I think with that CPU and GPU you are even below their demanded minimum specs.



Minimum systemrequirements

You will be able to install and run FS2020 when your system meets the minimal requirements set by Microsoft. Please note that Flight Simulator won't look at superb as it looks like in the movies published by Microsoft, as they used an ideal system for this.

• CPU: AMD Ryzen 3 1200, or Intel i5-4460
• GPU: Radeon RX 570, or Nvidia GTX 700
• VRAM: 2 GB
• RAM: 8 GB
• HDD: 150 GB
• Internetspeed: 5 Mbps (0.6 MB/s)

Recommended systemrequirements

Do you want a smooth Flight Simulator 2020 experience? If average graphics are good enough for you you need at least the speciaifcations below for your computer.

• CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 1500X, or Intel i5-8400
• GPU: Radeon RX 590, or Nvidia GTX 970
• VRAM: 4 GB
• RAM: 16 GB
• HDD: 150 GB
• Internetspeed: 20 Mbps (2.5 MB/s)

Ideal systemrequirements

Do you want to get the most out of Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 and would you like to be stunned by all details this new Flightsim has to offer, including its breathtaking sceneries? Then you do need a heavy PC, including fast internet connection.

• CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 2700X, or Intel i7-9800X
• GPU: Radeon VII, or Nvidia RTX 2080
• VRAM: 8 GB
• RAM: 32 GB
• HDD: 150 GB SSD
• Internetspeed: 50 Mbps (6.3 MB/s)

And minding everybody, these are only the officially advertised specs.

A need for 32 GB RAM I have not seen so far, however. Even when testing the sim in ultra settings for short time, RAM consummation always was signficantly below even 50% of those 32 GB I have.


FS20 is not even the biggest heap of code on my HD, btw. It is 100+1GB. But the full pack of Dirt Rally 2 counts even 109 GB (I wonder why, tbh, its a good and good-looking simögamne, but what takes this ammount of data is a bit beyond me). Assetto cordsa Classic leads the parade with 114 GB, but that is due to a million car, skin and track mods I have collected and installed. Call of the Wild: 56 GB. Raceroom (all content): 42 GB. Wreckfest: 24 GB.

Just an idea. Older versions of FS had mods featuring cars: follow-me cars, police cars, well - cars, like tin boxes with four wheels and an engine.

In Google Earth it does not work well trying to skim directly on the ground and then moving through the streets, the way Earth models threedimensional objects like houses and trees differs very much from the way such structures are featured in FS20. Trees and unrealistically connected structures will obstruct your path time and again, in practically every urban street with trees in it. Or vehicles, growing out of the tarmac like geological monolithes. But in FS20's world, it could work better. A good car mod with not super-realstic physical finesse, just the basics: gas and brake pedals, steering wheel control, no hysterical car behaviour, and then navigating through the road grid of cities you know - I would like to try that!


Like rolling off the airfield in a very tiny plane, and into town.

This is the VR headset that will get VR support first this autumn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AKrCKZtrgc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HGxh_K5jMM

I compared the resolution to my Oculus Rift.

The Oculus has 1280x 800 per eye

The G2 has 2160x2160 per eye.


The Rift has a FOV of "slightly more than 90°"

The G2 has a FOV of 98°

I want it. I need it. I must have it. Get out of my way to it, or die! :D

I race a lot, and exyclusively in VR. This will benefit from a G2 as well. 90HZ is perfectly enough, the Rift runs on 90Hz as well. If now Google Earth runs on this hardware, too the buying is almost decided, but Google Earth VR is a must. The pixel resolution per eye is 4.5 times higher, I did not know they were this far already. And no tracking cameras needed anymore (consume two USB slots). And Oculus Facebook account and their highly intrusive Oculus software not needed anymore.


P.S. Maybe I keep my head and wait anc check how tmy old Rift will work in FS20, specs-wise. If it kills the rig sanyway, there is no reason to go for the G2. But one can dream, can't you...

Some very good tutorials especially useful for managing the glass cockpits and how to properly plan according to IFR rules. But also some more.


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGW...ZO65heQ/videos




https://i.postimg.cc/SRZjxFfh/Screenshot-7.png
Over the Berlin Grunewald, flying south. On the left rim the southern tip of the Schlechtensee (=Battle Lake :) ), then the basin of the Wannsee and the Pfaueninsel, behind that at a distance Schloßpark Glienicke, on the right side the river Havel, and the land on the right rim is Kladow and Gatow. On clearer days you could see Potsdam from this position.


No more linear artificial render distance limits. No more razor sharpo horizons. I love it. Room temp is down over here, and my system temps at high vary between 70 and high 80s, the latter as spikes, usually it is in the high 70s with small GA planes. I still have not touched the airliners.

I compared both my CPU model and the i5-4460 in Intel's site and they seemed to be quite comparable in features and frequencies, etc. But it's on the edge so I'm not going to bother trying.

One indeed doe snto want mere min imum specs for hardware-killing sims like this. At low settings it looks significantly inferior, wehreas, middle an d high and ultimate settings all are acceptable. And even low settings at minimum specs does not sound tempting. you probably choose correctly not to go after it.


-------


Another tutorial recommendation, on camera setups. The system allows enormous versatility but can be anti-intuitive and very complex.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTUFA33wIEM




Somewhere over the Dutch coast, on my way from Amsterdam to Calais.

https://i.postimg.cc/7Y0cRfz8/Screenshot-14.png




https://i.postimg.cc/MT1Vw2mT/Screenshot-16.png

This is a website for free IFR flight planning. It costs no monthly fees like severla others. Som weof thes ecommercial onlöine products really are expensive, imo. I mean, we are talkign about a game planning tool, not real life needs.


Skyvector has a nice map and interface.



https://skyvector.com/


For saving files, you need to create an account, but the printout of the navlog with all course data and waypoints and frequencies can be printed any time. It serves you good compared to the default planning toy that FS once again is equiopped with as default. Thei8r included flight plannign toys always have been just, well, toys.



I hope that Aerosoft Flight Commander will see a new incarnation. I loved to use it in FSX.

New computer ordered. Not MSFS capable, I suspect but it's upgradable and I will continue to watch how MSFS is received by the sim community. I will probably need to up my graphics card to something like the 2080TI or better. Going for the 2060 and I should at least have a pc capable of a decent DCS experience.

You have red my feedback on how it handles, its okay with my rig which is three years old. Windows build 1903. My specs you can see in my profile.



The mix of planes in this version of FS is somewhat different. The focus is on small GA airplanes, obviously in lpine with the focus of the sim on VFR flying, whcih is no surprise with this scenery. Using the Delux Prfo version, there are many, many smaller planes. My only "complaint" is that so very many of them come with glass cockpits only. I understand that this is the way things go in reality, still, I prefer the old analogue instrument setups with a separate additional GPS. First, I am used to handling these, and second, the glass cockpits have all numbers and data on their displays in very small fonts and they are difficult to read for me although using TrackIR and also instrument views, also, the clickspots for the turning buttons are very small and you can easily mis-enter data. That cannot become better with VR and its limited resolution, I fear. There is also a substantial need to learn to handle these Garmin devices, if one does not know it already, you can in most cases not operate navigational aids without them.



Its strange to see these devices now as defaults, while 15 years ago you had to spend money on additional modules simulating them and then with even limited system depth. Things have so much changed.


Garmin tutorials:


G1000:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc1fZnr7i_M


G3000:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbdmBcsk6OA


G3X:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1A1oX4ywk0

Glass cockpits never caught my interest the same way steam gauges do. They were good enough for the pioneers so who am I to complain! As for aircrafts, I still hope to see helicopters but for those I would really like to get 60+ FPS. 40 is great for airplanes but for helis it's like having the cyclic stirring a pot of mud. Not really enjoyable. Anyway next vacation payout should land me a 2080ti or better! Oh and someone better make an Alouette II pack like the one for fsx.

Edit: Setup will include

ASUS GeForce RTX 2060 DUAL EVO OC
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
HyperX Fury DDR4 3200MHz 32GB
ASUS ROG Strix B550-F GAMING motherboard

Looks great Sky ... thanks for all of your reporting saves us other problems :up:

From what little I see so far (my rig is not up to date) you have to have an internet connection at all times even to download the game means no CD/DVD in your library.

I don't want to spend the money if I can't connect with enough speed

Well, you are flying over Bing Maps, literally, and as long as you cannot save 2 Petabytes of data on your HD (or accept a simplified display of the landscape), you need online all times, yes. And even for that the game will save the sim data and plane data on your HD, which is over 100 GB.

But to say this for once and to leave no doubt on it: this is probbaly th ebets looking game I have ever played. Its gorgeous. My Game of the year 2020 contender, no doubt.

There are issues, probolems, bugs, yes. But it will be ironed out, and then addons will start to do the simulation magic.


I did not expectg to become so happy with VFR so quickly, since I was an exclsuive IFR flyer back in the days.



==============



I also have started my world tour, already am after day 3.

Day 1: EDDG-EHAM Münster-Osnabrück to Amsterdam Shiphol, VFR 1500 ft, Daher TBM 930, 1410H-1446H, fair, scattered


DAY 2: EHAM-LFAC Amsterdam Shiphol to Calais, VFR 2500 ft, DA40 TDI, 1443H-1636H, scattered, misty


DAY 3: LFAC-EGLC Calais to London City Airport, VFR 1500ft, Cub Crafter XCub, 1432H-1519H, fair, clear

So I am now in London and need to get up to the north to Kirkwall (for the slightly longer jump to Iceland, the small airfield on the Faroer Islands is not modelled in FS20). How to get from London to Kirkwall is not yet decided, any points of interests between here and there that I should not miss? I will fly some city sightseeing in London of course, but have done a 4 hours long VR Google Streetview visit in London just three weeks ago.

"Achoo!"
https://i.postimg.cc/D0vnmVT1/Screenshot-20.png


Gloomy morning over London
https://i.postimg.cc/xTd92Sg2/Screenshot-23.png


https://i.postimg.cc/pTxt1Ny3/Screenshot-24.png

60 FPS? :haha: Thats a good one, if you mean 4K. Many people insist that not 4K means "unplayable", that is nonsense, of course, but some people are like this. I run full HD, and I indeed get 60 fps both at medium and high settings, with the GA planes I so far have flown.


In 4K and at ultra you will not get 60 fps with any of today's hardware. Probably not even at high settings. It also depends on the CPU, not just the GPU, and I red today that the sim does not support, efficiently at least, more than 6 cores. Whether that includes or excludes HT, they did not say. But the memory quality also is important, somebody wrote. You want fast RAM.



If they ever give it DX12, that will reshuffle cards, most likely.



=============


Thank God finally a plane with a normal cockpit that normal people can understand. :D
https://i.postimg.cc/R01xncBc/Screenshot-25.jpgwww keyboard

Great hardware benchmarking by Tom's Hardware.


https://www.tomshardware.com/feature...m-requirements


Sounds ugly, but it is not, actually if you do not expect crazy things, much of the hardware does reasonably well. Also, in a civilian flightsim, 33 fps are absoluitely playable. I recall the years when I arranged myself with frames in the realm of 17-20. Most of my FS flying has been done with that. The many tools used in older FS versions poiucked away and frames mindlessly, laughing. Weather, traffic, airport services...



I am surprised how well my GTX1080Ti does compared to the newer 2000er-cards.



At full HD, single monitor, I get 60 fps at medium and high settings, reliably.