft downloaded already. Unable to check the actual number right now.

IMO. not streaming, if possible would be defeating the feature of 24. Yes, a fast IP is required or helpful but load times and stored data are greatly reduced. Its a whole another Ballgame from XP.

Space is cheap now-a-days... years ago I would of agreed for streaming if we had the capability, but today anyone can store amazing amounts of data for offline use at low cost.

I always seem to notice additional flickers, slower texture loads during peak times and on the weekends with MS2024, could this be server load.... I think so, when I test my line there is no difference during MS2024 peak time (East Coast USA) or at 2 or 3am. So the flickers aren't on my end as the issue disappears at 2am.

Despite having downloaded as much data as I can for my flying regions, I think that it is the quality and reliability of your internet connection with the Microsoft servers that has a greater bearing on the visual quality in the simulator. My ethernet connection was restricted to less than 100Mbps for a considerable amount of time, but I never had any problems with blurry textures of any kind. Then I decided to try the wifi connection, which was wildly variable (between 120 and 300Mbps). It only took a couple of flights for me to notice delayed rendering of terrain textures, and also runway textures. In other words, reliability is the most important factor.

I now have a solid ethernet connection of 500Mbps 

Edited February 15Feb 15 by Christopher Low

20 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

Despite having downloaded as much data as I can for my flying regions, I think that it is the quality and reliability of your internet connection with the Microsoft servers that has a greater bearing on the visual quality in the simulator. My ethernet connection was restricted to less than 100Mbps for a considerable amount of time, but I never had any problems with blurry textures of any kind. Then I decided to try the wifi connection, which was wildly variable (between 120 and 300Mbps). It only took a couple of flights for me to notice delayed rendering of terrain textures, and also runway textures. In other words, reliability is the most important factor.

I now have a solid ethernet connection of 500Mbps 

I never run via wifi, never have. My tests have all shown speeds of just under 1Gbps. Doesn't matter if it's 3pm or 3am, same holds true for line noise, just about non existent.

The only solution to the bad photogrammetry is to turn photogrammetry off.  Every single place I've ever tested looks better with autogen.  I don't know why MS/Asobo even bothers with the photogrammetry.  It's a performance suck for worse visuals.  (Gig Internet here).

This thread brings back bad 2am memories.  The install locally bus has left the station.  Streaming with a healthy roaming cache is the way to go.

dd

Edited February 15Feb 15 by Sky_Pilot071