Like tittle says,Woow men the VRAM is very nice optimized now especially when airborne,almost free of sttuters,now nice ILS glidepath following.

This is the right direction.

How is going on for you?.

TTurbo.

Edited August 14Aug 14 by TTurbo

So far so good!

I don't know about the specifics about how this is, but yes. I'm getting much better performance.

For example, I loaded up and flew the PMDG B738 and my frame rates were 35-60fps and higher. Before this update, I had parked this aircraft because, after the high-res update, my frames were really bad.

Happy

Just a note that it is good, but they nerfed the LOD - which is why everyone is getting a good performance boost from SU5. We're back up to about SU4 performance but with worse visuals.

There are a lot of good things from SU6 so I'm not trying to be a debbie downer. But this is why it's performing better than SU5.

I did some rough comparisons and TLOD 400 is pretty much like TLOD200 in SU4. TLOD 400 is like TLOD 100 in MSFS 2020.... But we already knew Asobo disabled the 512x512 ground textures (that 2020 used) and went to 256x256 in 2024.

Edited August 15Aug 15 by ryanbatc

I'm getting excellent results with Dynamic FG. Is anyone else trying it out?

SU6 visuals are also excellent IMO.

Edit: fast becoming my favorite fix is the ATC window opens / closes without delay. The menus just seem faster even when not flying. 👍

dd

Edited August 15Aug 15 by Sky_Pilot071

2 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

Just a note that it is good, but they nerfed the LOD - which is why everyone is getting a good performance boost from SU5. We're back up to about SU4 performance but with worse visuals.

There are a lot of good things from SU6 so I'm not trying to be a debbie downer. But this is why it's performing better than SU5.

I did some rough comparisons and TLOD 400 is pretty much like TLOD200 in SU4. TLOD 400 is like TLOD 100 in MSFS 2020.... But we already knew Asobo disabled the 512x512 ground textures (that 2020 used) and went to 256x256 in 2024.

yes this was being reported ad infinitum during the beta and I've seen plenty of posts & reports since SU6 was released that this was the case, we certainly can't have everything and whilst extra performance is warranted I think it's clear that Asobo are going about it the wrong way with these constant regressions.
It's clear to me (and others) that they're lacking the core optimisation skillset so are just hacking away at "simple" graphical options like LODs (forever an issue) & Textures (512x512 went AWOL over a year ago, just one example) in order to get that performance boost, it's strange to think they don't have a proper handle on the very in-house engine they developed.

Something else that has much improved is the ground traffic for smoothness and night lighting near Denver. Huge improvement over SU5. Using LOD =200.

dd

42 minutes ago, MarcG said:

yes this was being reported ad infinitum during the beta and I've seen plenty of posts & reports since SU6 was released that this was the case, we certainly can't have everything and whilst extra performance is warranted I think it's clear that Asobo are going about it the wrong way with these constant regressions.
It's clear to me (and others) that they're lacking the core optimisation skillset so are just hacking away at "simple" graphical options like LODs (forever an issue) & Textures (512x512 went AWOL over a year ago, just one example) in order to get that performance boost, it's strange to think they don't have a proper handle on the very in-house engine they developed.

If that is the case then they already realized there's core aspects of the engine that they can't tinker with any further. If people want better performance, it'll have to come from somewhere.

3 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

Just a note that it is good, but they nerfed the LOD - which is why everyone is getting a good performance boost from SU5. We're back up to about SU4 performance but with worse visuals.

There are a lot of good things from SU6 so I'm not trying to be a debbie downer. But this is why it's performing better than SU5.

I did some rough comparisons and TLOD 400 is pretty much like TLOD200 in SU4. TLOD 400 is like TLOD 100 in MSFS 2020.... But we already knew Asobo disabled the 512x512 ground textures (that 2020 used) and went to 256x256 in 2024.

All we needed was 2020 terrain with 2024 lighting and pyhsics

11 minutes ago, rick celik said:

All we needed was 2020 terrain with 2024 lighting and pyhsics

Agreed. The LOD processing changes also made issues harder to solve for developers

47 minutes ago, Nandengo12 said:

If that is the case then they already realized there's core aspects of the engine that they can't tinker with any further. If people want better performance, it'll have to come from somewhere.

at the expense of poor visuals though, that's the key issue here that they're degrading the visuals far too much.

I have not noticed degraded visuals on my PC, but maybe the small 24" monitor masks the effect?

4 hours ago, rick celik said:

All we needed was 2020 terrain with 2024 lighting and pyhsics

I do admit I was really excited to see that high res of imagery in 2024.

The quality and clarity of 2024 has been repeatedly cut down so Xbox can run this sim. I've said it time and time again. An Xbox will never be able to run this sim as well as someone who spent 4-5k USD on a PC running a rtx 4090 and 9800x3d.

It's extremely frustrating that 2024 continues to be downgraded visually.

Somehow we need 2 versions. I mean we already have that - Microsoft pushes console updates via a different pipeline than PC. We know this because they actually screwed up the M600 release. They pushed the Xbox version for the PC.

But still, we don't want the visual downgrade on PC. At least I don't. Maybe some of you aren't noticing the difference or just don't care.

Xbox is where the money is.

18 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

I do admit I was really excited to see that high res of imagery in 2024.

The quality and clarity of 2024 has been repeatedly cut down so Xbox can run this sim. I've said it time and time again. An Xbox will never be able to run this sim as well as someone who spent 4-5k USD on a PC running a rtx 4090 and 9800x3d.

It's extremely frustrating that 2024 continues to be downgraded visually.

Somehow we need 2 versions. I mean we already have that - Microsoft pushes console updates via a different pipeline than PC. We know this because they actually screwed up the M600 release. They pushed the Xbox version for the PC.

But still, we don't want the visual downgrade on PC. At least I don't. Maybe some of you aren't noticing the difference or just don't care.

Xbox gaming revenue is megabillions. Our PC community is not anywhere near that. It sucks, but money talks...

Edited Saturday at 01:53 PM5 days by Nandengo12