Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

368 Excellent

About enright

  • Rank

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

1,565 profile views
  1. Yep - you are trading fans that cool the CPU heat sink for fans that cool the liquid radiator - you still need to move air in either case, which can be noisy. Your best bet for a quiet build would be a CPU with a lower power draw since, in general, power = heat = higher fan RPMs. The AMD 5800x3d is the current reigning champ (by far, according to most benchmarks) for MSFS due to the large amount of L3 cache, and it also has the lowest power consumption vs. most other "flagship" CPUs: https://www.hardwaretimes.com/amds-ryzen-7-5800x3d-draws-less-than-half-as-much-power-than-the-intel-core-i9-12900ks-and-yet-faster-in-gaming-workloads/ This CPU can't be effectively overclocked - which I don't think gets you much these days anyway - so there's no need to waste time tinkering with it to get the best performance. Combine this with a solid case and low noise fans and you'd probably have something fairly quiet. However, you might want to wait 30 days to see what both Intel and AMD have in their next gen CPUs, both of which should be announced in early September. If nothing else, the announcements might result in some price drops on existing inventory.
  2. One other tip - if possible, connect to the router via wired ethernet from your desktop - otherwise both your desktop and Quest will be transmitting the stream via wifi over the same channel. Desktop -> wired ethernet -> router -> WIFI6 -> Quest 2
  3. No worries! I've been in the hair pulling stage you are at now. With airlink - the sharper the image, the more data it takes to transmit - so you are always trying to strike a good balance between sharpness and smoothness (frame rate). Here are my settings. I have a 3080 and a 5600x and am pretty happy with both sharpness and frame rate, so your setup should outperform mine: Oculus Device settings: - 72hz refresh rate - 4128 x 2096 render resolution - Airlink bitrate - dynamic (100mbps) MSFS VR Graphics Settings (make sure you have switched from "PC" to "VR" at the top of the graphics settings page) - Anti-aliasing TAA (try DLSS if you have SU10 beta) - Render Scaling 100 (you can probably go higher with your 3090, but try 100 first) - Most settings to high or ultra (make sure texture resolution is ultra) That should produce a fairly sharp image. If it doesn't- you might have a bandwidth issue that is forcing the video stream to compress (much like a youtube video does when you have low bandwidth).
  4. Well, that's a good sign - you can factor out your prescription interfering with your ability to focus on the image, which would be the most difficult problem to solve. Added a few more questions to the list - I accidently hit submit too quickly. LOL.
  5. It is possible to get a butter smooth and sharp experience with the Quest 2 and airlink. I feel your pain - there are many links in the chain and a weak point in any one of them can cause an inferior experience. Let's do process of elimination: - When you run a Quest native app, is it smooth and sharp? - When using airlink *before* you use MSFS (e.g. at the desktop home screen), and you turn your head quickly side to side, do you need artifacts and/or black areas that take a while to fill in? - When in MSFS, when you move your head quickly - do you see artifacts or black areas? - Do you have anti-aliasing on and set to the highest level? - Do you have render resolution set to at least 100? - If you are using SU10 beta, have you tried using DLSS?
  6. Ahhhh moment of inertia - I knew my physics classes would come in handy some day. As it happens, the FSW 414 is one of the more "yawwy" planes in SU10 beta for me. The turning rate is very "sputtery" - normal turn rate, then slow, then normal, etc... Will try Rob's G36 and see how pronounced it is there- he definitely works some magic into his flight models.
  7. That could be - however it occurs during manual coordinated turns, and with rudder assist on, and on planes that have an automated yaw damper like the a320 and 737. And it only occurs in gusty conditions. It don't think the adverse yaw effect should be that noticeable under those circumstances Whew - I'm glad I'm not the only one that experiences this. It's a bit immersion breaking, and I haven't seen any one else mention it. It's definitely most noticeable when turning - but I'm not sure it's adverse yaw for the reasons I mentioned above. 100% agree about Flight Unlimited. I'm not sure what the secret sauce was in that flight model, but it definitely "felt" like you where moving through the atmosphere - it had a softness to it that was very realistic. I'm tempted to find it and run it to see if it stacks up to modern sims, or if it was simply ahead of its time and better than what existed back then.
  8. Just wondering if I'm the only one that experiences this: a subtle "bouncy" yaw motion when turning - as if the nose is being pulled along by a spring. It's noticeable on any aircraft - even twins - so it's not caused by P-Factor. I've even noticed it on big jets like the Fenix A320 and PMDG 737. I noticed it before SU10, but it seems more pronounced lately. At one point, I thought it might be caused by spurious inputs from my controllers, so I unplugged them all and I see the same effect with a just mouse and keyboard connected. The "springiness" seems proportional to the amount of wind that is present and nearly goes away completely if the winds are calm. I'm thinking inertia in the flight model is too low - planes are not as easy to pivot laterally in real life (thankfully - it would be extremely nauseating). Either that or the flight model is not smoothly calculating the yaw rate and is falling behind / catching up. Is it just me though? Does anyone else notice this?
  9. I wish there was an easy way to either adjust or disable the exposure compensation effect entirely. Seems a bit smoother / less jarring now though.
  10. Update: I am seriously considering spending $20 on the virtual version of a place that I would gladly pay $20 NOT to go to in the real world and it seems like a rational decision to me. I am re-evaluating the life choices that brought me to this moment.
  11. The level of detail on the scenery is pretty amazing. They captured the soul crushing 1970's blandness of the airport perfectly. Believe it or not, Terminal B (shown below) was constructed in 2010 - but they somehow managed to make it look 40 years old and outdated on the day that it opened. Seriously though - I practically live at this airport, and the details are so exact (e.g. the signs, the pattern of the linoleum floor, etc..) that I'm having PTSD.
  12. FYI - The name of that strip is literal - it's next door to the worlds largest bat colony: https://tpwd.texas.gov/huntwild/wild/species/bats/bat-watching-sites/bracken-cave-preserve.phtml Each year in the fall, you can buy tickets to sit in a little mini-theater of sorts near the cave to watch over 15 million bats take flight at dusk. Fortunately they don't fly very high, or else this would be one heck of a flight hazard for that airstrip. The aerial shot at 2:13 below is stunning.
  13. Excellent job on lining them up in just the right angle. I'll admit I flipped back and forth more than once because I wasn't sure which shot was real - amazing!
  14. Definitely improves the immersion from my perspective but I think head movements, especially in VR, effect each person differently. Your best bet is to try it out for yourself, since there is a seven day trial. You can install and experiment with it and then decide if it's worth paying for. One bit of advice: VR head movements tweaking is listed as "a known issue" and is likely to be improved in a near-term update. You may want to wait for those improvements before starting the trial.
  15. It's definitely troubling that a significant strike occurred so early on - odds are there will be more - and unlike Hubble, a repair is not an option. But that's all part of the risk of exploration and doing something new. I'm personally amazed we've gotten this far with the mission, given everything else that could have gone wrong. Launching a dummy satellite of approximately the same size and materials as Webb as a test would probably cost almost as much as launching the real thing - given the fuel, propulsion systems, and guidance hardware required to get any object to a geo-synchronous solar orbit. Might have been better to build two actual satellites and put both in orbit for redundancy. Even if it blew up tomorrow though, it's still an amazing accomplishment, and in all likelihood - we are going to get several years worth of new discoveries out of it before it's ultimate demise.
  • Create New...