It feels crazy to go from DCS which can easily pull 100s of consistent frames on mid-end systems, to X-Plane which struggles to get 20 fps whenever it strays within 1000 m of an airport.
Isn't a large part of this because of the detail of the flight model in X-Plane? That's an assumption on my part because I couldn't find anything that explains how DCS models the physics of flight but there's loads of info about X-Plane.
True but the problem with DCS for me is stutters not just peak frame rate. Especially multiplayer although I get thats not much to do with pure cpu/gpu performance and has other factors too.
These numbers vary from more than just settings. You must also consider aircraft, airport, time of day, weather, what is in view, etc. This is important to note. Someone may believe they have their settings tweaked perfectly, but they did it in the ultralight at high noon in a rural area. Then they load up a 9 AM flight with long shadows, a couple cloud layers, in a Zibo at LAX and wonder why their performance tanked. You can adjust your settings in a worst-case scenario, then know you'll have a great experience at all times, or you can adjust for each aircraft and scenario for the best possible experience (visuals and FPS).
I would also like to emphasize CHIPSET as well! That matters a lot because when you start getting at these higher-end systems, the front side bus can be saturated if not properly optimized.
@@AWaifuInVR The memory controller talks to memory across that motherboard.. There is bandwidth there, more than in the past, but that architecture still says, "Go fetch me a shrubbery," and it has to go across that connection to do so. It's just, as I said, faster than in times past. I was trying to keep it somewhat simpler so I wouldn't lose *everyone* because all that MSEE talk will make 99% of the people's eyes glaze over immediately, especially with dilettantes.
For me the cpu bottleneck was the cheapest to fix. Thanks to your videos i took a 7800x3D, now the bottleneck in VR is the GPU. I have a 4070Ti but I figured out it's even not enough for my headset. So ok the main bottleneck in Xplane is usually the CPU but not necessarily in VR.
Really appreciate this video, as its very timely for me, as I have an Nvidia 2060 GPU, and I'm only getting ~18-24 fps at / near larger airports, e.g., KSEA, KDCA, or KBOS with XP12, and SimHeaven, Active Sky XP 12, and Toliss A320 family aircraft. I can get 35-45 fps approaching international airports in much less densely populated areas, and typically get 50 fps at FL350. I have an AMD CPU (can't remember the number as I've recently moved and everything's in boxes), and have been thinking upgrading my WIN 10 tower.
I upgraded my computer as much as I could afford, and then lowered bit my graphic settings. Now in VR I can get 90FPS but for sure the setting aren't set to the max but it is so smooth when you fly
What framerate could we get with the same computer in XP11 ? I guess there's also some optimizations Laminar can do to improve the way it is used (multithreading and better use of the GPU, improving the calculation algorithms for clouds etc.)
It feels crazy to go from DCS which can easily pull 100s of consistent frames on mid-end systems, to X-Plane which struggles to get 20 fps whenever it strays within 1000 m of an airport.
Isn't a large part of this because of the detail of the flight model in X-Plane? That's an assumption on my part because I couldn't find anything that explains how DCS models the physics of flight but there's loads of info about X-Plane.
True but the problem with DCS for me is stutters not just peak frame rate. Especially multiplayer although I get thats not much to do with pure cpu/gpu performance and has other factors too.
These numbers vary from more than just settings. You must also consider aircraft, airport, time of day, weather, what is in view, etc.
This is important to note. Someone may believe they have their settings tweaked perfectly, but they did it in the ultralight at high noon in a rural area. Then they load up a 9 AM flight with long shadows, a couple cloud layers, in a Zibo at LAX and wonder why their performance tanked.
You can adjust your settings in a worst-case scenario, then know you'll have a great experience at all times, or you can adjust for each aircraft and scenario for the best possible experience (visuals and FPS).
That is true. Any change listed above can change things.
Thank you, Michael! You have done some excellent videos on this topic, not to mention all the other topics.
Very cool! Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
Nice! Thanks.
This is the reason why i like the Xplane. Xplane is not just flightsim but the capabilities to give information and creativity to the users.
wish you could periodically focus on MSFS for discussions like this.
Excellent information. I was about to spend some money in GPU overlooking the CPU. Thanks.
Interesting, hope it helps to get higher performance 😉
I would also like to emphasize CHIPSET as well! That matters a lot because when you start getting at these higher-end systems, the front side bus can be saturated if not properly optimized.
modern systems don't have FSBs anymore because the memory controller is now built into the CPU
@@AWaifuInVR The memory controller talks to memory across that motherboard.. There is bandwidth there, more than in the past, but that architecture still says, "Go fetch me a shrubbery," and it has to go across that connection to do so. It's just, as I said, faster than in times past. I was trying to keep it somewhat simpler so I wouldn't lose *everyone* because all that MSEE talk will make 99% of the people's eyes glaze over immediately, especially with dilettantes.
For me the cpu bottleneck was the cheapest to fix. Thanks to your videos i took a 7800x3D, now the bottleneck in VR is the GPU. I have a 4070Ti but I figured out it's even not enough for my headset. So ok the main bottleneck in Xplane is usually the CPU but not necessarily in VR.
Yeah, VR is a little different. GPU is a premium.
Really appreciate this video, as its very timely for me, as I have an Nvidia 2060 GPU, and I'm only getting ~18-24 fps at / near larger airports, e.g., KSEA, KDCA, or KBOS with XP12, and SimHeaven, Active Sky XP 12, and Toliss A320 family aircraft.
I can get 35-45 fps approaching international airports in much less densely populated areas, and typically get 50 fps at FL350.
I have an AMD CPU (can't remember the number as I've recently moved and everything's in boxes), and have been thinking upgrading my WIN 10 tower.
I upgraded my computer as much as I could afford, and then lowered bit my graphic settings. Now in VR I can get 90FPS but for sure the setting aren't set to the max but it is so smooth when you fly
Any chance to be aqble to create diferent user visual setting profiles ?
,so I can have one for VFR low and slow ,another for airliners etc
Will your pc run 3 screens on high settings with no stutter in 1440p each screen
not a CPU bottleneck but more accurate CPU+RAM bottleneck, Ram ussually is not a problem but there is that possibility.
What framerate could we get with the same computer in XP11 ? I guess there's also some optimizations Laminar can do to improve the way it is used (multithreading and better use of the GPU, improving the calculation algorithms for clouds etc.)
I have another video on that. Do a search for it. Coming in 12.10, they SHOULD have multi-thread support.
@@xforcepc 🤩