Side by Side Graphic Setting Comparison - Microsoft Flight Sim 2020

A comparison between each Graphic Setting in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020. Comparisons are done side by side to show you the difference.

▬ Contents of this video ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

0:00 - Building Quality
3:36 - Tree Quality
4:31 - Grass and Bushes
7:27 - Anti-Aliasing
10:23 - Terrain Level of Detail
12:48 - Objects Level of Detail
14:06 - Volumetric Clouds
19:48 - Volumetric Clouds (Thunderstorm)
22:00 - Water Waves
28:29 - Ambient Occlusion
29:45 - Anisotropic with Texture Supersampling
31:00 - Texture Synthesis
31:47 - Shadow Maps
32:50 - Terrain Shadows
34:29 - Lens Flare
35:06 - Bloom
35:27 - Light Shafts
37:53 - Windshield Effects
40:00 - Contact Shadows
41:11 - Reflections
44:23 - Depth of Field
45:45 - Lens Correction
46:09 - Texture Resolution

My Specs
i5-7600k
GTX 1080ti
16 GB Ram
Track IR. (Links Included below for all of my equipment)

Our Websites

***Links*** (Support Our Channel)

Rudder Pedal

Yoke (Logitech)

Yoke (Honeycomb) * Not one I have used, but it's on my list of future purchases

TrackIR

Want to support us? Use one of our links when you buy anything on Amazon to support the channel (Doesn't have to be Oculus or Pedals). We really appreciate the support. Thanks! Please note that the links in this description are affiliate links, which means I will earn a small commission if you purchase after using my link. This won't affect your price or sale in any way and it helps us keep VR Flight World running strong.

My Specs
i5-7600k
GTX 1080ti
16 GB Ram
(Links Included below for all of my equipment)

If you want to see more about VR Flight World

Rod Machado is a 10,000 hour airline pilot that has a way with words. Rod has some amazing books and training. If you have any intentions of becoming a real pilot, upgrading to IFR or you just want to fly properly in a sim, then you need to take a look at what Rod has to offer.

Please note that the link below is an affiliate link which means that I do earn a small commission for any sale made from the link. This doesn't affect your price or purchase in anyway. I really appreciate the support if you use my link.

[pilotembgamers]

Wow this was brilliant. I can’t imagine the effort that went into this. It’ll help out so many of us. Thanks!

[lowerding]

Actual Graphics Settings
- Low
- Medium
- Medium with Less FPS
- Medium with least FPS

[ChristopherMangels]

Note to self: Set Building Quality to MEDIUM
(edited: that's too short of an answer)
(edited: Thanks for all the likes - never had that before. And thanks for all the super insightful replies!)

[williamlocke]

This is the best graphics comparison I've EVER seen. Good work sir!

[YourXLNerd]

you want your buildings with air conditioning units?? better update that graphics card

[animatedlife_]

Ok i was so pissed off about playing on medium but now i have achieved inner peace !!

[efegulboy]

recap: (prefered settings imo)
building settings above medium have no effect (medium)
tree settings above medium just adds more trees no change in tree quality (medium)
grass settings just adds more grass (high)
anti aliasing anything below taa is blurry mess (taa)
terrain detail just adds more buildings and trees farther away (100 is fine)
object level of detail just adds more defined shadows to objects but after 100 nothing changes (100)
volumetric clouds settings just adds more detail to clouds (high)
water waves make water resolution higher (high since doesnt effect fps)
ambient occlusion gets darker every setting till high (medium)
anisoptropic and supersampling make texture resolution higher further away (8x and 4x4)
texture synthesis more defined textures again but doesnt really effect anything (low)
shadow maps increase shadow accuracy (1024)
terrain shadows (512)
lens flare is cool (on)
bloom (on)
light shafts lights passing through clouds etc (med)
windshield effects medium if you want performance ultra if you want the reflections of the cockpit as well
contact shadows dont change anything (low)
reflection creates more defined reflections (medium)
depth of field just blurs everything and decreases fps (off)
texture resolution (high)

[filflight]

Settings that I find that doesn't have a major difference/can live with low or medium settings based on observation:
• Texture Synthesis (>/= Low)
• Terrain Shadows (Off or 128)
• Windshield effects (>/= Medium)
• Contact shadows (>/= Low)
• Depth of Field (Low, but depends on your preference, I think this can complement the Render Scaling setting)
• Ambient Occlusion (>/= Medium or High if it won't impact performance)
• Shadow Maps (>/= 768)
• Buildings, Trees, and Bushes (>/= Medium)
• Texture Resolution (>/= Medium)

Settings that I find that makes a major difference/must live with at least high:
• Anisoptropic (>/= 16x)
• Texture Supersampling (>/= 8x8)
• Reflections (>/= High)
• Volumetric Fog (>/= High)
• Water Waves (>/= High)
• Terrain Level of Detail (>/= 175)
• Object Level of Detail (>/= 100)

I find that these settings really make a difference or they pop out, so I'm not taking PC specs into consideration here

EDIT:

[ClovesPastrana]

Not only is it an organized video, I know how much work it took, but it still released the used songs in an organized manner ... congratulations for the impeccable work

[Tortuosit]

19:48 The reason why I have clouds on High, at all cost. A lot is quite decent at mid ranges, but clouds have to be high.

[RobertEnterprises]

Absolutely phenomenal job with this video! This is what I call a true Direct comparison between the different graphic settings. I can only imagine how much time it took you to record the scenery 4 different times in exactly the same position as well as doing all the editing after. I've seen some of your other videos and you always put a lot of work into them and you deserve a lot more subscribers and recognition, this is one of my favorite videos when it comes to doing comparisons in general. This is, in my mind, a perfectly done video, because its exactly how I would want to see it being compared, literally pixel for pixel where you can follow the line and clearly see any and all of the differences, both big and small. So again, outstanding job with this video as usual :)

[tubecoatue]

I really didn't think even "Low" was bad, and I struggled to see any real difference between "Medium" and "High", nor between "High" and "Ultra." Maybe it's just my present monitor is just OK and not the best but, with my current setup, looks to me like "Medium" settings are hardly distinguishable from "Ultra", so "Medium" looks like the way to go. Thanks for the excellent and very useful video!

[lgerman]

30 years of desk flying, countless hours of tweaking. AT LAST I can reach nirvana in just one hour. You Sir... have strengthen my enjoyment of this addiction. You deserve high recognition for this. Hopefully somebody from the annual flightsim events around the world and manufacturers are reading this. He deserves an

So low is garbage Medium is fine and High and Ultra are just a waste of time.

[tfd]

Very informative, the one thing I would have added to each one, is a frame rate counter, so we can tell the performance hit the different settings would cost. As we can see, many settings don't make a very big visual difference, but I bet some may hit frames pretty hard for little gain visually while others may gain visually but not cost much in frames.

[jonjohnson]

The difference from low to medium is crazy, after that you’d be hard press to tell the difference - even with a side by side comparison

[wendake]

Awesome job ! Will help me in the fine tuning of my graphic settings (like medium building quality being very close to high & ultra so no need for more)

[tamasprokay]

So as I see. At almost every options, the medium is the way, at least in 1080p res.

[AndySomething]

This video was awesome ❤️
I took notes of my findings watching it for what I would use; which I will leave below 🤓

Building quaity - med or high
Tree quality - med or high
Grass & bushes - med or high
Anti-aliasing - TAA best
Terrain level of detail
(Mid & high height) - 125 to 200
(Diminishing returns after 125)
Objects level of detail
(low height) - 50 to 200
(diminishing returns after 50)
Volumetric clouds - high or ultra
Water waves
(Low height) - high
(High height) - medium or high
Ambient Occlusion
(Low height) - medium or high
Anisoptropic - 4x min up to 16x
(Diminishing returns after 4x)
Texture supersampling - 4x4 min up to 8x8
(Diminishing returns after 4x4)
Texture synthesis
(High height) - Medium
(Can't tell difference between low & high)
Shadow Maps
(Low height) - 1536 to 2048
Terrain Shadows - 1024
(Can barely notice any difference going from off - 2048)
Lens flare - I prefer off
Bloom - I prefer on
Light shafts - medium
(hard to tell difference from low to ultra)
Windshield effects - medium to ultra
(Ultra if you want dashboard reflections)
Contact shadows - medium
(Could barely tell difference from low to ultra)
Reflections - Medium or high
Depth of field - I prefer off
Lens correction - I prefer on, but difference is super subtle
Texture resolution - high

[eds]

Thanks for your time to create this very useful settings comparison. I'm sure you're helping a lot of (future) simmers to get the best quality settings for their individual system.