aniiran

They need to fix their crappy old Reno first and add parking codes, change runway numbers, fix some terminal issues. Cleveland needs parking spots revamped. Incheon needs an update as well. Salt Lake City is amazing though, I have Charelston by DD don't need another SC Airport. I keep hoping a top level developer will do St. Louis, Kansas City or Nashville, but it just never happens. There is still a lot of airports we are missing: some just arent there, some just aren't up to quality standards,. St. Louis, Des Moines, Cincinatti, Pittsburgh, Birmingham, Nashville, Kansas City, Little Rock, Tulsa, Wichita, Tucson, Rapid City, Minot, Fargo, Billings, Missoula, Bozeman, Spokane, Portland, Columbia, SC, Wilmington NC, Raliegh-Durham NC, Grand Rapids, Milwaukee, Albuquerque. We know Denver is being worked on but man is it behind the real airport.

I always check to make sure the wind in sim brief matches what is on the flight planner screen in MSFS. Problem is FSLTL uses the internal engine so if real world weather reports the wind is 120 at 1 kt it will use runway 12 even if 30 was the actual runway being used by real-world traffic. I have noticed that if your flight plan in the flight planner screen is at odds with the real world weather being reported by the sim you'll have traffic coming in from both directions. This is something I hope beyond ATC can fix. Long story short If I get close to the airport and see some silliness I will reset the FSLTL traffic injection just before about 20-25nm. Usually by then approach will be telling the aircraft which approach to expect. Last flight coming into Minneapolis, this was the exact scenario I faced. When approach told me cleared for approach 12L then I hear them give 30R to another airplane I just reset the traffic injection then listened to the ATIS. because the wind was 270 at 1kt it reset everything back to the 30s. AI traffic still has a long ways to go but I have a lot of hope in Beyond ATC's traffic engine.

You need to make sure that HAGS is enabled and then you will be able to enable Frame Generation. You need to go to your Settings>Display then Default Graphics settings and turn on Hardware-Acceleration GPU Scheduling. That will enable Frame Generation. Your frames will double with FG. What CPU is it paired with. I did a whole series on my you tube channel about upgrading my RTX 2070 Super to a 4070 with a i7 9700K and had a massive CPU bottle neck. I ended up just buying a new system. but this video will show you what you can expect. https://youtu.be/rUK6pMPKAt0

Axnos, is pretty bad. Their Perth is so poor quality, inaccurate, and outdated it's worthless. If you want RIC probably worth it, it looks better quality than all previous attempts by Axnos.

DLSS with DLAA and FG still aren't winning me over. 3.6 seemed to be zero improvement over 3.5. Displays still ghost. DLSS 3.7...sigh, if its not in DLSS swapper I don't care. I'm doing TAA with FG ON render scale 100 at DSR(DL) 2.25 at 3840X1620 everything maxed out except TLOD using AutoFPS and it's just about perfect. 75-85 FPS, and sooo smooth. I finally have the performance I have always wanted with a 13700k and 4080 super.

The problem with the 9th gen is the Z390 couldn't accept a better chip. I wanted to go 4090 but the cost was just too much over the 4080 Super. I didn't find 15-20% better performance to be worth 800 dollars. I feel the same as you about Intel VS AMD the 7800X3D was obviously a better CPU. But my plan is to go i9 14900KS eventually since the Z790-P supports it. Of course 3 years from now we will be talking about how obsolete an i7 13700K has become.

Well sounds like I did my job then. I think some higher level thinkers in my comments section figured out that not only is the problem the CPU but the motherboard as well. A 40 series card is PCI 4.0 X 16 and my motherboard is a 3.0 X 8. The PCI lanes were further strangling the GPU performance. Without frame gen there was actually worse performance with the 4070 than the 2070 super.

For me a 40 series card was not worth it with an i7 9700k and an old Z390 mother board. I got tons of artifacts to the point it was unplayable depending on the settings. If your CPU is old your going to get more of these wierd artifacts. Now that I have an i7 13700K and 4080 super I don't get any artifacts with frame gen and TAA DX 12. It's one of the reasons I made a YouTube video to show the ugliness of trying to run a 40 series card on an old motherboard and old CPU. i7 9700k with 4070 vs i7 13700K with 4080 super: https://youtu.be/rUK6pMPKAt0 I also did FSR 3 with an i7 9700K and RTX 2070 SUPER Vs Native Frame Gen with the i7 9700k and a RTX 4070. https://youtu.be/tshCfgNFfCk

The Fenix has never performed as well as the PMDG 737 series. But I think it really depends on the scenario. The Fenix and the PMDG do about the same at iniBuilds LAX, of course the frame rate is low to begin with. At a minor airport or stock airport the PMDG has a significantly better frame rate, it always has. I have noticed a bit of a performance penalty with the IAE model specifically, but not with the CFM... strange. I think one of the differences is that there are no 4k repaints. I never use 8k liveries always 4k, so for me I think that has something to do with my stuttering in the outside view and wing views. The cockpit textures seem sharper to me, maybe they are 8k now as well? I get a new system soon so all of this won't matter.

The thing I care about most is running AI traffic outside of MSFS therefore increasing performance. The Mid tier looks about right for me. I want voices that are appropriate for where I am flying. The premium voices just sound too excited.

This will be interesting. I like ifly. This is their chance to make big waves in the community. I for one hope they beat PMDG to the punch. Either way I'm excited for a good MAX.

Wow this looks awesome... 30 bucks a month..? Ha Ha not a chance. Beyond ATC will be a game changer. I'm exicted about it especially when they showed the demo of the AI traffic being ran outside of MSFS. That was amazing epecially if it has almost no farme rate impact as they claim.

I'm going to continue using the freeware JXSN one on flightsim.to. But that's great that Fly2High is covering Texas. Looks decent, better than the free one for sure.

Preach! I got a post "flagged by the community" when I typed. "Simply uninstalling 8 cities worth of photogrammetry isn't a fix for the blurry textures and bumps at DFW caused by the Arlington photogrammetry, can we please find an actual fix like just removing Arlington from the package or getting different Arlington photogrammetry, or actually finding the source of the conflict?" I guess that was too derogatory to ask for a fix and offer suggestions. It must have been my tone. It was too aggressive.

I have them both, the E190 has a HUD and a few more systems. If you are outside the US go for the 190.