News Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 needs 64GB of RAM for ideal performance — oddly, the game install size is only 30GB

[CelicaGT]

In the context of this article and discussion, computers built primarily for gaming, DDR5 RAM speed is fairly irrelevant since games aren't RAM intensive tasks, and the gains outside of games for programs which would typically run on those systems really diminish after DDR5-4800.

FWIW MSFS 2020 and probably 2024 even more so hit system RAM HARD. Fast RAM is paramount to peak performance. Many users report rather surprising performance upticks after upgrading to faster memory (I've seen claims of 25% increases on the forums). This is one of the reasons why the X3D chips perform so well, even a 5800X3D still outperforms Intels best. A fast SSD is also a requirement. These sims don't stress any specific component, they stress the WHOLE SYSTEM. In many cases I have seen the CPU (mainthread) and GPU below 100% utilization because either the network, or the texture data being shuffled from SSD to RAM to VRAM and lord knows what else is holding things up. One cannot generalize when regarding MSFS bottlenecks. It is its own thing. Not even Asobo knows what's going on half the time.

 

[TeamRed2024]

These sims don't stress any specific component, they stress the WHOLE SYSTEM.

Yeah I'm looking at the minimums... 6800K, 970, 4GB ram. My kid's laptop has 4GB ram and running something as dated as WoW even turns into a slideshow in populated areas.

Can't say I'm a believer in the minimum specs beyond slideshow type performance.

 

[CelicaGT]

Yeah I'm looking at the minimums... 6800K, 970, 4GB ram. My kid's laptop has 4GB ram and running something as dated as WoW even turns into a slideshow in populated areas.

Can't say I'm a believer in the minimum specs beyond slideshow type performance.

In this case 30fps is the target, as that is adequate for the type of "action" one will see here. I expect between better threading and offloading much of the local texture handling has allowed them to keep the CPU/GPU specs so low. TBH even 2020 had rather low minimum specs when it released. I was able to play it on a 4790K and a GTX1080 at mid/high settings and a smooth 30fps. I did have to be very methodical on which settings to lower, as some had a huge effect on performance and visuals, like volumetric clouds and LOD for example. Other settings like buildings/trees and some of the shadow settings had little visual impact but freed up some CPU/GPU cycles for other things. Time and experimentation were key, time will tell if '24 is the same.

 

[TeamRed2024]

TBH even 2020 had rather low minimum specs when it released. I was able to play it on a 4790K and a GTX1080 at mid/high settings and a smooth 30fps. I did have to be very methodical on which settings to lower, as some had a huge effect on performance and visuals, like volumetric clouds and LOD for example. Other settings like buildings/trees and some of the shadow settings had little visual impact but freed up some CPU/GPU cycles for other things. Time and experimentation were key, time will tell if '24 is the same.

Yeah I was running a 7700K and 1080 Ti until recently and had similar experiences. I haven't even installed 20 on the new build... with 2 months to go just waiting on 24.

Still can't help but question the minimum specs but looking forward to seeing just how much of an improvement 24 is.

 

[CelicaGT]

Still can't help but question the minimum specs but looking forward to seeing just how much of an improvement 24 is.

Agreed. I believe it is going to be on Game Pass day one. If so, and like last time, I'll spring for a month and demo it.

 

[thestryker]

In the context of this article and discussion, computers built primarily for gaming, DDR5 RAM speed is fairly irrelevant since games aren't RAM intensive tasks, and the gains outside of games for programs which would typically run on those systems really diminish after DDR5-4800.

Except that it's not and looking at geometric means gives zero context. When it comes to games DRAM speed and latency tend to either matter or not which is why averages are useless. There's also the impact to 1% lows that are completely unaccounted for in those graphs.

Here's a more recent article comparing high speed DDR4 vs DDR5 on RPL which ought to explain what I'm talking about if you don't get it: https://www.techspot.com/review/2777-ddr5-vs-ddr4-gaming/

 

[annymmo]

System requirements going as high as 64GB means it's time to start thinking about 128GB for next systems or upgrades.

 

[annymmo]

RAM system requirements are reminding me about those from new programs coming out in the nineties, except they were in megabytes instead of gigabytes.

 

[Makaveli]

Streaming from RAM? How do you think it gets to RAM? A lot of people still don't have fast internet connections so, having the data predownloaded will work much better for those players. Nobody wants to be always waiting for content to load, every time they fly, having the option to download before playing would help many. I note the blog post makes no mention of the required download bandwidth for smooth running.

I know what you mean by the data will be coming from the SSD. However if I only have to do that trip once and store everything in memory won't that be faster than trips back and forth. And yes people will need good internet without a data cap to play this game based on how they have presented those requirements.

System requirements going as high as 64GB means it's time to start thinking about 128GB for next systems or upgrades.

Nah that is just one game.

I'm currently using 32GB in my system now but when I move up to AM5 I will go 64GB. Unless you are doing something else that is ram intensive I won't be going to 128GB yet.

 

[TeamRed2024]

I'm currently using 32GB in my system now but when I move up to AM5 I will go 64GB. Unless you are doing something else that is ram intensive I won't be going to 128GB yet.

That's what I did. Can't say I've noticed any difference between 32 and 64... but turned out to be a good choice because MSFS 2024 is one of the titles I will be purchasing.

 

[CelicaGT]

RAM system requirements are reminding me about those from new programs coming out in the nineties, except they were in megabytes instead of gigabytes.

I remember when it was KB...shoot me...aaaaaarrgghh...

 

[TeamRed2024]

I remember when it was KB...shoot me...aaaaaarrgghh...

Apple IIe in my 6th grade classroom with the C64 followed by the CAmiga 500 as the first home computers in my household.

I never used a PC till Windows 95 on a Pentium 75mhz machine around 1997 I think. Can't remember the specs on the earlier computers other than the A500 was less than 10mhz and had 3MB ram. Thing was a beast though... I still remember the day we upgraded the modem from 2400 to 9600 baud...I was always dialing up the local BBS's.

 

[CelicaGT]

Apple IIe in my 6th grade classroom with the C64 followed by the CAmiga 500 as the first home computers in my household.

I never used a PC till Windows 95 on a Pentium 75mhz machine around 1997 I think. Can't remember the specs on the earlier computers other than the A500 was less than 10mhz and had 3MB ram. Thing was a beast though... I still remember the day we upgraded the modem from 2400 to 9600 baud...I was always dialing up the local BBS's.

Apple IIe in kindergarten to grade 3, later on Intel 386/Mac LC475's, learning Basic and Pascal. At home my dad had a Pentium 75 which was a replacement for a Tandy 1000 TX with a 286... Good stuff, I also cut my teeth on a C64 that I paid 5 bucks CAD for at a garage sale. Regardless of all things I may have complained about in other posts, PC/Mac/whatever gaming is the best damned hobby ever.

 

[Misgar]

it's time to start thinking about 128GB

I have three systems with 64GB.
1). Ryzen 3800X with 4 x 16GB dual channel
2). Ryzen 7950X with 2 x 32GB dual channel
3). Ancient E5-2643 v4 Xeon with 8 x 8GB quad channel

If I ditch the 8GB DIMMs in the LGA 2011 Xeon system and fit 64GB LRDIMMs, I can run 512GB RAM. Will that be enough for Flight Simulator 2026?

And to think my first PC came with only 512KB RAM. How times have changed.

 

[amilcarnj]

I wonder if I can run in ideal with my system. I have an i9-12900F and 4070ti (12GB VRAM) and 32 GB of RAM. I know I am beyond the recommended one.

 

[stuff and nonesense]

I am curious which way it is weird, and I think it is likely that AMD's version of a 970 just couldn't handle it. ie the minimums

AMDs equivalent was the R9 290/390. Both are well out of support. The 480 effectively replaced it performance wise and hammered it for efficiency (roughly equating to a Nvidia 1060).

 

[JTWrenn]

AMDs equivalent was the R9 290/390. Both are well out of support. The 480 effectively replaced it performance wise and hammered it for efficiency (roughly equating to a Nvidia 1060).

More wondering what thing in their instruction set, or specs that is causing the problem if it is not a typo. Maybe something to do with direct x 12 support or some other oddity. It could just be much simpler and the system is just more tuned for nvidia and intel though.