Video on weak PC

Every video I've seen of FS2020 so far has clearly been conducted on a hugely powerful, top-spec PC, which is great for showing what the game is ultimately capable of.

However... lots of us are going to be running it on more mediocre machines, nearer to the minimum specifications. What would be really great would be a demo of how well the game runs on a weak machine with the minimum specs, showing its performance at the most basic graphics settings and then what happens as you gradually ramp them up.

This would be very useful from the perspective of those of us who are considering upgrading our hardware, but don't know if it's worth buying the game anyway before doing that - or whether the performance is so bad even on minimum settings that it's sensible to wait for better hardware before buying the game.

Has anyone conducted this kind of test?

You haven't stated what rig you have, so perhaps the minimum specs listed here would help:

 

https://flightsimulator.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360013463459-Minimum-Recommended-and-Ideal-PC-Specifications-for-Microsoft-Flight-Simulator

 

Perhaps the most challenging bit for many will be the bandwidth requirement, though it will also run with reduced textures with poor internet access.

You haven't stated what rig you have, so perhaps the minimum specs listed here would help:

 

https://flightsimulator.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360013463459-Minimum-Recommended-and-Ideal-PC-Specifications-for-Microsoft-Flight-Simulator

 

Perhaps the most challenging bit for many will be the bandwidth requirement, though it will also run with reduced textures with poor internet access.

 

Did you read my post?

I think the problem in assessing your situation, is that there are so many variables in determining satisfactory performance. For example, you could have a processor and video card that would run the program successfully, but not have sufficient memory or lack a good internet speed?? If you are slightly above the minimum specs, you will need to try it with what you have, then decide if you are needing to upgrade right away.

I think the problem in assessing your situation, is that there are so many variables in determining satisfactory performance. For example, you could have a processor and video card that would run the program successfully, but not have sufficient memory or lack a good internet speed?? If you are slightly above the minimum specs, you will need to try it with what you have, then decide if you are needing to upgrade right away.

 

I understand that. I'm talking about the minimum specs as referred to by Microsoft, which covers things like processor power, system RAM, graphics memory etc. Get a computer that at least approximates those specs to do a test on, and put a video up showing what it's like. I'm aware that the separate components cannot be entirely separated in terms of contribution to performance, but it would be helpful for someone whose specs are close to what's given. For example, someone with a computer with close to the minimum specs but with a much more powerful CPU could reasonably guess that they'd see better than minimum performance. Nobody is asking for an exact framerate count to be predicted or anything, just ballpark.

Or does nobody have ANY curiosity for how FS2020 will run on anything less than a top-whack machine?

I agree it would be an excellent idea, but I suspect this won’t happen until the sim is released. I would think most of the youtubers posting the videos will have high spec machines and of course the beta testers can’t do it because of the NDA

 

Regards

Steve

Here is a video with a guy running a RTX2060 super and a mid range AMD.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz-I_9v-PMc

Another video tested a GTX 1060 with I5-8400 running high (not ultra) settings at 1080p getting ~35 fps.

Edited August 1, 2020 by plainsman

Every video I've seen of FS2020 so far has clearly been conducted on a hugely powerful, top-spec PC, which is great for showing what the game is ultimately capable of.

However... lots of us are going to be running it on more mediocre machines, nearer to the minimum specifications. What would be really great would be a demo of how well the game runs on a weak machine with the minimum specs, showing its performance at the most basic graphics settings and then what happens as you gradually ramp them up.

This would be very useful from the perspective of those of us who are considering upgrading our hardware, but don't know if it's worth buying the game anyway before doing that - or whether the performance is so bad even on minimum settings that it's sensible to wait for better hardware before buying the game.

Has anyone conducted this kind of test?

 

VRAM the rest is the rest...but as much VRAM as you van afford

 

in previous sim was "processor cpu"...not anymore

 

4 letter VRAm

Dearie me, was it them funny mushrooms? Apologies, my bad.

Actually, the processor vs GPU load shifts dramatically depending on what resolution you are running according to the video doing testing of different settings, resolutions and processors/GPUs.

Eeverything depends on everything

you cannot go for a lot of ram if you dont have the latest motherboard, and so on...ssd, monitor frequency, resolution, proc etc

 

he ask what would be the main priority to look at (of course tending to have a better quality sim, if not stay with fsx)

 

so my two cents is VRAM...RTX card but GTX will do also

Thank you Plainsman for your link.

Kapitan, I wasn't asking what would be the main priority in terms of performance affect. I was curious to see what the whole combined low spec definition from Microsoft looked like. However, as others have indicated, it's a self selecting sample at the moment with the only flyers generally being those with nuclear powered gaming rigs.

And I can't stay with FSX because I'm one of those Windows 10 users who can't make it function. So for me at the moment, even FS2020 on its lowest settings with a poor frame rate is likely to be an improvement.

I suspect you will be able to run at medium setting, which looked much better on the test video (I lost that link, sorry), than FSX. The low setting looked a lot like FSX or FS9 at higher settings, so if you stay at 1080p or 720 you probably will be happy. The test suggested the real need for massive processing power, came at 1440 and 4K resolutions, huge drops in frame rates to run at those resolutions with the weaker cards and processors tested. All the videos using less powerful systems were using early alpha versions, and several mentioned that the developer expected to get significant improvememnt with optimization that was still on going. By the time it is released, it may be more efficient for weaker systems? The tests did note a significant advantage to Intel processors at the point of the test, but mentioned that AMD optimization was not as far along but could improve by release. Edited August 2, 2020 by plainsman

I have actually found a video now that does some comparison with different settings on lower end specs.

Yes, that is the one I was referencing. Thank you!

How about getting the xbox game pass for pc (beta) and see how it works? Also ther's a special offer for $1 or £1 for a month. That's what I'm going to do Edited August 3, 2020 by roypaglia

Obsidian Ant has now put up a video showing exactly what happens on a low spec PC, which is pretty enlightening.