AnkH

Wrong. The sim runs on a Xbox, if you cant manage to run it smooth on mediocre system, you simply do something wrong.

Thanks for the heads up Raymond, it was (of course) also disabled in my case and it for sure helped with the FPS. Not that much but I am getting there (having locked 36FPS and then 72 with Frame Gen in all scenarios).

Those who cant afford a rig suitable for high and ultra? I mean, there is no free lunch, if your budget doesnt allow for a high end rig, you have to get along with reduced settings. It is a idiocracy of todays time that even those using a potato still think they are entitled to run each and every game in "ultra" settings. They are not. End of the story...

True only for those who do not know what all those things are for listed under "customize graphics options". Sadly, nowadays the vast majority of the users. Just a hint from my side: rumor has it that using "medium" or even "low" might improve your performance on medium to low end builds. But as I said, maybe it is just unconfirmed rumour...

Something "in between". I did not reinstall W11 and simply reactivated it again using the key. Then I forced a W11 24H2 full update using the Windows installation tool, took 2.5h and is basically a new OS installation. BTW: in the mean time I did some further testing, the rig is ok, the 9800X3D performs as it should and I guess I simply had too high expectations from this upgrade. But with the exception of inibuilds A350 on MK Studios LSZH with AIG traffic, the performance I get is fine now, I guess I also did not properly test the same settings because I rebuilt the usercfg.opt after switching the hardware, resulting in a full reset of my settings.

Just to verify: if I use the FPS Cap mode and I have my FPS limited via usercfg.opt to 36 FPS (before Frame Gen, target FPS WITH Frame Gen is then 72), what number should I put into the FPS field? 36 or 72? or slightly lower numbers, e.g. 34 or 70? And what does AutoFPS do, when I e.g. switch tabs resulting in a transient loss of FG and thus lower FPS? Sorry, I am sure it was already asked and discussed, but 208 pages thread is simply too much...

Well, it always led to sky flickering in my case, whatever I tried. Happy I do not really need it with my GPU in MSFS2024...

What do you expect if some obviously so blind they dont see it? 🤣🙈

Sadly with 7.1, I see no traffic using the settings from AIG for offline AI traffic. What is wrong? I installed the additional routes, might this be the culprit? Had reasonable amounts with 7.0 and the exact same settings, checking with LNM. No ships in LNM, no ships visible... AddonLinker the culprit?

Nobody talks about VATSIM or SU3 beta. The AIG models loose their front gear at a certain distance and further out, also the main gear. And it is like this for ANYONE, it is a bug and still not properly fixed. At release, the AIG planes did not show landing gear at all, even when the camera was close. THIS was fixed. But not the distance issue. And sorry, nothing more simple than posting a screenshot, bad excuse for a claim that is obviously not true...

And again... proof or it is not true. Again you might confuse it with the bug that WAS fixed, that AI planes do not show ANY landing gear. But the disappearance at a too close distance still exists.

If you say so...

Considering the fact that you could probably run Microsoft Flight Simulator v1 up to 5.1 on a simulated computer within MSFS2024, e.g. on one of the screens in the Ini A350, without hampering the performance that much, this comparison is rather unfair, no? Example: there was a Tool around for years where you could design your own plane, take whatever aircraft.cfg and go flying in your sim. Imagine this today? People start screaming "scam" if a plane with a perfect 3D model uses the default systems of a default MSFS airplane... People complain, if the beta range of a turboprop is not properly simulated, they complain about things, you could not even have dreamt of back in the early days of Microsoft Flight Simulator. Not even bringing the visual stuff into calculation...

Why you call people "silly" if the only "silly" thing is your comment? What do you think is the purpose of a benchmark e.g.? If it is not putting 100% load on your GPU, how do you think that measurment a) is comparable to measurment b)? Or any other benchmark of an actual game, like we see all over the place? Having your GPU at or around 100% is THE thing you want. Reducing load by capping FPS or lower settings are only means to reduce power consumption and/or heat, nothing else. If you do not care about power consumption and heat is not an issue, there is NO reason why your GPU should not be running at 100%. And it usually does. Or do you really think that people e.g. reduce settings or limit FPS in Cyberpunk 2077 or comparable GPU heavy games to avoid 100% load? Ridiculous. "Oh well, I only get 50FPS, but because I should not let my GPU run at 100%, I better limit my FPS to 40". Sounds silly, is silly.

Guess you also have a matching CPU, because at least in my case, even in 4K, THE limiting factor regarding FPS is still the CPU when sitting in the ini A350 on ini EGLL with 75% AIG Traffic and bad weather.