Hope it helps a bit, anyway, Q330.
I don’t do anything special on ‘Settings’, mainly because nothing I do seems to make much difference! So I leave most of them at ‘default’ – the exceptions being the resolution (I use 1024X768) and the frame-rate (I set that at ‘unlimited’ by moving the slider all the way to the right – can’t see the point of pegging the rate). 'Realism' set to 'Hard'.
Your comment gave me the idea of some research into whether different aeroplanes present different frame-rates. When I first noticed the improvement I was ‘flying’ a B25. This is a model of an actual Mitchell that is still flying at the Mid-Atlantic Air Museum in Pennsylvania. It is the most exquisitely detailed model I’ve seen, and is usually pretty ‘hungry’ for frames:-
I called up a practice landing approach I keep saved, which has pretty cloudy weather, and tried the Mitchell out. Not bad – rates in the range 18-26. Then I switched in flight to another favourite, a Comet 4 – and got 23-27. Then to a VC10, not so good here, high teens-early twenties.
Finally I switched back to the original aeroplane, the FS
default 737. This was the result!
Maybe we can set up a competition – can anybody beat a frame-rate of 47.9 in cloudy weather?
From all this I conclude that the frame-rates you get seem to be very much dependent on which aeroplane you are using, and the skill of the designer. Makes sense really – it looks as if the game takes whatever resources it needs to run a given model (highly detailed designs/panels presumably needing more) and what is left over determines the frame-rate. The default aeroplanes are pretty simple designs and therefore achieve higher frame-rates.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci