In the development process of passenger cars, various scopes are defined by subjective criteria, which have to be determined in road tests. Therefore driving simulators are increasingly used in order to improve the efficiency of the development process. In the context of vehicle dynamics, map-based models are used predominantly, as they are unconditionally real-time capable. Multi-body simulation (MBS) models have a higher complexity and are therefore more accurate. However, adherence to the real-time condition depends on the available computing power and model complexity. A main advantage of this approach is that no conversion into map-based models is required. As a result, spontaneous changes can be made to the full vehicle model, which significantly enhances the tuning process at the driving simulator. First, a theoretical comparison of the two simulation approaches is made. This shows that real-time MBS models deliver significantly better results than map models, especially at higher frequencies. Subsequently, expert drivers assess both, the full vehicle models (map-based model and real-time MBS model) on a dynamic driving simulator in direct comparison with the real vehicle on the proving ground. The vehicle's controllability and steering behaviour through lane change manoeuvres and sinusoidal steering are assessed. It turns out that the subjective assessments between the driving simulator and the real vehicle agree very well. There are hardly any differences between the two simulation approaches for the driving manoeuvres examined. As a result, the process for integrating vehicle dynamics models on a driving simulator can be significantly downsized by the use of realtime multi-body models without experiencing any loss of evaluation quality. At the same time, this opens up potential for assessing comfort issues on the driving simulator.