Simviation Forums

I wanna know if i locked the frame rate in 25-30 fps, is it better than Unlimited? Coz in this game doesnt need more than 30 FPS, this can affect the improvemente of game?

Thanks!

It's generally regarded that the human eye can't detect any difference over approx 25-30fps or thereabouts, this is why most people lock the FPS around this level. No point in wasting resources chasing frame rates that you don't notice.

Cheers,

TSC.

This is a subject with different views some say locking the frame rate is better while others say leave it unlocked and set it to unlimited.
There is no one single answer here as it is a system to system issue. About all you can do is to try it unlocked and see how it effects your system. If you see a slow down or stuttering frames then you will need to lock it.
According to what I have read if you leave it unlocked your system will do everything it can do try to reach the max limit it can but doing this can cause the CPU to slow down as it is being overworked trying to reach a goal that it can not reach. The other fact is the human eye can only detect so much so anything past that is not even detected. What I did was to unlock the frame rates load up a high detail aircraft at a complex airport with the worst weather I can generate. Checked the frame rates and than locked the rates just below the highest number I saw. So if it was maxing out at 35 I locked it to 30

I lock my frame rate at 25 and max out all my sliders.  I works very well for me.

Tell you what, in FS9 I've always found myself better locking my framerate (currently at 22), while in FS2002 (like in FSX), trying to keep the lock at other than unlimited cut down severely on both framerate and fluidity. I guess you better try for yourself and see what's better for you and your sim.

This is a subject with different views some say locking the frame rate is better while others say leave it unlocked and set it to unlimited.
There is no one single answer here as it is a system to system issue.

I think the best answerrs to this are likely given by NickN.  If I am remembering correctly, he says "lock it".  The exact VALUE of the lock is based on the system.... but it is still very "low" (in the 20-25 range, if I remember.)

This allows resouirces to be given to processing the complex flight and AI position calculations.


Hopefully he'll chime in here.

best,

...................john

I find that if I don't lock the framerate I experience the "Blurries", and my scenery looks awful after a while (This  problemgot seriously worse when I installed ultimate Terrain, which gives more scenery detail). I keep mine locked at 30 now, and that prevents any scenery detail issues.

I find locking at 25 is best. The reason is you can't perceive faster than that (which is why TV and movies play at this speed) and you don't waste system resources

There are people who will tell you unlimited is best. The reason is not because they know what they are talking about but because their system falls under certain criteria and they dont know it...


1. Photoreal scenery is the bulk of what is being displayed

2. Certain hypertransport Intel motherboards


Steve Lacey who was a FS9 dev explained part of it in his blog...

In FS9, lower resolution (but geographically larger) tiles of photographic scenery take a disproportionately long time to build compared with the higher resolution (but geographically smaller) tiles. When you cross a lower resolution tile boundary, requests for new low resolution tiles block the texture production queue and delay processing of the higher resolution tiles as, in FS9, the tiles are produced serially (first in, first out).

This goes back to the "give the fiber system more time" issue.

Using "unlimited" may work for you in most cases, but you're now hitting a trade off when sometimes, the fiber system may need a lot more time to do it's work. By starving it when the terrain system needs to build those large low resolution tiles, the processing of the high resolution tiles gets delayed until finally they're processed and they all pop in.

Theoretically speaking, pushing out the LOD radius may help on high performance systems, but I've not tested this directly to find out.

There are a few other conditions that may also make "unlimited' a better choice but it is a rare thing to find those conditions. Probably less that 30% of all users may meet the criteria and out of that 30, only a very small % ALWAYS run the sim in areas where the setting would mean a 100% advantage.


Very few see this magic-bullet setting of "unlimited" as a way of enhancing the sim performance but that is why you will see a few people post 'unlimited' as the best setting to use. They dont know why it works and usually they hang around in certain areas of the world with scenery they have added. If they were to fly in an area that did not present the right conditions they would see the downfall to that setting.

I remember there was someone a year or so back that got downright nasty with me about how unlimited was better than locked.. about 2 months later they started posting how their sim had changed and it was not as smooth as it was. My first question was "Are you flying somewhere other than you normally do?" and told him to lock the frame rate at 24. I got the same argument.

Apparently he locked the frame counter and tested the difference in the old and new flying areas. Needless to say he learned his argument of running unlimited was specific to his system and where he was flying in the world.



I always advise to start at a frame lock the card and system should be able to handle. For slower cards, 20-22 for decent cards 24-28, thats it.. no more


I kept a very overclocked 7900GTX 512 locked at 24 in FS9

There is no reason to run it any higher is the sim is smooth. If there are minor stutters or other banking micro stutters, sometimes raising the frame lock 2 or 3 above 24 can smooth it out. Sometimes you have to drop a frame or 2. Its a matter of fine tuning but I have seen a PROPERLY set up system need more than 28. If it does the sim is out of balance and somewhere along the line other issues will creep in. The person simply refuses to believe the other issues are as important as keeping the frame lock in the low to mid 30s or higher. They would rather live with the distance blurs or other problems setting a high frame lock causes than admit there is no difference between 24 and 34 frames on a sim AND system that is set up correctly.


And I find very few set a system and a sim up right to begin with

I have tried to explain to quite a few hard headed people about frame rate and the human eye. There are those who will argue the issue till they are blue in the face and tell you they can see the difference.

I do not doubt they can see the difference because the problem is THEIR MACHINE and because of that, -they are correct- in what they say.. they just dont know why they are correct THEIR system looks (keyword "looks" .. looks can be wrong) better at 38-40 frames than 24-28 in MSFS.

It's not they are right, it's their system is messed up and they dont know or understand it, just hard headed and will argue they know better.


Here is why:

There is a difference between frame rate and

Once again NickN proves.... "He da' man!"  

Thanks for the "graphic" Nick.  Great description.

best,

....................john

I would like to point out there is one situation that is an exception to what I posted above... SLi and Crossfire


You do not want to run 24-28 frames in either because there is a hardware factor in play. At 24-28 you are throttling your cards. Without going into the technical reasons, the best way to explain it is to say that 24-28 is being 'split' (sort of) and the sim will throttle the hardware instead of allowing it to do its job. In the case of SLi or Crossfire, you have to experiment a bit more but usually you will find the lock around 35-45FPS. The sim runs much better at higher frame lock and higher resolutions/AA with SLi and Crossfire.

Great posts made by Nick N, thanks due...So now i'll lock in 20-22. Coz my system is a middle term...
See u later!!

Great posts made by Nick N, thanks due...So now i'll lock in 20-22. Coz my system is a middle term...
See u later!!

For FS9 your system is very high quality. For FSX your system is medium-low and would probably be locked at 17-18FPS max


In FS9 I would lock at 24 on yours and perhaps test at 26-28 with a few flights


I saw miltestpilot posted a set FS9.cfg settings for you and how to set up the sim in another thread and those settings are what I would work with and a 24-26FPS lock, but remember... its ALL ABOUT WHAT IS SMOOTH ON YOUR SCREEN, and NOT what I or anyone else says to set it to.

If you followed his instructions TO THE LETTER in that post, AND assuming your system is not all bogged down with startup junk, FS9 should run exceptionally well on your hardware. Better than most.


If you are not aware of how to set up Windows and your system for maximun results.. read here:

http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2 ... 3;start=#5


Do not skip any steps and do not substitute O&O Defrag professional (payware) for any other product.


Do NOT skip a single step in the 2 posts from that thread, exception: You CAN skip the use of Registry Mechanic but NOTHING ELSE.


Also, for WindowsXP and dual core processor make sure you also do this:

http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2 ... 795837/0#0


NOTE: What I posted is ONLY for Windows XP x32 and x64. VISTA users, DO NOT USE THAT LIST. I will post one for Vista after I get finished testing a complete performance setup routine and make sure all is in order for anyone to use.

I haven't already did that you said, but the scenery in my FS9 is very horrible...
like the buildings are moving with little points, and the terrain too, blurry too
just the aircraft is good...

Soon, I'll send a few screeshots for you see the problem, and make a new topic in it!

i'll try the settings that the guy said, so I'll see that what gone get!!
thanks!!