This site is being deprecated.
Please see the official X‑Plane Support page for help.
Framerate in X-Plane depends on many factors. Strictly speaking, your hardware is more powerful than an i7 3770 with a GTX 1050. But to compare apples to apples, you have to run X-Plane in the same settings on both systems. Are you comparing with the same graphics, weather, scenery and aircraft settings? Also, it doesn’t make much sense to measure X-Plane against other gaming software.
Moreover, if you have been following the discussions in this and other X-Plane forums, you’ll detect the simmers have developed a general preference for Intel and nVidia hardware—performance wise. That is not to say AMD has inferior hardware, but at least with X-Plane for the time being, that’s the way it is.
Going back to the first paragraph, I believe your hardware can get you much better than 20 FPS if you have the abovementioned settings/conditions at medium or a bit higher. But if you try to max things out, I bet they can quickly push the FPS south of 20.
Someone had flagged my previous answer, I wonder why?
If I’m correct about the options you picked for the FPS test, a test code of 5 means to apply “Extreme” rendering preset. As in my last reply, I am not at all surprised of the low resulted framerate. I also recall that the test uses the simple Cirrus Jet. Thus, if you run with a more complex aircraft and throw in some weather, FPS would no doubt be struggling in the low teens.
I think the effective options are: Lower the rendering settings, or upgrade your GPU and/or CPU.
You can also reduce some non-essential plug-ins (if any). Run Task Manager (Windows) to identify the bottleneck and tune down the Graphics settings accordingly.
With 30% loading, the GPU is not running at its full potential. It could mean the CPU is the bottleneck. Note that the CPU loading % shown is from the total of all 6 cores. We know that (unfortunately) X-Plane 11 is largely a single-core process. So, 30% CPU loading likely indicates one of the 6 cores is actually being maxed out. You can verify that by looking into the TM’s “Performance” tab.
When the CPU is the bottleneck, you can lower the “Number of World Objects” setting (right side), and raise the Graphics settings on the left side to help balance the performance.
8% is very LOW indeed. I have an i7 Quad Cores (8 threads), when the CPU is maxed out as the bottleneck, TM would be showing ~40% loading. 8% seems to me the system is not even keeping one of the 12 threads fully occupied. What’s the GPU loading at this same time?
You’re right in which X-Plane is far from properly utilizing your CPU. What we’ve learned from this is: number of cores/threads matters little to X-Plane--Speed (GHz) is king. Nice to keep that in mind if you upgrade the CPU.
You may find this Michael Brown’s YouTube video informative:
So the GPU is hardly working up a sweat. Since you did see one of the CPU threads is at maximum, it looks like the system is CPU-bound.
I can only suggest lowering the Number of World Objects and leave Reflection Details at minimum. Hopefully to divert some processing power to keep the GPU a bit better utilized.
No, I have no idea. https://developer.x-plane.com/2019/04/vulkan-and-metal-it-runs/
I am from Missouri. I’ll believe it when I run it.
This site is no longer being actively maintained.