If you had "tested the sim at all of the available FPS settings as well" why did you tell me everything but that? At this point, it seems as though you are either being evasive or just making things up as you go, which is fine. You built and tested your computer with the goal of expending all available resources to attain the highest possible FPS and still run your programs at levels you are satisfied with.
I mentioned all the things that occurred to me at the time. If you see fit to think that's evasive and build a theory, I can only shrug. Life is
much too short.
Nothing wrong with that, you bought and paid for your system, and by golly, if you want to devote unnecessary processing resources in order to see that all important FPS counter perform at its highest possible output, don't let me harsh your buzz. It's not like that extra 10 or 15 % processing power could be used by your Oculus Rift unit...right?
I think you may be trying too hard. The Oculus
automatically locks your frames to as close to 90 fps as possible, so its flat out impossible for me to "lose" anything by any other settings I might be using. The point you are attempting to make is without a basis in fact.
I was only trying to reason this out for the benefit of those who might come along later wondering about such things as FPS, settings, etc. Not everyone has a mega super computer, and for many of us we need to expend all possible resources to run a flight sim at levels we are satisfied with. For us it is a good rule of thumb to worry more about how things look and feel and pay less (read little or no) attention to FPS, which if anything is like the check engine light on a car's dashboard.
But..... that's your opinion, backed by a technical argument thats not very relevant, at least for my purposes. As I said, The Oculus (and so you don't think I'm being evasive, I will add the HTC Vive as well) both lock frames to as close to 90 as possible, as that's the required standard for VR.
As far as 5ghz and above, many simmers buy whole new computers and the latest graphics cards to drag just a few more frames out of FSX or Xplane. I would hazard a guess that simmers as a group tend to have higher spec machines for precisely that reason, and are also more familiar with overclocking and working under the hood than your average player of Candy Crush. Thread after rather scholarly thread appears on Avsim and other forums from users with the latest "Eureka" for getting better framerates, and this causes nary a raised eyebrow for the most part as its at this point an accepted facet of the hobby.
I'm kind of surprised at this back and forth about such a common practice. I do think the ability to reach such high frames by Aerofly is a very good sign though, as it means they might have quite a lot of strategic depth to give up as those frames retreat with the accumulation of additional features.
As for my having a supercomputer, I'm not sure I'm all that far ahead. There are
tons of threads in various forums of other people upgrading and overclocking for the exact same reasons I gave above, and at least within this community, I doubt my specs will remain "super" all that long, especially as VR reaches its stride.
Its Rob Ainscough who has the 6 core monster with the $1000 processor and two TitanX graphics cards.
Thats the supercomputer.
