plainsman

KBKX to KSTL. Brookings SD to St Louis MO. After SU6

I started the update at 6:24 CST and was complete by 6:49 CST. I had completed a short flight from Phillipsburg to Rooks County in the Diamond 40 by 7:13.

After you start the sim, go to Options then General settings. I have marked with orange arrows things you can change that might lower your GPU workload, and may not change your visual a lot. You don't say what monitor resolution you are running? That makes a big difference! There are better ways to set a frame rate limit, but since you say you don't understand a lot about your PC, I have made it simple.; Ooops, I forgot to mark the first Render Scaling option. That should have an orange arrow as well. Once you have set all the options you must save them to have effect. Note the settings behind the orange arrows are not what I run. I have lowered them to suggested settings for you to try. I also lowered render scaling which i forgot to mark.

In 1967, I was at the University.

I suspect the servers are just temporarily down in your area. With the Windows 11 rollout, it seems the servers are taxed right now. I had a few short dropouts on a flight yesterday. I would try again, they didn't stay down for very long here, just 20 seconds or so.

Post away!

KPHG to KFMZ

Actually, I don't think it is as cheap right now to build from parts. In order to run MSFS, you need substantial GPU processing power, even at 1080p. On Newegg, a RX 5500xt is about $800, a GTX 1660ti about $900, and even an outdated GTX 1070 is almost $600. Companies that have bulk access to GPUs can at the moment, sell the whole thing cheaper than you could buy the parts. The reason I like AVA Direct, is they custom build from a VAST selection of options, which are all standard parts that allow upgrade ability.

In a prebuilt from Amazon, this is about the minimum machine to run MSFS at 1080p on intermediate settings (a mix of medium and high). https://www.amazon.com/dp/B096ZL68SY/ref=sspa_dk_detail_4?pd_rd_i=B096ZN4L1G&pd_rd_w=3Pq1W&pf_rd_p=9fd3ea7c-b77c-42ac-b43b-c872d3f37c38&pd_rd_wg=fSWCq&pf_rd_r=DYV487P8XZ5BAM0WBAKF&pd_rd_r=49b790fb-377c-43c2-8902-d124246799a6&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUEyRFNNOUVJRlg0QUpQJmVuY3J5cHRlZElkPUEwODUzMzQxMkw1VFY0VVEzU1JWMSZlbmNyeXB0ZWRBZElkPUEwMjEyNzEzMjRNQU1WMlNUQktHViZ3aWRnZXROYW1lPXNwX2RldGFpbCZhY3Rpb249Y2xpY2tSZWRpcmVjdCZkb05vdExvZ0NsaWNrPXRydWU&th=1 If I had $1400 and some patience, I would highly recommend: https://www.avadirect.com/

I would not recommend any of these units to run MSFS. In reverse order, the bottom unit (Lenovo) has sufficient CPU and GPU to run 1080p, but the SSD is too small and the big HDD won't work well with MSFS. The middle system (Dell) has a marginal CPU but the GPU is way below the specs needed to run MSFS. The top system (MSI) has a slow CPU (They really don't give enough info??), a good GPU, but only a 512 GB SSD and a big HDD. You could just get by with the 512 GB SSD but if the updates get larger, you won't have much room for the expansion. In addition, it seems to use some nonstandard components which may be cutting corners??

As to thee performance of he RX 6600XT, it should exceed the scores for the RX 5700 by about 5-10%, and be very competitive with the RTX 2060S. You can look at the test chart I posted in the other link, to see how that relates to fps at 1440p (I would expect 55/46 or better on the chart). I do think the stock PSU is going to be a very bad choice. Cheap PSUs typically have even less power at the +12V rail. They also tend to be a little more "dirty" in the smoothness of the power delivered. I would recommend this as the lower end of appropriate PSUs: Antec High Current Gamer Series HCG650 Gold I bought an Antec 850W Gold back in about 2009-2010, and my grandson is still running it.

The components you specify are fine, but will it have sufficient cooling capability?? It will likely work fine??

Thunder Bay to Billings. CYQT to KBIL.

If you have live traffic, the CPU will be working hard to position all the aircraft in the area, while the GPU does little to aid the process. Also, live weather might cause some of this. Try disabling live traffic ans live weather and see if it occurs?

The Upper Peninsula of Michigan.

We can't be of much assistance if you don't post your system components. If you don't know much about the system, this might help. Just get the free version, it wi9ll tell you essentially everything you need to specify. https://www.ccleaner.com/speccy/download BTW, FSX Steam Edition wi9ll I believe run fine in Windows 10. Actually the boxed version runs also, but you need a bit of computer knowledge to get it to work. I think the Steam Edition is pretty straight forward.

What is your traffic setting? The traffic is a huge processing load. As you fly, more traffic enters the calculations.

It sounds like the problem with 3600 MHz ram is fixed in the updates. The performance difference between 3600 and 3200 isn't going to be a large amount, so if you want to be conservative the 3200 MHz won't hamstring you.

I suspect it is everyone rushing to upgrade to Windows 11. I don't plan to rush on the upgrade.

St Cloud Regional to Des Moines

I don't find a test of the Rx 560 on MSFS, but using the userbenchmark comparison, the Rx 560 will get about 75% of the fps of a Rx 570. Thus, the scores above would be ~21 and ~18.5 fps. You would improve a bit at low settings, but still probably below 30 fps. Therefore your freesync will be useless as you can't reach 48 fps on minimal settings. I do think these results may be too low for the latest update, but you will still likely be below 48 fps. Also note, these scores are for a normal wide 1440p, not a wide screen. That will lower the scores on a wide screen substantially below the ones shown above.

Here is the performance of the RX 570 with 8GB vram. Note this is straight 1440, not a wide screen.

I have the same issue, I have photogrammetry turned on, and stuttering on the ground. Like you, it only started after SU5.

Pellston, MI to Rice Lake, WI. KPLN to KRPD.

The reason I went with 3200 speed ram, is that according to some early testing with MSFS, I think it was in Tom's hardware, 3200 speed ram was the optimum, and they encountered some problems at 3600. I don't know if that still holds true?? It wasn't a MB issue, it was MSFS software related. That may have been addressed in updates?