Performance on landing
-
I had awful stutters all last week whenever I got within 10 miles or so of an airport. Not VRAM - I was using 10 of 16 and fps showed 35+ but it was pausing.
Tried many, many things then yesterday deleted then disabled rolling cache and the two flights I did were fine. Today I'll try at my "heaviest" airports and see what occurs.
I find the Fokker relatively heavy on fps even when I have no stutters but it's still lighter on my system than the Fenix - PMDG 737 remains King o' the Hill
The fps load is imo worth it for the plane - it really is excellent.
-
I had awful stutters all last week whenever I got within 10 miles or so of an airport. Not VRAM - I was using 10 of 16 and fps showed 35+ but it was pausing.
Tried many, many things then yesterday deleted then disabled rolling cache and the two flights I did were fine. Today I'll try at my "heaviest" airports and see what occurs.
I find the Fokker relatively heavy on fps even when I have no stutters but it's still lighter on my system than the Fenix - PMDG 737 remains King o' the Hill
The fps load is imo worth it for the plane - it really is excellent.
-
Are you guys monitoring your VRAM (Video-RAM) usage in these cases ?
That sounds like running out of VRAM, the moment the airport / scenery spawns in.
With high LOD settings for buildings and scenery you could be good with other airplanes, but the F28 with its better quality can bring a graphics card right to the edge of its capabilities.I've got a 12 GB nvidia and often enough i can see a 10GB+ usage.
Thats when the stuttering sometimes starts when getting close to 11GB of usage.And the possibly having 8K textures for the VC and 8K for the livery gets you there quickly ...
2nd Often i see a lot of Internet activity - streaming photogrammitry etc. That causes stutters too sometimes.
@jetnoise Hi
I don´t use 8k textures, and I reduced my graphics setting generally to medium as I know I can´t get to max on my desktop, I´m very realistic about that.
Terrain LOD 100
all settings to MED, except cloud and texture to high
Objects LOD 40With these setting I have no problems with any aircraft, maybe some 1 or 2 part of a second lag on approaching busy addon airport, but for ther landing phase no issue, I´m the ony issue then ;-).
I placed me on the mentioned addon airport EDDW Bremen with the Fokker, all systems on, I can pan around fastly inside and outside cockpit, works like a breeze. So there is no general issue with my settings.
Yes, maybe spawning at approach is a thing, but as said, even on default Aberdeen I had remarkable stutters. That really shouldnt happen.
Do you really think the Fokker has better quality as 146? On what level? Using RAM?
The Fokker is marvellous, nice to fly, a must have for lovers of vintage airliners, period.
But I don´t think it has to compute more logic of avionics as e.g Maddog an use more ressources. Something wastes here memory under some condtition I think. -
@jetnoise Hi
I don´t use 8k textures, and I reduced my graphics setting generally to medium as I know I can´t get to max on my desktop, I´m very realistic about that.
Terrain LOD 100
all settings to MED, except cloud and texture to high
Objects LOD 40With these setting I have no problems with any aircraft, maybe some 1 or 2 part of a second lag on approaching busy addon airport, but for ther landing phase no issue, I´m the ony issue then ;-).
I placed me on the mentioned addon airport EDDW Bremen with the Fokker, all systems on, I can pan around fastly inside and outside cockpit, works like a breeze. So there is no general issue with my settings.
Yes, maybe spawning at approach is a thing, but as said, even on default Aberdeen I had remarkable stutters. That really shouldnt happen.
Do you really think the Fokker has better quality as 146? On what level? Using RAM?
The Fokker is marvellous, nice to fly, a must have for lovers of vintage airliners, period.
But I don´t think it has to compute more logic of avionics as e.g Maddog an use more ressources. Something wastes here memory under some condtition I think.@sparrows69 Idk by heart, but I'll check next time i load into the 146.
I am flying the F28 exclusivly right now
BTW what are your specs, Settings look pretty low to me.
I am on a 8600K and a 2080Ti and i am able to go higher settings ...Oliver
-
@sparrows69 Idk by heart, but I'll check next time i load into the 146.
I am flying the F28 exclusivly right nowBTW what are your specs, Settings look pretty low to me.
I am on a 8600K and a 2080Ti and i am able to go higher settings ...Oliver
@jetnoise
Core I5 10400F
16GB
GFX 1660 Super 6GBYes, the settings are lower, but the world looks pretty ok if not amazing for me (as someone started 1984 with simming), I don´t want to see screenshots, I want to fly. Others seem to have stutter, too. Yes, may depends on many things, but this is a new product, maybe ok as release candidate, that does not mean it has no flaws. I don´t see a reason why this wonderful aircraft should not run on a medium setup, at least it has to, if it has to run on xbox.
It does at 90% a wonderful job, only the last 2 minutes it causes trouble, sad. -
@jetnoise
Core I5 10400F
16GB
GFX 1660 Super 6GBYes, the settings are lower, but the world looks pretty ok if not amazing for me (as someone started 1984 with simming), I don´t want to see screenshots, I want to fly. Others seem to have stutter, too. Yes, may depends on many things, but this is a new product, maybe ok as release candidate, that does not mean it has no flaws. I don´t see a reason why this wonderful aircraft should not run on a medium setup, at least it has to, if it has to run on xbox.
It does at 90% a wonderful job, only the last 2 minutes it causes trouble, sad.@sparrows69 said in Performance on landing:
@jetnoise
Core I5 10400F
16GB
GFX 1660 Super 6GBYes, the settings are lower, but the world looks pretty ok if not amazing for me (as someone started 1984 with simming), I don´t want to see screenshots, I want to fly. Others seem to have stutter, too. Yes, may depends on many things, but this is a new product, maybe ok as release candidate, that does not mean it has no flaws. I don´t see a reason why this wonderful aircraft should not run on a medium setup, at least it has to, if it has to run on xbox.
It does at 90% a wonderful job, only the last 2 minutes it causes trouble, sad.I'd say, the 6GB Graphics is your main problem ...
but as long you are enjoying the Sim, alles gut
Oliver -
@sparrows69 said in Performance on landing:
@jetnoise
Core I5 10400F
16GB
GFX 1660 Super 6GBYes, the settings are lower, but the world looks pretty ok if not amazing for me (as someone started 1984 with simming), I don´t want to see screenshots, I want to fly. Others seem to have stutter, too. Yes, may depends on many things, but this is a new product, maybe ok as release candidate, that does not mean it has no flaws. I don´t see a reason why this wonderful aircraft should not run on a medium setup, at least it has to, if it has to run on xbox.
It does at 90% a wonderful job, only the last 2 minutes it causes trouble, sad.I'd say, the 6GB Graphics is your main problem ...
but as long you are enjoying the Sim, alles gut
OliverWell; I´d say:
Fokker requirements:
Processor: Intel i5-4460 / AMD Ryzen 3 1200 (Intel i5-8400 / AMD Ryzen 5 1500X recommended)
RAM: 8GB (16GB recommended)
Graphics card: nVidia GTX 770 / AMD Radeon RX 570 (nVidia GTX 970 / AMD Radeon RX 590 recommended)I´m in the limits. As long JF does not say , no you need RTX40 to run this, I do think things can be solved, If they would come with this statement now, I would ask for refund.
Again: if I can run Maddog, I should be able to run Fokker.
-
Well; I´d say:
Fokker requirements:
Processor: Intel i5-4460 / AMD Ryzen 3 1200 (Intel i5-8400 / AMD Ryzen 5 1500X recommended)
RAM: 8GB (16GB recommended)
Graphics card: nVidia GTX 770 / AMD Radeon RX 570 (nVidia GTX 970 / AMD Radeon RX 590 recommended)I´m in the limits. As long JF does not say , no you need RTX40 to run this, I do think things can be solved, If they would come with this statement now, I would ask for refund.
Again: if I can run Maddog, I should be able to run Fokker.
@sparrows69 said in Performance on landing:
nVidia GTX 970
I don't think, you can compare the Maddog textures (original) with the 146 / F28.
And than there are some frame-heavy airports/scenery. (like Bremen or Brüssel (payware)).
It all adds up ... -
On my side I experienced the same issue with a 4090 and Ryzen 7950x3d and 64 gigs of ram. My settings are high but not all on ultra as I prefer smoothness over visuals. As mentioned on my last post on this thread things are coming to normal after system shut down and battery off. To add some details when I leave my departure airports, there is no stutters even if it’s a more demanding airport than my destination. So it’s why I’m still thinking something stack up in the memory. But that could also be something else.
-
@sparrows69 said in Performance on landing:
nVidia GTX 970
I don't think, you can compare the Maddog textures (original) with the 146 / F28.
And than there are some frame-heavy airports/scenery. (like Bremen or Brüssel (payware)).
It all adds up ...PMDG: 1,7GB texture (840MB for VC)
Fenix: 2,2GB texture (916MB for VC)
Fokker: 2,1GB (1.6 GB for VC)May right to say it hits on addon scenery, but again if I´m in the recommended specs, I may expect I have no impact or no huge impact landing on a vanilla airport. That should be possible at least, and at least with my medium settings. If not, the recommendations are wrong.
The Fokker may be demanding on perfomance but it is not out of this world. -
On my side I experienced the same issue with a 4090 and Ryzen 7950x3d and 64 gigs of ram. My settings are high but not all on ultra as I prefer smoothness over visuals. As mentioned on my last post on this thread things are coming to normal after system shut down and battery off. To add some details when I leave my departure airports, there is no stutters even if it’s a more demanding airport than my destination. So it’s why I’m still thinking something stack up in the memory. But that could also be something else.
@boomer If you leave the dep airport you already loaded in all the stuff, if you are approaching, stuff is loaded in at a certain range ! Understand LOD values.
IMO, to own a 4090, 30xx, or 20xx doesn't matter for this issue.
If its a 12GB card and you try to load 11+ Gbs into, its obviously causing issues.A big memory hog btw is "General Options" - "Traffic"
My settings are OFF, OFF, 20, 0, 20, 25,25,70, 25, OFF, OFF,OFF, ULTRAThat helped a bunch
BTW, did you see my privat message ... (if you are GGCH_BOOMer on FS.to)
-
I have stutters and a significant FPS drop (from 80 on takeoff to 5-10) after 1,5 hours of flying. No other plane behaves like this. But the sim itself works well, when I go to the menu, it runs smoothly.
@exp131 said in Performance on landing:
I have stutters and a significant FPS drop (from 80 on takeoff to 5-10) after 1,5 hours of flying. No other plane behaves like this. But the sim itself works well, when I go to the menu, it runs smoothly.
Nope, never saw this ! Its NOT the plane !
-
@exp131 said in Performance on landing:
I have stutters and a significant FPS drop (from 80 on takeoff to 5-10) after 1,5 hours of flying. No other plane behaves like this. But the sim itself works well, when I go to the menu, it runs smoothly.
Nope, never saw this ! Its NOT the plane !
-
@exp131 said in Performance on landing:
I have stutters and a significant FPS drop (from 80 on takeoff to 5-10) after 1,5 hours of flying. No other plane behaves like this. But the sim itself works well, when I go to the menu, it runs smoothly.
Nope, never saw this ! Its NOT the plane !
-
@jetnoise I don't think so. I cleared the community folder - no effect. Flew the same route with another aircraft - everything was fine. The issue exists for this particular aircraft on my system.
-
@exp131 said in Performance on landing:
I have stutters and a significant FPS drop (from 80 on takeoff to 5-10) after 1,5 hours of flying. No other plane behaves like this. But the sim itself works well, when I go to the menu, it runs smoothly.
Nope, never saw this ! Its NOT the plane !
Thats what I said, then the recommendations are wrong, if we are wrong.
Boomer has a top notch sytem and has the problems with this aircraft. For sure destination will load in a certain range, but if this is causing probs on a top notch system what specs should one have? An 128GB GC? Thus Fokker needs infinite memory? Always a GC would load most data as possible, that is not the end of the world, maybe it´s limiting me, thus I reduced settings, but a 24 GB GC should be able to soak up the stuff.
I will open a ticket, "it´s not the plane" is not an answer, the world is not black and white.
-
Thats what I said, then the recommendations are wrong, if we are wrong.
Boomer has a top notch sytem and has the problems with this aircraft. For sure destination will load in a certain range, but if this is causing probs on a top notch system what specs should one have? An 128GB GC? Thus Fokker needs infinite memory? Always a GC would load most data as possible, that is not the end of the world, maybe it´s limiting me, thus I reduced settings, but a 24 GB GC should be able to soak up the stuff.
I will open a ticket, "it´s not the plane" is not an answer, the world is not black and white.
@sparrows69 said in Performance on landing:
Thats what I said, then the recommendations are wrong, if we are wrong.
Boomer has a top notch sytem and has the problems with this aircraft. For sure destination will load in a certain range, but if this is causing probs on a top notch system what specs should one have? An 128GB GC? Thus Fokker needs infinite memory? Always a GC would load most data as possible, that is not the end of the world, maybe it´s limiting me, thus I reduced settings, but a 24 GB GC should be able to soak up the stuff.
I will open a ticket, "it´s not the plane" is not an answer, the world is not black and white.
Sure do it
See my specs above
MSFS and F28 (146, Fenix, Maddog) are just running fine.
F28 from release day, MSFS through all its BETAs.
All i can say ...
Oliver
I'll post my settings if you guys need ... -
@sparrows69 said in Performance on landing:
Thats what I said, then the recommendations are wrong, if we are wrong.
Boomer has a top notch sytem and has the problems with this aircraft. For sure destination will load in a certain range, but if this is causing probs on a top notch system what specs should one have? An 128GB GC? Thus Fokker needs infinite memory? Always a GC would load most data as possible, that is not the end of the world, maybe it´s limiting me, thus I reduced settings, but a 24 GB GC should be able to soak up the stuff.
I will open a ticket, "it´s not the plane" is not an answer, the world is not black and white.
Sure do it
See my specs above
MSFS and F28 (146, Fenix, Maddog) are just running fine.
F28 from release day, MSFS through all its BETAs.
All i can say ...
Oliver
I'll post my settings if you guys need ...That something works for you does not mean it works for everyone.
This is your experience, not an evidence.
I could say MSFS and 146, Fenix, Maddog are just running fine. This is my experience, not an evidence, but leads to the impression that my system is basically not f... up.We talk of Software, and software is made by humans and can contain bugs, that may apply on one system, while on other system it doesn´t hurt. Maybe you are a GC driver version ahead or behind? Who knows?
From this threat I can read there is something some people experienced or I can read one is smart and the others are not on the page. I prefer the first interpretation.
