Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
chiliwili69

Will a single GTX970 be enough to run BOS in VR?

Recommended Posts

The recommended PC specs for the next CV1 Oculus rift were published some weeks ago (Vive specs are pretty similar):

 


 

My first question when I read that was: "Will they be enough to run a CPU-intensive simulator like BOS?"

As usual, after reading many opinions/speculations I concluded that I will need to do my own test on that.

 

First, I need to determine the resolution that I will use in BOS which would be equivalent to the resolution required for the rift.

The numbers of the CV1 are:

 

2160x1200=259200, per 90Hz is 233 million pixels per second

But they say that at the default eye-target scale is needed 400 million pixels per second, so a ratio of 1.71 more.

 

So 259200x1.71 is 4449785 pixels, and looking to the nearest available resolution in BOS we find:

 

2560x1600=4096000

or

3840x2160=8294400

 

Therefore, in my test, I will run BOS at 2560x1600 resolution, since it is the nearest resolution (just 8% less) to what the rift will require.

The Graphics settings I used are:

 

2560x1600

High (I didn´t use Ultra since I consider High is good enough in general)

VSync: Off (I also deactivated the G-Sync in the GTX970 to allow fps higher than 60)

Anti-Aliasing: x2

FPS limiter: Off

Gamma correction: 1

 

The plane is BF-109, with clear sky and single quick mission at 300 m.

I just wanted to test the basic thing first, since the fps performance of BOS is very dependable on weather conditions, number objects in scene, etc.

The fps were measured and averaged by Fraps during a 1 minute flight making barrels and dives over some ground objectives.

 

The results are:

Min 77, Avg 89, Max 104.

 

So, I can conclude that my PC based in a single GTX970 will be OK for a basic flight with the CV1 Rift/HTC Vive. (Of course, If implemented in BOS with current DX9)

My PC use 1866Mhz RAM which is not bad, but I believe that higher RAM speeds could improve the above results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well lucky for you 3d mark alreqdy has you covered

You can download 3d mark vantage free demo, run it with a 970 and it tells you if it exceeds the Oculus recommended specs. You don't need to have a 970 to check out other systems either!

 

You can compare to systems that have what you are thinking about purchasing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To get a better idea, run the same test with a more demanding, worst case, scenario. It will matter how the PC performs in the worst situation. In scenarios with a lot of other objects it's the CPU which limits your performance, not the GPU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL you actually think they will implement VR into this game after the long string of broken promises?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL you actually think they will implement VR into this game after the long string of broken promises?

They haven't abandoned VR

 

Guys,

 

I've explained this in detail. We did not abandon Oculus. They changed their targets and were making some crazy demands on us if they were to continue to answer our emails. We now see what their plans are and when we can, we will support it. Why don't you also send an email to Valve asking them why they did not respond to our request to take part in the Vive headset program even though we asked? We are more than willing to work with VR platforms at at E3 today I made contact with my friends at Razer and we will explore what is possible with their VR. We fully understand the importance of VR, but for the immediate future we need to take care of other issues if this train is to keep on rolling.

 

Jason

Edited by SharpeXB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't the rift force vsync? If you redo the test again with vsync you'll see every time you drop below 90 fps it will display 45fps instead. 90fps is the absolute minimum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of talk about performance in VR threads. I wonder how many of you actualy had used DK2 and DCS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it work well?

 

What are the minimum FPS you need to maintain to avoid annoyance? I'm assuming tolerance levels are pretty variable, as otherwise it could just be an increase input latency situation all the way down to ~24 min. fps, like a standard panel in ideal conditions with even frametimes. Unfortunately, adaptive refresh (which probably will be part of oculus) doesn't resolve the variable input latency problem. Might be pretty bothersome.

 

 

I won't really know until the consumer version is released. Either way, I'm looking forward to it.

 

When's the consumer release of OR? This summer right?

Q12016 iirc

Edited by e345spd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q12016 iirc

 

Exactly, it was supposed to be this summer. Then Q4, now Q1 next year. Support for it should be worried about when it is released and the technology proves itself.

Edited by FuriousMeow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of talk about performance in VR threads. I wonder how many of you actualy had used DK2 and DCS.

I've got the dk1 home on the shelf and comparing its specs to the cv I still can't see myself switching to it for usual gaming anytime soon. Hope I'm wrong tough, It would be nice to be pleasantly surprised as it feels awesome flying with it but fighting is impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I see it as a true accessory in the strictest sense. I hope people don't decide to skimp on monitors and instead only spend money on VR, I think a monitor investment would be better overall if someone is choosing one or the other. If the pricing is reasonable, I will enjoy playing around with it. Of course, other superior options may be available by then.

 

 

Anyone waiting for oculus to do something about head tracking, just do it now and don't wait. You can build an IR array and use a $15 ps3 camera very easily and cheaply for surprisingly close to trackIR 5 performance, though definitely not at the same level overall. Makes you a much better flier and dog fighter, unless you have some crazy robot button/mouse system figured out already.

 

I really like the idea of 1:1 360 degree head tracking with the OR. But, it's not going to work correctly in most sims for a good long while, so no point in waiting for tracking from OR specifically.

 

I've got the dk1 home on the shelf and comparing its specs to the cv I still can't see myself switching to it for usual gaming anytime soon. Hope I'm wrong tough, It would be nice to be pleasantly surprised as it feels awesome flying with it but fighting is impossible.

Hang on, why is fighting impossible? As for the specs, I don't relish downgrades in resolution. Oh well, the overall experience in ideal conditions should make up for it, even if rather fleeting and long to develop....

Edited by e345spd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on, why is fighting impossible? As for the specs, I don't relish downgrades in resolution. Oh well, the overall experience in ideal conditions should make up for it, even if rather fleeting and long to develop....

Ok not impossible but incredibly hard as the low resolution means other planes are only clearly visible when you get within a few hundred meters. I think 4K+ is defenitly needed to get comfortable spotting when the picture coveres your entire fov compared to a relativily smaller monitor where you can also adjust the fov/zoom on the fly. Second is the motion blur, keeping the headset on for more than a few minutes is very uncomfortable for me due to the motion blur and a combat sortie requires frequent breaks. I know the cv headsets uses use low persistence lightboost like refreshing of the entire screen to battle that but that also means it can't use adaptive refresh rate like free- and g-sync to stop tearing. Keeping any modern flight sim 90fps vsynced is prob not possible for many years due to cpu stagnation lately and if you drop below 90 the motion blur is back is it displays 45fps then. To also run it at 4k like resolution will require incredible gpu power that doesn't exist yet.

 

It will still be awesome as hell for games where you don't need to make out tiny objects across large distances though which is most other games :P

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok not impossible but incredibly hard as the low resolution means other planes are only clearly visible when you get within a few hundred meters. I think 4K+ is defenitly needed to get comfortable spotting when the picture coveres your entire fov compared to a relativily smaller monitor where you can also adjust the fov/zoom on the fly. Second is the motion blur, keeping the headset on for more than a few minutes is very uncomfortable for me due to the motion blur and a combat sortie requires frequent breaks. I know the cv headsets uses use low persistence lightboost like refreshing of the entire screen to battle that but that also means it can't use adaptive refresh rate like free- and g-sync to stop tearing. Keeping any modern flight sim 90fps vsynced is prob not possible for many years due to cpu stagnation lately and if you drop below 90 the motion blur is back is it displays 45fps then. To also run it at 4k like resolution will require incredible gpu power that doesn't exist yet.

 

It will still be awesome as hell for games where you don't need to make out tiny objects across large distances though which is most other games :P

Ah okay, the spotting issue was one of the things I was wondering about. The blur also sounds a bit unpleasant. In terms of what is comfortable, I imagine everything changes with two offset screens right in front of your eyes. A bit of blur and input latency can suddenly become literally sickening, lol.

 

 

As for the low persistence, I think it's likely that they will have fairly advanced custom scalars, which may include both variable refresh (down to a certain point) and low persistence. If I remember correctly, there's nothing intrinsically preventing the combination of the two besides timings/scalar features and some sort of minimum in FPS before flickering becomes a problem. Though, that's already a problem with almost any panel, including variable refresh. Can only go so low without flicker. Also, maybe variable refresh doesn't really matter in the end, as anything below the OR panel's native refresh rate may have input latency problems to begin with.

 

 

If 'presence' is really going to be defined as having imperceptible input latency, I'm confident that the transition from imperceptible to otherwise will be pretty jarring, different from transitioning between smooth changes in always-perceptible latency. If this is the case, then even if you do have variable refresh, dropping out of the imperceptible latency zone is probably something to be avoided as much as possible. In that case, refresh rate may remain fixed and simply increased as panel technology progresses. If latency is imperceptible, it no longer matters how much extra latency vsync must add into the pipeline to match the panel refresh rate, it's still an end net of imperceptible (remember, vsync can theoretically add zero latency, if the gpu(s) happen to output a frame at just the right time).

Edited by e345spd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone knows the hololens microsoft project? maybe better than OR? or maybe not applicable to have a VR experience?

Xbox will use for some car simulator ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hololens is all about agumented reality. Overlaying objects and information into the real world.

 

You are correct, not applicable for VR experience.

 

That said, the potential is amazing. I'm concerned the platform will remain heavily compute-performance constrained for a long time, though. 

 

Simply improving the accuracy of the rendered objects to match the true environment will be a long-term pursuit iin basic compute performance, just like it is with games. Eventually raycast photon simulation from something like luxrender, maybe capturing lightmaps from a 360 degree sensor in real time. Augmented reality alone is a very cool concept, but convincing and complex augmented reality will be astounding.

Edited by e345spd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...