Jump to content

chiliwili69

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    1800
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

625 Excellent

2 Followers

About chiliwili69

  • Rank
    Founder

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Spain

Recent Profile Visitors

2402 profile views
  1. You can see what I saw when comparing them one year ago: I think the images really reflects what I saw with the device. You can download the raw images. Those images were taken at the centre, so it will be the same in G2. After a very difficult decision process, I kept the Index. Now with G2 three of the reasons should be gone: Sweet spot, audio and performance (solvable with a better card now, for example 3080). The only thing will be the better FOV of the Index. I will need to check myself I will kept the Index or not. I will know that in November hopefully.
  2. At minute 31:40 someone ask for IL-2 😉 What he say is quite right, the G2 is going to be a non doubt device over the Quest2 if you want to go to PC-VR. Depending on the model of the Quest2 (128Gb o 256Gb, with PClink cable and Elite strap) you will pay 140$ or 40$ less than with the G2. And this the price you will pay to give all your data and habits to Facebook. Look "The social dilemma" in Netflix as Sebastien was suggesting. With the G2 you have better resolution, better audio, better IPD adjust, less inertia and less front weight (no battery), not compressed image through PC link. Most of the reviews say that the Quest2 is still a front heavy device. He also mention that in a podcast of Jamie Feltham from uploadVR, he said that he preferred the image quality of the Rift-S over the Quest2 PC-Link. And G2 is much better than Rift-S.
  3. wise man 😉 As I told you, you can buy some golf clubs with the savings...
  4. Yeap! those reasons are also important to take into account. In my case the customer service was excellent (very fast and they log into my PC to review config, etc) was probably was due to early days with the first Pimax5K+ released. I don´t know know. On IPD I am 66 so I had no problems. And for the audio/fixing I had to go to the DAS fixing (which needs custom 3D printing). But I believe they have solved this with the 8KX which include the new comfort kit. Regarding about a potential Index "S", I think it will take a while until there is a new Index since their first competitor (Oculus) left the PC-VR only business line (Rift-S discontinued in Feb-2021. You know , Valve and Oculus don´t compete for devices but for platform. The new G2 is a perfect device for consumer to spend in Steam, so there is no rush to create a new Index. Although in the other hand, it would be relatively "easy" to produce a new Index "S". Just keep everything like it is now but putting a 2160x2160 per eye panels.
  5. Ideally someone could buy both and then compare then. I was doing that in the past with other headets but on the Pimax 8KX (even being a backer Pimax and having a reduced price) I dind´t went for Pimax8KX. If you compare both headsets and want the best for IL-2 VR, I think the Pimax8KX will win (regardeless of price). Why? Resolution: G2 is 2160x2160 per eye, but 8KX is 3840x2160. It is almost double pixels but in a larger FOV, so pixel per degree could be similar. FOV: Here the Pimax8KX is the clear winner. A large FOV is quite nice. FOV of PIMAX is really good. And FOV is important for inmersion. Eyetracking: If it works, it would really reduce the workload of the GPU, so it would be easier to reach higher fps Other factors like Confort, audio, weight, tracking for IL-2, etc they will be on pair. There only two cons on the Pimax8KX: - Tweaking: The Pimax software (PItools) has many options to adjust, this is good and bad. You will need to spend a good amount of time with optimal settings. - Price: IMHO, the 8KX price (without counting base stations and controllers) is really high in general. And much more than the G2. So, if money is not a problem the best solution would be to buy both and then compare. Then sell the one you don´t like. If money is somehow a constraint, then definitely the G2. I will do that with the G2 and the Index. Only one will survive at my home.
  6. Exactly that HunDread and SCG_Wulfe! I was testing the new visibility with just QMB in SP using NORMAL settings (which activate the "Enhanced airfcraft visibility" option). To deactivate that, you have to go to "CUSTOM" and then deactivate that option. When I did that, the planes beyond 10 Km are very very small (as it should be), and then, they progressively became bigger as they approach. So it solved my problem. Many thanks, I never touched that option and now I will always will deactivate that.
  7. Yesterday I had the chance to do a bit more testing to know what of the four reasons above influence the VRAM usage. For all tests I used the Remagen test Settings (High preset, 4K textures, etc and 130% SS for Index). The first test was just QMB in Kuban with the monitor window at 1920x1080 (not full screen) in my 4K monitor. Initially 2vs2 planes and then 8vs8 planes. Reaching 4.2 GB at the end. So it is aligned with my previous test. Then I switched to 4K resolution for the monitor view and run 3 series of 8vs8 using different planes each time. Here I saw an increase to 4.8GB, but that increment (I believe) is due to changing the planes, not due to using 4K resolution since the first 8vs8 used the same VRAM than the previous 8vs8 in FullHD. Then the last test I went to MP mode in CombatBox dogfight just at the ground airfield with a lot of smoke from a nearby explosion. Here the VRAM rampup to 6.1 GB. Conclusion: The reason 1 above does not influence VRAM usage (or allocation). The reason 3 is true. MP seems to require a bit more (about 1Mb). But not sure if this is because I was at ground. The reason 4 is slightly true, but very small effect for every new plane textures. But I am still far from the 10GB. I wonder why haikcube had 8GB just at game start-up (maybe msaa?). Is anyone also using 8GB VRAM at game startup? here also show other details like RAM usage which also increases in MP mode.
  8. I am also with you here. I think the augmented size in VR of planes farther than 10Km is too large. I use Index with 130%SS, perhaps every device has different effects. The "problem" I have then is that when I see (no zoom) a bomber at let say 11Km it has the same size that a bomber at 3Km (no zoom) (I say 3Km but maybe is 2 or 4, don´t know). So this confuses me to really know if that bomber is in the long range (more than 10Km) or short range (around 2-3Km). Of course, I can do two thing to know were it really is: zoom it or use labels for a second (in SP). If I use zoom and the size if reduced then it is at long range, if the size remains constant or increased a bit then it is short range. That´s is not my case. For objects beyond 10Km the scaling is too much. You can see them very easily. In fact, when they go from 10Km to 9.9Km you will see a drastic reduction of the size. The scaling beyond 10Km should not produce objects bigger than at 9.9Km. I will try to obtain some pictures this weekend.
  9. Many thanks for running again with the corrected scale. It is clear now that it is not just a peak, you VRAM is around 10.5 constantly. I wonder why you require more VRAM. I could see four reasons: 1.- The resolution of the monitor window while you are in VR. I also have a 4K monitor but the window is 1920x1080 (and not full screen). Perhaps when developer said to reduce this size for optimum performance they were referring to VRAM usage bottleneck. (I didn´t see any performance bump by going from 1920x1080 to 1024x768, so I use 1920x1080) 2.- The WMR software (for your Odyssey) require more VRAM than than the software of the Index (just SteamVR) 3.- The MP require more VRAM than SP. 4.- There were more variety of planes in your test than in my test. (more textures loaded in GPU). Who can determine which is the reason?
  10. That review is amazing then. It has been done with all games in 4K! What it is surprising is that the factor is the same regardless of RTX ON or OFF. So what is wrong with NVIDIA to put double price for only 10%?
  11. Oculus listen: Take the Quest2, remove the battery and the XR2 chip and put a proper DP cable. With the savings reduce the price to 200$. Oculus is totally blind to reject the PC-VR business. How single person can influence so much in a company and destroy the original concept. It is like a dictator, everyone inside Oculus has to be aligned, otherwise they are out.
  12. The scale of your graph for VRAM was limited to the default value 8192. You can change that scale for the VRAM in the afterburner options. In my case I changed it to the 1080Ti VRAM memory which is 11264MB. So you will be able to see the current usage during play game. The Max value to 10.5 could be due to a peak or previous games you played. It would be nice if you could check it out again. I played DCS in the past, when IL-2 was not in VR... more than for year ago (see below), but since IL-2 was in VR I switched again to IL-2 (my only sim).
  13. A recent discussion about the importance of VRAM of the new GPUs, specially the 3080 with 10GB, made me wonder how much VRAM is used (or allocated) by IL-2 in VR. I made three runs of the same combat (Kuban map, 2vs2, the 4 planes are different, Novorossiysk low fly) with the following settings: 1st run: SteamVR SS at 130%, this is 2296x2552 per eye (so more than native resolution of Reverb). Using High settings with Remagen test settings (it uses 4K textures, FSAAx2). No clouds. 2nd run: Identical to 1st run but increased SteamVR SS to 200%. This is 2848x3168 per eye. 3rd run: It is like 2nd run but maxed out all in-game graphics settings (Ultra, Extreme or ultra everything, including HDR, SSAO, Sharpen, distant building, FSAAx4) and put averaged clouds. You can see that for 1st and 2nd run the maximum VRAM used reported by MSI Afterburner is about 4Gb. So it seems that SS doesn´t affect to VRAM used. Then in the third run the maximum VRAM ramp up to 6.7 GB. So, based on that I believe that the 3080 should be OK for IL-2 VR in terms of VRAM. If anyone is using more than 8GB of VRAM while playing IL-2 VR, please let me know. VRAM usage is also reported in the fpsVR app. Here the MSI Afterburner trends: GPU temp, GPU usage, GPU VRAM CPU temp, RAM usage, CPU clock.
  14. No I didn´t. The reason for that is that I already have the Index for IL-2 and my curiosity was not big enough to buy a 99€ cable and install again all Oculus software in my PC (given that I am always a curious guy). The Quest1 was not going to give ANY improvement over the Index so I even didn´t try it.
×
×
  • Create New...