144hz/1440p monitor or VR on gtx1070?

[Ribbon]

Is there an end to spending money on simming?

Here is my dilema; currently i have gtx1070 with i7 6700k and 1080p/60hz monitor so i'm thinking to buy new monitor 1440p/144hz or VR.

Can you help me decide taking in consideration my pc specs and it's performance in VR (graphics settings must be ultra). Also to note that if i go for monitor right now doesn't mean i wont go for VR in future (next gen VR or after summer).

Mods please leave thread here for a while where more ppl will see it than in HW subforum.

Thank you all!

[SAG]

i have a 720p 32 inch monitor with crappy response times. i have never considered changing it, but i will however be getting an oculus rift 

[Sim]

I have gtx 1070 (and i7 4770k) and playing Il-2 in VR on Ultra without issues. Furthermore - I have also set SS to 1.2 in Steam VR settings, so I would say with gtx 1070 you are good to go for VR.

[SAG]

I have gtx 1070 (and i7 4770k) and playing Il-2 in VR on Ultra without issues. Furthermore - I have also set SS to 1.2 in Steam VR settings, so I would say with gtx 1070 you are good to go for VR.

 

 

Thats great to know SIM, i was waiting for them  to implement VR here so that i could finally get a rift!! seeing so many people having good experiences  with similar setups as mine really makes me feel comfortable taking the 500USD plunge 

[=VARP=Cygann]

I would say that it depends if you are more into offline or online flying. If former, I'd go with VR in your shoes, but if latter, 1440p is more convenient option since one can use keyboard and can spot better.

 

I am personally waiting on VR with higher resolution and a bind for letting see trough image from the outside world on a key press (and some other polishing in size, weight, etc...).

This will happen eventualy, only not soon enough for you since you got to decide now. But hey, it's a choice without bad outcome, either way more fun for you

[Ribbon]

I have gtx 1070 (and i7 4770k) and playing Il-2 in VR on Ultra without issues. Furthermore - I have also set SS to 1.2 in Steam VR settings, so I would say with gtx 1070 you are good to go for VR.

oh it's nice to know that, thank you! And how about framerates, my biggest concern with 1070 and VR is low fps?

 

I would say that it depends if you are more into offline or online flying. If former, I'd go with VR in your shoes, but if latter, 1440p is more convenient option since one can use keyboard and can spot better.

 

I am personally waiting on VR with higher resolution and a bind for letting see trough image from the outside world on a key press (and some other polishing in size, weight, etc...).

This will happen eventualy, only not soon enough for you since you got to decide now. But hey, it's a choice without bad outcome, either way more fun for you

i mostly play in MP but that could change once the career and coop mode arrives in october.

I think i'll go for now with 144mhz/1440p monitor and after summer i'll consider buying VR or wait for next gen VR.

Thanks guys!

[216th_Jordan]

oh it's nice to know that, thank you! And how about framerates, my biggest concern with 1070 and VR is low fps?

 

i mostly play in MP but that could change once the career and coop mode arrives in october.

I think i'll go for now with 144mhz/1440p monitor and after summer i'll consider buying VR or wait for next gen VR.

Thanks guys!

 

1440p is very nice, I use it and resolution in VR was just too low for me (it seems like the rift did not like my hardware either..). Next generation of VR will probably take up to 2 years, which is fine by me.

[Ribbon]

1440p is very nice, I use it and resolution in VR was just too low for me (it seems like the rift did not like my hardware either..). Next generation of VR will probably take up to 2 years, which is fine by me.

Yeah i'm sensitive on low graphics too, 1440p monitor and trackir will do fine until next gen VR is released

[Thad]

Salutations,

 

I for one am not sold on the current graphical performance of any of the VR headsets. So, I'd recommend getting the monitor and keep an eye on future VR improvements.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

After trying​ VR good monitor is what I choose, but next gen VR could change that.

[Gambit21]

I'll consider going to VR when it's affordable and at a much higher res - and running flawlessly at that.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Gambit21

[Thad]

In the meantime... memorize your HOTAS or joystick and keyboard commands so when you strap on the VR visually restrictive goggles you can still control you craft effective without the ability to see them. Also, look into 'Voice Attack'.

[Jade_Monkey]

You will get two very different things. The VR will give you tons of immersion but pretty poor visuals. The 1440p will give you less immersion but much better visuals.

 

I'd say nothing can compete with the feeling of VR, but im sorely disappointed with the resolution right now.

 

Essentially, there are significant tradeoffs and you have to decide what you value the most.

[Thad]

This ^

[Ribbon]

Thank you guys for removing any doubt i was having, i'll go for monitor and wait next gen VR.

And thank you Mods for leaving thread here for so long, now you can move it, lock it or let it be if will help others with similar problems in life.

[coconut]

You will get two very different things. The VR will give you tons of immersion but pretty poor visuals. The 1440p will give you less immersion but much better visuals.

 

I'd say nothing can compete with the feeling of VR, but im sorely disappointed with the resolution right now.

 

Essentially, there are significant tradeoffs and you have to decide what you value the most.

 

My feeling too, but I'm starting to come around. You can improve things a bit with super sampling, by the way. It does not help with the landscape and other planes, but it has a nice effect on the cockpit.

 

What we are comparing is actually screen + Track IR vs Rift/Vive vs Pimax

 

I've tried two of these, 1440p screen @ 144Hz with gsync and Rift. I haven't tried the Pimax.

 

The screen with gsync gives a very nice feeling, it's very smooth, and it's easier to spot objects from far away. With the rift, it's easier to keep track of planes in close flight. On a screen I will lose bombers I am trying to escort when they disappear under my wing. With the rift that does not seem to be a problem.

 

It may come as a surprise, but I find Track-IR (or the cheaper equivalent I ordered in the web, working with opentrack) more painful for the neck than the Rift. The movements with the rift are of course more extensive, but at least all your body goes in the same direction, so to speak. It's a lot more natural than the "turn head to the left but keep eyes to the right". At least for me this seems to result in less tension in the neck muscles, and less pain. Your mileage may vary, of course.

 

The positional tracking of the rift is miles better than the Track-IR, but that's probably because it's easier to calibrate the rift. The rift also tracks all combinations of movements and rotations properly. Not so with opentrack, in my experience.

 

It's been reported by others, and I can confirm it: It's easier to hit targets. With a screen you end up "counting pixels" to aim and get your target, it comes naturally in VR. It's one of those things you have to experience to understand it. If you have flown IRL you'll probably know it already: You get a different sense of space and volume IRL than on a screen. I noticed for the first time the hills near the volga on the Stalingrad map. I knew they were there, but in VR you really feel them. Same thing with clouds.

 

The 1440p screen I've bought not long ago will serve me long. Maybe I'm wrong, but I see no need to upgrade after that. Pixels do not need to be smaller as far as I'm concerned, and screen space is OK too (it's constrained by desk space, after all). The same isn't true with the Rift. I already know I'll be upgrading as soon as a Oculus or a competitor provides a polished implementation. Until then, even if I go back to screen for flying, I'll keep using the rift for other experiences: Elite Dangerous, maybe a bit of racing. I tried a small skiing game the day before 2.009 came out, and that was a lot of fun. I also want to try carrier landings in War Thunder.

Edited April 12, 2017 by coconut

[Urra]

Thank you guys for removing any doubt i was having, i'll go for monitor and wait next gen VR.

And thank you Mods for leaving thread here for so long, now you can move it, lock it or let it be if will help others with similar problems in life.

A monitor can be used for everything. But I can tell you only that as a rift owner with a 980 card, I hope to upgrade it to 1080ti to be able to squeeze some more detail out of the screens by rendering with a factor of 2. It does make a difference. Because as long as you are able to keep a fluid 90fps, planes whizzing by no longer skip and judder. It really is butter smooth at 90fps. The picture in bos seems smoother than dcs because with the right card the frame rate tends to stay higher easier. An expensive monitor will cost as much as the 1080ti. Just some extra experience to add to the list for you.

[RobCarter3]

I have a 1440p, 144Hz, G-sync monitor and I adore it. After experiencing both the resolution and refresh rate -- these are "never going back" things now. You will not regret the monitor upgrade. The latest crop of GPUs also reliably provide 1440p performance at high fidelity settings - you don't need ridiculous SLI rigs anymore, which is a plus.

 

It comes down to what you want to do with the setup. If you work, web browse, stream video, or play other (non-sim) games on the computer, the 1440p monitor will get more mileage. If the setup is just for simming, well it's clear to even a non-VR owner like me that VR is almost certainly the future of flight simming. The question is only to pick it up this generation or the next.

[Gambit21]

The question is only to pick it up this generation or the next.

 

...or the one after that.

[Ribbon]

Hey fellas!

Now i have i7 6700k with gtx1070 and i think i'm wasting my hardware playing it now on 1080p 60hz monitor, that's why i'll go for 144mhz/1440p monitor.

Also i play arma so new monitor is way to go (has no VR support) and after summer i'll check status of VR gear, is next gen close and if not i may go for rift.

Edited April 12, 2017 by redribbon

[chiliwili69]

A bit late my feedback, but If you can afford both, go for the monitor first and VR later, specially if you are resolution sensitive and MP gamer. So, you will experience by yourself the difference of monitor vs. VR.

 

I could be another discussion but I would go for a 4K G-sync monitor rather than 1440p/144Mhz (in fact this is what I did 18 months ago). G-sync does a very good work  when frame rate doesnt reach 60Hz.

 

Regarding GTX1070, it is fine for VR at Ultra. If 90fps are not reached in some cases, then ASW enter in action making a great work.

 

I would also recommend you to try VR with a friend/colleague or store near you. If you came from a 1080p monitor, the currrent VR resolution should not be a big issue. I think the limited VR FOV (about 100º) is a bigger issue.

Edited April 19, 2017 by chiliwili69

[=IL2AU=chappyj]

6700k and GTX1070 will probably run ultra provided you reduce Supersampling. 

But tbh you arent getting anything out of running ultra in vr, high is better with supersampling jacked up.

[chiliwili69]

 

 

But tbh you arent getting anything out of running ultra in vr, high is better with supersampling jacked up.

 

I have been always running with the 4K monitor at HIGH settings and it was good enough (I really don´t know the true differences between HIGH and ULTRA, are they written in any DD?).

 

I have not experimented with SuperSampling but it is something that definitely I am going to do to balance gained detail and performance. Thanks for the advice.

[yeikov]

 

 

I really don´t know the true differences between HIGH and ULTRA, are they written in any DD?

 

Ultra has higher detail in:

- shadows

- SSAO

- sky texture (less banding)

- clouds

- smoke effects (more particles)

 

The first two have always been there, the rest were introduced in recent patches (see patch notes). I don't know if there are other differences.