Settings for 100+ fps in FSX?

[IanHenry]

I recently found this article on the Aerosoft site so I tried Mathijs's setting as an experiment
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o> </o>
http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=30796&st=0
<o> </o>
With those setting I got frame rates of 100+! I know that those settings are probably not sufficient for most people as they are but I found it very interesting to use them as a starting point and then start tweaking them to see what I could come up with. I have so far found that I can get 70-75 fps at the default <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" /><st1lace w:st="on"><st1laceName w:st="on">Friday</st1laceName> <st1laceType w:st="on">Harbour</st1laceType></st1lace> using the Aerosoft Beaver, REX2, FEX, and UTX. My system is:
<o> </o>
Windows 7 -64 Bit
Intel i7 920 2.66Ghz CPU
12Gb Corsair TR3 1600Mhz Memory
Ge-Force GTX 285 <o></o>
<o> </o>
I found this a very worthwhile experiment. If you do decide to 'have a go' don't forget to save your current settings, just in case you want to go back to them!<o></o>
<o> </o>
Regards,<o></o>
Ian.
<o> </o>

 

[IanHenry]

PS there is no overclocking on the computer!

Ian.

 

[falcon409]

I've always found Mathijs a pretty straight up guy and worked with him while he was still the Lago Guru (and that goes back quite a bit), so I was interested in this to be sure.

I think what he proposes is interesting and workable, but I wonder by whom? He does a lot of experimenting with both aircraft and scenery, after all, that's his business and so what he talks about in his setup is an excellent idea for anyone who wants to fly in a specific area, over and over again, or even a few different scenarios, but on a regular basis. So you set all your sliders to get the most out of that specific setup for that area you'll fly and that, presumably will get you max performance.

I would have to have a hundred different profiles saved to get any benefit from what he talks about and that just seems silly to me. I never fly the same terrain, the same area of the country when I load up FSX, I just fly. . .one minute I could be over the mountains and the next I could switch to an Island in the pacific and then before I close everything out, I could be over the North African desert. All of those, based on his settings would require that I switch profiles to get the very best FPS.

I think, as I said, that his idea has a lot of merit and I'm not saying it's bunk and don't bother, but it seems that the system he uses was born out of what he does for a living. . .he tests software. So if he plans on releasing a new airport in the Alps, he sets his FSX settings to maximize that area and then every day, for months, he flies that same area, tweaking, making notes, tweaking some more and so on until the product is the very best he and his team can produce. For that type of flying, he has a great idea. But for the random flyer. . .I'm not so sure.:salute:

 

[IanHenry]

Hi Falcon,
I certainly wouldn't want to keep changing my setting to suit what or where I'm flying, but I think Mathijs's settings make a good starting point.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
I altered them as follows;<o></o>
<o> </o>
Graphics<o></o>
Target Frame rate-Unlimited<o></o>
DirectX 10<o></o>
Lens Flare<o></o>
Light Bloom<o></o>
Advanced animations<o></o>
Aircraft<o></o>
Aircraft casts shadows on the ground-off<o></o>
Aircraft casts shadows on itself-off<o></o>
Aircraft landing lights illuminate ground-on<o></o>
Scenery<o></o>
Level of detail radius-Large<o></o>
Mesh complexity-81<o></o>
Mesh resolution-2M<o></o>
Texture resolution-15cm<o></o>
Water effects-Low2X<o></o>
Scenery complexity-Extremely dense<o></o>
Autogen- Dense<o></o>
Ground scenery shadows-off<o></o>
Weather<o></o>
Cloud draw distance-60 miles<o></o>
Thermal visualization-none<o></o>
Rate at which weather changes over time-Medium<o></o>
Detailed clouds<o></o>
Cloud coverage density-Maximum<o></o>
Traffic<o></o>
Airline traffic density - 50%<o></o>
General aviation traffic density - 75%<o></o>
Airport vehicle density-minimum<o></o>
Road vehicles - 25%<o></o>
Ships and ferries - 30%<o></o>
Leisure boats - 30%
<o> </o>
It's with those settings that I managed 70-75 fps at <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" /><st1lace w:st="on"><st1laceName w:st="on">Friday</st1laceName> <st1laceType w:st="on">Harbour</st1laceType></st1lace> ( I'm sure Microsoft made that the default flight for a good reason). I know that those figures will fall depending upon aircraft/location and when I use Active Sky Advanced for my weather but I was just experimenting. I also believe that anything above 25 fps is irrelevant, smooth stutter free flight is of far more importance .
<o> </o>
Regards,
Ian.

 

[falcon409]

Hi Falcon,
I certainly wouldn't want to keep changing my setting to suit what or where I'm flying, but I think Mathijs's settings make a good starting point.<o></o>. . . . . . . . . .It's with those settings that I managed 70-75 fps at <st1lace w:st="on"><st1lacename w:st="on">Friday</st1lacename> <st1lacetype w:st="on">Harbour</st1lacetype></st1lace> ( I'm sure Microsoft made that the default flight for a good reason). I know that those figures will fall depending upon aircraft/location and when I use Active Sky Advanced for my weather but I was just experimenting. I also believe that anything above 25 fps is irrelevant, smooth stutter free flight is of far more importance .
<o></o>
Regards,
Ian.

Yep, right on many levels Ian, especially the "above 25fps". I've always felt that folks who talked about how they were able to get constant 50, 60 and above fps were sort of missing the point, which is "smooth, stutter free" flight. If I can accomplish that at 18 to 25fps, then continuing to try to break the 50fps barrier was kind of useless, since it's generally accepted that the human eye is unable to discern minute movements above 20 to 25fps anyway.

Mathijs's concept is definitely a good starting point.

 

[cheezyflier]

if i could get 30 fps, i would be seeing a 30%-50% boost.
i'm normally bouncing between 12-20 fps

 

[harleyman]

I can get those frames too on a very small underpowered box..

Now add some sceneries, weather, and fly somewhere besides the default start location and you begin to see that frames now fluctuite so badly that its not as good, as when it drops, its far below where you used to set and lock at..


Your eye can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 frames..but your hardware sure can , and will act up and stutter, ans never get 100% smooth and stable..

Thats just my opinion though...LOL

 

[spotlope]

Mathijs's post makes a strong case for the Orbx FSX Go utility. Using it, you could quite easily have a whole pile of different configs for various kinds of flying, and switch between them with a click.

 

[d0mokun]

For a laugh, I just enabled DX10 mode- and, well: wow.

I went from 25-30fps at Dillingham to 60-70fps, without a dodgy runway too.

Huzzah!

 

[dhl1986]

Interesting write up, but setting frames to unlimited is a bad idea, and has always done nothing for me but create stutters so bad I no longer want to play the sim...

Locked framerates are the way to go. I personally use 22 FPS, which is very smooth. Your computer will use the saved processing power to render further ahead, which eliminates almost all stutter.

 

[IanHenry]

Also with DX10 you can use Light bloom without it effecting your frame rate. I quit like running with DX10.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
<o> </o>
Ian.<o></o>
<o> </o>

 

[EgoR64]

Interesting, Looks like basic In game Settings -

My System Almost matches yours minus the 6GB of Memory - I keep my FPS locked at 20, only because latley, I'm into the Tubes at Big Airports, I like lots of traffic, I usually keep the big birds around 50% and GA around 20% with DX10 Turned on, Anything above that with Traffic Goes into the teens with Stutters at Major Airports, Normal I guess for FSX.

I'm getting closer to my FSX Happy place, I need some Tweezers..........

Cheers -

 

[Bjoern]

Anything above that with Traffic Goes into the teens with Stutters at Major Airports, Normal I guess for FSX.

Teens yes, stutters actually no.


Someone needs to convert the models used by WOAI for FSX use. Portover sceneries and aircraft are eating frames like there's no tomorrow.

 

[EgoR64]

:ernae:

Hmm, It does for me, I just got the Orbx FSX to Go - Can't Pass up under 9 smacks - looks like it covers all Config in FSX.CFG File -

Will Check it out -

 

[anthony31]

Your eye can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 frames..but your hardware sure can , and will act up and stutter, ans never get 100% smooth and stable..

Thats just my opinion though...LOL

I know scientists have tested this and that we shouldn't be able to tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps but I would add a small acveat to this. I can get FS9 running pretty consistently at 60 fps and on a computer with a LCD monitor refresh rate of 60Hz it just looks "better" than if I run FS9 loacked at 30fps.

I imagine it's probably got less to do with the framerates and how my eyes perceive them and more to do with the display hardware as at 60fps the image just looks more "solid" if I can use that term.

Regarding FSX my main problem (like many) is the stutters. I have to run FSX at 30-40 fps with a locked framerate to get anything bearable (and yes I've tried the FPS limiter program but had mixed results with it). In an ideal world I would love to run FSX at 60fps but then in an ideal world I would love to wake up next to Cameron Diaz. Oh well, one day maybe

Of course everyone seems to have different results depending on the particular way their system is set up.

 

[harleyman]

FSx was coded badly by M$ to begin with..

It will run as different as night and day on the same specked computers...

Tested it, seen it first hand....

I build many computers for FSX..

Best I have seen that takes NO tweaking other than the TBM set is..

DDR3 MoBo

Q9550 or Q9650

DDR3 memory (dual Channel)

ATI 4890 and up

Both quads OCed to 3.4 - 3.6


Set the TBW to 10 to start...Toss in the weather, sceneries, heavies, lock it at 35 and have at it..

It will show a drop at heavy places , with traffic, and full on weather.. but it stills runs smooth with dense to very dense settings ..Traffics at 50..Yada yada yada


All the boxes I build for FSX is preload FSX and set it up and test...


I have spent months and months setting up and tweaking FSX...

I can bnow set it up in less than 5 minutes...And never touch it again...


I also fine FSX to set up easier on a socket 775 over an X58 i7..

 

[falcon409]

. . . . .I have to run FSX at 30-40 fps with a locked framerate to get anything bearable. . . . .

I'm having a laugh with this at your expense Anthony and I apologize in advance for that. Do you know how many folks running FSX right now would give anything to actually get that kind of performance?, lol.

When I read that it was like. . .yea, here I am stuck with only 30 to 40fps, lol. By the way. . .I'm one of those that would "love" to get only 30 to 40. . .I run unlimited and in a relatively active area (with a fair amount of autogen and land traffic) I might get 17 or 18fps, out in the desert I can knock down a respectable 25fps, lol (tops).

 

[nio]

Thanks, Ian, for this tip.

My FPS have improved, even when flying in my "backyard".

best

nio

 

[Dimus]

It is a well known fact that using DX10 will improve the performance. This is mainly due to a reduced setting for AA that DX10 uses. However, even if someone solved the flickering runway issue for all airports (I know you can manually edit one by one) you can not use higher AA settings to fight the shimmering trees.

I have been using DX10 until I discovered NickN's guide for FSX in DX9 and Nhancer and never went back. I might however retry DX10 and Mathij's settings and have it as an alternate config. Thanks Ian!

 

[grunau_baby]

I tried Mathijs´s settings and well, I had an enormous fps increase, BUT I don´t like the looks!!! That´s my very personal point: if it doesn´t stutter it´s allright!!! DX10 increases the fps, but the default runway-flickering is unbearable for me, so that´s a no go!

I optimized my settings for DX9 and for suiting my wish for eyecandy and smooth flight. After experimenting for ages now I pretty much found my own profile. The only thing I change for specific flight situations is traffic or water. I don´t want to spent more time changing settings than flying!

But still his suggestions work fine and might sure be great for people with real fps problems! I just don´t like the look and feel, but that´s just me...

Alex