Compare MSFS 2024 VR performance with MSFS 2020, including frame times, CPU and GPU limits, VRAM, streaming, reprojection and fair test steps.
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 can run better in VR than MSFS 2020 on a well-balanced PC, especially where 2020 is limited by its main thread. It is not a guaranteed upgrade: headset resolution, VRAM, scenery streaming, aircraft complexity and OpenXR reprojection can make 2024 equal, slower, or simply smoother at the same reported frame rate.
When is MSFS 2024 faster in VR?
MSFS 2024 has the clearest VR advantage when MSFS 2020 is CPU- or main-thread-limited rather than GPU-limited. Its simulation workload can be distributed more effectively across CPU cores, although complex avionics, traffic and detailed airports can still create a main-thread bottleneck.
| Limiting factor | Likely result | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| CPU or main thread | MSFS 2024 may be faster | Better workload distribution can improve frame times in busy scenes, but results depend heavily on the aircraft and location. |
| GPU or headset resolution | No automatic 2024 advantage | The GPU must still render the headset's large combined resolution, clouds, shadows and cockpit displays. |
| VRAM capacity | Whichever remains below the limit | Exceeding VRAM causes paging, abrupt stutters and texture problems rather than a clean, predictable FPS loss. |
| Internet and asset streaming | MSFS 2020 may feel more predictable | Both simulators use online world data, but MSFS 2024 streams more content and is more exposed to connection or server delays. |
| Motion reprojection | Whichever holds the cadence | A stable reprojection threshold matters more than a slightly higher but fluctuating average frame rate. |
Identical preset names do not guarantee identical image quality or workload between the two simulators. Our broader MSFS 2024 and 2020 performance comparison explains the same CPU, GPU and VRAM limits outside VR.
Launch-build benchmarks are also poor evidence for a purchase decision. Compare Sim Update 5 or later against a fully updated MSFS 2020 installation; early server congestion and older code can otherwise be mistaken for normal VR rendering performance.
How do I compare MSFS 2024 and 2020 VR fairly?
A fair comparison requires matching the headset workload and isolating rendering performance from streaming, add-ons and reprojection.
- Update both simulators and remove add-ons. Temporarily test without third-party aircraft, scenery or utilities in the Community folder. Different add-on versions can invalidate the result.
- Use the same headset configuration. Match refresh rate, OpenXR runtime, output resolution and any runtime-level supersampling. Disable automatic resolution changes during testing.
- Match the flight conditions. Use the same airport, weather, time, aircraft type, cockpit view and parking position. Disable multiplayer and match AI, road, airport and ground traffic.
- Match the expensive settings. Set comparable render scaling, anti-aliasing, clouds, Terrain Level of Detail and Objects Level of Detail. Test equal numerical settings and equal perceived clarity, because those are not always the same thing.
- Test without reprojection first. This reveals the simulator's real frame time. Enable motion reprojection afterwards to judge the experience you would actually fly with; desktop Frame Generation figures do not represent headset performance.
- Repeat the route. Run at least two passes so scenery has streamed and temporary shader work has settled. Record CPU and GPU frame times, large spikes and reprojection stability rather than relying only on average FPS.
At 90 Hz, native rendering has about 11.1 milliseconds per frame, while half-rate reprojection needs a stable real frame around 22.2 milliseconds or better. A fluctuating 50 FPS can therefore feel worse than a steady 45 FPS with well-behaved reprojection.
Why can MSFS 2024 show higher FPS but feel worse?
VR smoothness is controlled by frame pacing and missed compositor deadlines, not just the FPS number displayed by the simulator. A single long frame can produce a visible head-tracking judder even when the average looks healthy.
- Reprojection threshold changes: repeatedly moving above and below half refresh rate causes uneven motion and artefacts.
- VRAM exhaustion: high textures, render resolution and detailed scenery can trigger sudden paging stutters.
- Scenery streaming: bandwidth or server delays can pause asset delivery without showing a sustained GPU bottleneck.
- First-run shader work: a simulator update or graphics-driver change may make the first test pass less representative.
- Changing traffic load: AI aircraft, airport vehicles and complex avionics alter CPU demand while the flight is running.
Which settings most affect the comparison?
Change the settings associated with the measured bottleneck rather than lowering everything at once.
- GPU-limited: reduce headset output resolution or in-simulator render scaling, clouds, shadows, reflections and ambient occlusion. DLSS can reduce GPU time where available, but may soften cockpit text or introduce ghosting.
- CPU-limited: reduce Terrain Level of Detail, Objects Level of Detail and traffic. Lowering texture resolution rarely fixes a pure main-thread limit.
- VRAM-limited: reduce texture resolution and render resolution, then close GPU-accelerated background applications.
- Streaming-limited: test with a stable wired connection, stop background downloads and repeat the route after its data has loaded.
A mistake we see constantly is reducing both OpenXR output resolution and the simulator's render scale at the same time. That can make gauges unreadable before identifying the actual limit. Use our matched VR settings and bottleneck guide as a starting point.
Should I move from MSFS 2020 to 2024 for VR?
Choose MSFS 2024 for VR when MSFS 2020 is clearly main-thread-limited, your GPU has resolution headroom, VRAM is not already full and your internet connection handles continuous streaming reliably. Follow a controlled MSFS 2024 VR optimisation process before judging it from the default preset.
Stay with MSFS 2020 when it already holds a stable reprojection cadence, your hardware is close to its GPU or VRAM limit, or your established aircraft and scenery library matters more than the newer simulator's features. Our MSFS 2020 VR baseline and tuning procedure helps confirm whether performance is already being left on the table.
The safest summary is that MSFS 2024 has a higher potential VR performance ceiling on suitable hardware, while MSFS 2020 can remain easier to keep stable on a marginal system. If 2020 is already GPU-limited at the headset resolution you want, moving to 2024 alone will not remove that limitation.
Does this comparison include PSVR2?
No. This is a PC VR comparison because MSFS 2020 was never released on PlayStation. MSFS 2024's PSVR2 support is being delivered through a free 2026 update, so there is no equivalent MSFS 2020 PlayStation VR version to benchmark against it.