JF PA-28 Arrow CPU Heavy?



  • (Cross-posting this from MSFS forums)

    It seems that the aircraft is way too CPU intensive, compared to the default ones.

    A simple benchmark on the lowest GPU settings, 1080p, shows quite a difference between the JF Arrow and various Asobo aircrafts (even one with a glass cockpit):

    JF Arrow PA-28R Arrow III CUSTOM:
    48211df8-9469-46fb-bc80-2d4815566512-image.png

    Asobo DA 40 TDI:
    6bacef03-5b74-463e-8706-b3ee80a83b44-image.png

    Asobo Cessna 172 w/ steam gauges:
    5f726c4d-ee17-4ffc-9fe9-d43bb1a56870-image.png

    Asobo Cessna Grand Caravan 208 B:
    1deeeba5-e532-400a-8814-9f6ec7136275-image.png

    Is it possible to fix it anyhow? Turning off the EFB does not help, neither switching GPS.

    PC specs: Ryzen 3600, 16GB RAM, GPU EVGA 3080, MSFS - MS Store version, latest drivers.



  • The aircraft is approaching study level so a lot more systems are being simulated at a higher computational expensive as a result.



  • Honestly I"d sort of expect this for any of the higher fidelity aircraft. I dont notice any issues but I do have a 5900x on open loop cooling and ultrafast ram.



  • Unfortunately, on my system the performance issues are noticable. I understand that my CPU and RAM (16@3200) are only (below) average, but even the Working Title CJ4 mod has a better performance (I've just tried).

    But yeah, I have actually no idea about the systems modeled and how demanding they are. I only know that the flight model is pretty good.

    Yet it would be nice if JF tried to optimize the CPU performance in future updates. Maybe it will become possible when Asobo improves their SDK.


  • JF Staff

    Unfortunately, Third Party aircraft cannot be compared in anywhere to basic aircraft in MSFS, Third part aircraft will contain a lot more custom code and generally more realistic than anything from the base sim, meaning that it will use more resources than anything from the base sim.



  • I have found the solution. It’s right in the manual.

    I suspected the EFB and all the GPS modules running in the background (at the same time) could affect the CPU. But turning off the EFB using the I/Com switch did not help, because it does not actually turn it off, it only makes it invisible. However, the EFB can be switched off by using the physical ‘Home’ button, located on its right bezel (as correctly described in the manual):

    Home Button (2).png

    FPS CPU TEST (w/ lowest graphics settings):
    EFB On:
    33d849c6-6dc7-4fb0-8b95-3a31f95ef57f-image.png
    EFB Off:
    66a6b5f4-a662-4947-a028-998ee7428e6b-image.png
    5b8343a7-aad6-4919-ac79-dbd165fb08cf-image.png



  • I have noticed this as well. In fact, I have to stay away from high density areas and airports in order to keep my frame rate at a flyable level.

    Obviously some impact on the performance is expected with this addon compared to the default equivalents, but I get worse fps with this addon than I get with the FBW A32NX and the WT CJ4. Those aircraft are way more complex than the Pa-28 which brings me to believe there's something else going on here.

    My theory is that they accidentally released a debug build. They are compiled with debug flags and no optimization flags which would explain the performance issue.



  • @Ohmsquare

    Fantastic find, thank you!!!



  • I only see a 1 FPS increase turning the EFB off.



  • It makes no difference for me. I'm guessing that's because I have a 5900X so plenty of spare CPU capacity while the GTX980 is maxed out.



  • Yep, the FPS increase will only be visible if you're CPU bound since it basically only affects the CPU load.

    @Craig said in JF PA-28 Arrow CPU Heavy?:

    Unfortunately, Third Party aircraft cannot be compared in anywhere to basic aircraft in MSFS, Third part aircraft will contain a lot more custom code and generally more realistic than anything from the base sim, meaning that it will use more resources than anything from the base sim.

    Well this is a bold statement if even a complex airliner which definitely has more lines of code and logic and screens has less FPS impact.

    The EFB with it's static display eating so much CPU power is simply unoptimized and should be fixed. There is no reason that the EFB alone (the rest of the logic is still working fine while the EFB is off!) costs so much performance.