Install on SSD?

  • Changing the theme Jet-pack a question; for the developers of AFS4, because they don't paint the propellers on the piston and tubropop airplanes, that is, when they are turned on you don't notice the paint on the tips of the propellers in Aerofly, and that would also give it an attractive appearance! ! , I think that in Aerofly fs1 it was noticeable

  • I bought a 1 TB SSD just for AFS4 as my internal drive is only 500gb. If you are buying an external drive then that is what I would suggest. But, if you have other options then go with them.

    I have a TB SSD but it's almost full and a 1.5 HHD eh I installed AFS4 on the SSD first and there was little space left so I had to install it on the HHD for space, and I was thinking about buying a 1tb nesterno for AFS4, but according to Jet-pack there is no difference in those two discussions to use AFS4.


    Thanks for the advice! AOB

  • I just moved FS4 from my 1Tb SSD to my 4Tb hdd, mainly just to see it this had any significant effect. The Steam Move/verification did take a while (~2 hours). Anyway. all I've noticed is about 10 seconds extra initial load times to get to startup screen and ~5 seconds more to start a session. Still faster than FS2 which is still on my SSD. This is in VR with a Vive Pro btw.

    Custom built gaming desktop; Win10 pro, i9 9900k (water cooled) oc to 5ghz, zotac rtx 3090, 32 gb 3000hz ram, 1 tb ssd, 4 tb hdd, corsair gold 750w psu, Asus ROG Maximus xi hero wifi mb, StarTech 4 port/4 controller sata powered usb3.0 pcie card, Vive Pro w/etsty gear VR lens mod, and Quest 2 wireless with Air Link. Asus VG248QE external 1080p 144hz gaming monitor.

  • Yes, I wanted to comment on that, the problem is already in Virtual Reality, I had to lower the graphic quality to be able to use it!!

    How do you feel the VR on your SSD?? feel better??

    So far, having FS4 on my HDD feels the same as FS4 on my SSD in VR. These are the specs for my HDD;


    Seagate ST4000DM004 4TB SATA Hard Drive

    • Capacity: 4TB.
    • Speed: 5,400RPM.
    • Interface Types: SATA.
    • Form Factor: 3.5inx1.0in LFF Hard Drive.
    • Sector Size: 512 / 512e.
    • Sustained Throughput: 190.
    • Electrical Interface: SATA 600 - 6.0Gbps.
    • On-Board Cache: 256MB.

    Custom built gaming desktop; Win10 pro, i9 9900k (water cooled) oc to 5ghz, zotac rtx 3090, 32 gb 3000hz ram, 1 tb ssd, 4 tb hdd, corsair gold 750w psu, Asus ROG Maximus xi hero wifi mb, StarTech 4 port/4 controller sata powered usb3.0 pcie card, Vive Pro w/etsty gear VR lens mod, and Quest 2 wireless with Air Link. Asus VG248QE external 1080p 144hz gaming monitor.

  • Yes, I wanted to comment on that, the problem is already in Virtual Reality, I had to lower the graphic quality to be able to use it!!

    How do you feel the VR on your SSD?? feel better??

    Forgot to mention it but even with a rtx3090 I needed to drop a few graphics settings down from ultra to high in order to maintain performance. Building density still on ultra though. Overall the visuals still look as good to me as they did with FS2.

    Custom built gaming desktop; Win10 pro, i9 9900k (water cooled) oc to 5ghz, zotac rtx 3090, 32 gb 3000hz ram, 1 tb ssd, 4 tb hdd, corsair gold 750w psu, Asus ROG Maximus xi hero wifi mb, StarTech 4 port/4 controller sata powered usb3.0 pcie card, Vive Pro w/etsty gear VR lens mod, and Quest 2 wireless with Air Link. Asus VG248QE external 1080p 144hz gaming monitor.

    • Official Post

    Small info:

    Aerofly FS loads scenery in a background thread which is why there is no noticable frame rate decrease when it runs on HDD compare to SSD. The type of drive you use should not affect the frame rate when done right.

    And thanks to multithreading the initial loading times remain pretty short, in other words your hard drive is constantly loading files and while parts of the executable are already dealing with the files that have been loaded others functions await their turn to load the next files.

    This is all possible because Aerofly FS uses the latest C++ features, we programmed most things ourselves and for the most part are not using third party libraries or old legacy engine code which we could not optimize.

  • So, this is all your own custom coded engine?


    Impressive work, especially impressive overall image quality. Most so called mordern engines lack of image quality and present lots of grain and blurries all over the place, which in my opinion is simply unpleasant to look at. Your engine creates a very crisp but also flickerfree (with HQ antialias on) image and very natural environment overall.