Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mordrac

[VIVE] How far can you go on graphics settings?

Recommended Posts

I'm using HTC Vive and recently upgraded Mainboard, CPU and RAM. The old build was propably 5 years old and barely able to handle IL2, let alone in VR. Now I got new stuff that should stay solid for another good amount of years. The limiting factor now is  my GTX 1060.

 

My ultimate goal is to get that sweet always-on reprojection in steamvr with 90 fps that completely changes the game experience. So far I can only run that setting on maps that go easy on performance, like winter Stalingrad. On Kuban I always have to go back to asynchronous reprojection and get that annoying double image of other aircraft flying around me. My CPU and RAM are running smoothly, GPU is on max the whole time.

 

Logically, upgrading the GPU to something like 1080 should propably let me play 90fps on any map, and maybe even pump up the graphics settings a little. But I've read somewhere that you shouldn't go above 1070 as there's no major improvement after that. Plus, a wingman of mine has a 1080ti+i7 8700k, balanced preset and says that he still can't run always-on reprojection most of the time.

 

I'm a bit uncertain and confused, and hence wanted to ask for some advice. Whether people here can run always-on repro on Kuban and what setup they have, and if someone can even go on higher graphics presets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There is not a system today that will give you a constant 90 fps on all maps/combat scenarios in VR.

 

But yes a 1080 Ti will help you get closer at least.

I saw a nice improvement even going from a 1080 to a 1080 Ti.

Edited by dburne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see. Thanks for the info.

 

Here's to hoping for performance improvements!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you set things per Jason's recommendations? I am running on Ultra without too much of a hit, but have a 980TI overclocked as well as a 6700K overclocked. Some of the things in Jason's recommendations seem like a performance hit, but actually make the game run smoother. Start there and tweak a bit. I was surprised...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1./JG54_Schneemann said:

Have you set things per Jason's recommendations? I am running on Ultra without too much of a hit, but have a 980TI overclocked as well as a 6700K overclocked. Some of the things in Jason's recommendations seem like a performance hit, but actually make the game run smoother. Start there and tweak a bit. I was surprised...

 

What kind of fps are you getting in VR on Ultra settings ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, let's see. Around 45-55 on a really crowded runway, Moscow and Stalingrad I usually get in the 60's-80's down low, and 89+ above about 2K or wherever the trees down hit it hard. I enjoy the stuka and such, so fly pretty low usually. I don't notice much glitching, if at all. Oculus Rift if that matters, but I think the performance should be similar between it and the VIVE? Anyway, use Jason's settings as a start. I was getting less until I dialed it in, but his recommendations really helped a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 1./JG54_Schneemann said:

Oh, let's see. Around 45-55 on a really crowded runway, Moscow and Stalingrad I usually get in the 60's-80's down low, and 89+ above about 2K or wherever the trees down hit it hard. I enjoy the stuka and such, so fly pretty low usually. I don't notice much glitching, if at all. Oculus Rift if that matters, but I think the performance should be similar between it and the VIVE? Anyway, use Jason's settings as a start. I was getting less until I dialed it in, but his recommendations really helped a lot.

 

I've heard the Oculus Rift has a mode that keeps Head Tracking FPS on 90 when the game has lower fps. Asynchronous Reprojection in SteamVR does more or less the same thing. If I enable it head tracking stays smooth even when game fps drop lower.

 

But Always-On reprojection seems to slave FPS to the game. When the game then hits steady 90fps, the whole experience changes. It all becomes so smooth and more alive. That's what I'm trying to achieve.

 

I'm running by peregrine's thread:

But also Low graphics preset. Is Balanced better? And I'll read through Jackson's smoothness thread.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are my settings. I can hold 90 FPS most of the time with the Rift, GTX 1070, i7 4790K at 4.7 GHz and 16 GB DDR3 RAM at 2666 MHz. I play Multiplayer and dip below 90 FPS very rarely in huge furballs and very demanding scenes.

 

Preset - Balanced

SSAO - OFF

HDR - ON (but bloom OFF in startup.cfg file)

Landscape Blurred

Sharpen - ON

Shadows - Off (Big FPS killer)

Mirrors - OFF (I do not fly planes where it is available so not sure about the impact)

Clouds - Low

AA - 2x

Distant Landscape detail - 2x

Visibility Distance - 100km

High Res Textures - ON

 

HUD mostly OFF  - key mapped to HOTAS if I need to check something.

 

SuperSampling - NONE - 100% in SteamVR and 1.0 in Oculus Tray tool

 

ASW - OFF with Oculus Tray tool

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, -[HRAF]Black_Sab said:

These are my settings.

Thank you. Shadows off does actually help a fair bit. But when I look at another aircraft on Kuban it still goes down. So I might as well keep em...

I've noticed pretty much no impact going on balanced preset. That's nice.

 

Other than that I think I squeezed out all the performance I can get from my 1060. Maybe I'll get lucky and there will be some performance improvements soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I am patiently waiting for Nvidias next gen cards while running on my 1070 right now. It's acceptable for me. Although I do know that VR at 90fps is a much more fluid experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/26/2018 at 1:52 AM, Mordrac said:

But I've read somewhere that you shouldn't go above 1070 as there's no major improvement after that

 

That´s certainly true. I had a 1070 and I moved to a 1080Ti. I didn´t get a gain in fps for low SS (150% steamVR).

So, for Rift/Vive devices a 1070 is quite enough.

 

But a 1060 is a clear bottleneck for IL-2 VR:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29322-measuring-rig-performance-common-baseline-for-il-2-v3/?do=findComment&comment=626053

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

But a 1060 is a clear bottleneck for IL-2 VR: 

Well I do know it's the limiting factor but I don't know how much improvement I can expect.

 

I have Corsair Vengeance RAM with 3600MHz and an I5-8600k overclocked to 4.5ghz and that runs at about 60% most of the time.

Maybe I should try to run the benchmark of your thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

That´s certainly true. I had a 1070 and I moved to a 1080Ti. I didn´t get a gain in fps for low SS (150% steamVR).

So, for Rift/Vive devices a 1070 is quite enough.

 

But a 1060 is a clear bottleneck for IL-2 VR:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29322-measuring-rig-performance-common-baseline-for-il-2-v3/?do=findComment&comment=626053

 

Wait so going from a 1070 to a 1080ti would get me no benefit? I just don't see how that's possible, I already have the best possible cpu you can get the 8700k at 4.9ghz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Mordrac said:

Well I do know it's the limiting factor but I don't know how much improvement I can expect.

 

We have one example of Jack59 going from 1060 to 1080Ti, keeping everythingelse the same (using i5-4690K):

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gJmnz_nVxI6_dG_UYNCCpZVK2-f8NBy-y1gia77Hu_k

 

 He went from 

23 46

40.975

to 

42 90 55.685

 

but in this case, the i5-4690K is also a limiting factor (we do not know why this particular CPU is performing below expected).

 

So, with an i5-8600K and RAM at 3600Mgz you will need to do two things, in this order

 

- Replace 1060 by a 1070, or 1070Ti , or even 1080

- Put a good CPU cooler to go to 4.9 or 5.0 GHz overclocking

8 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

Wait so going from a 1070 to a 1080ti would get me no benefit?

 

Unless you want to use a high SS (more than 170% in SteamVR).

 

You can use MSI Afterburner to trend the GPU load (an many more variables of GPU and CPU if you want). If you use 150% SS in SteamVR you will see that you almost never hit 100% load of GPU while you play IL-2 in VR, so your GPU is not the bottleneck. Now try the same but with 220% SS, then you will see that you hit 100% most of the time. So, your GPU is the bottleneck.

10 hours ago, Mordrac said:

60% most of the time

 

Don´t trust on CPU load. IT is a fake number. Actually one of the IL-2 VR threads (the heavy one) is bottlenecked in your cores. This is explained in the other thread:

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29322-measuring-rig-performance-common-baseline-for-il-2-v3/?do=findComment&comment=499246

 

Edited by chiliwili69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

- Put a good CPU cooler to go to 4.9 or 5.0 GHz overclocking

I was previously on 4.8 but it turned out to be a bit unstable. In large furballs my game would freeze. Is that a result of thermal throttling?

 

3 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

Don´t trust on CPU load. IT is a fake number. Actually one of the IL-2 VR threads (the heavy one) is bottlenecked in your cores.

Would an I7-8700k have been a better choice? From what I know the only real advantage is hyperthreading for video editing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

Wait so going from a 1070 to a 1080ti would get me no benefit? I just don't see how that's possible, I already have the best possible cpu you can get the 8700k at 4.9ghz.

 

Fwiw, I saw a nice improvement even going from a 1080 to a 1080 Ti in actually playing the game...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mordrac said:

I was previously on 4.8 but it turned out to be a bit unstable. In large furballs my game would freeze. Is that a result of thermal throttling?

 

 

Probably there are other factors than heat in stabilty. I can make my 4790K totally stable at 4.7 GHz at 1.26 volts, but I was not able to make it stable at 4.8 GHz even at 1.32 volts which is a huge jump in voltage. In the end I returned to stable 4.7 GHz as I didn't want to push further than 1.32 for 24/7 use.

 

Heat was never an issue at 4.8 GHz. Max 60 C during heavy load, only 2-4 celsius higher than 4.7 Ghz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mordrac said:

Is that a result of thermal throttling?

 

You can use MSI afterburner to produce trendlines for CPU temp, if you are below 90 Deg C there should not be thermal throttling.

 

You can first work on the CPU Overclocking, the method is quite simple, it is explained at the end of this thread:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29881-overclocking-a-4790k-for-better-bos-performance/

 

It is a bit strange that you can not go beyond 4.8 with your i5-8600K, but intel is a lottery.

 

At what voltage did you run with 4.8 GHz?

What CPU cooler do you have?

8 hours ago, Mordrac said:

Would an I7-8700k have been a better choice?

 

AS it was demostrated in the benchmark, for the same CPU frequency, the i7-8700K is not showing better performance than the i5-8600K. So you took the right CPU.

If I were you, I would invest a bit of time trying to tweak with your OC and determine why you are not able to achieve 4.9 or 5.0 GHz.

You could also consider deliding if the temps are high.

8 hours ago, dburne said:

Fwiw, I saw a nice improvement even going from a 1080 to a 1080 Ti in actually playing the game...

 

In your case I think you were using a very high SS when you had the 1080  (and being a bottleneck then) and then you lower the SS when you acquired the 1080Ti. You subjetive impression was that you gain some fps but I believe it was due to a lower SS. Just my thought that could be a wrong theory.

 

In fact, we talked about that in this post:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/36882-advice-please-msi-1080-gaming-about-to-buy/?do=findComment&comment=623253

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

At what voltage did you run with 4.8 GHz? 

What CPU cooler do you have?

I was on 1.27 core voltage.

My CPU cooler is the Alpenföhn Brocken Eco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

In your case I think you were using a very high SS when you had the 1080  (and being a bottleneck then) and then you lower the SS when you acquired the 1080Ti. You subjetive impression was that you gain some fps but I believe it was due to a lower SS. Just my thought that could be a wrong theory.

 

In fact, we talked about that in this post:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/36882-advice-please-msi-1080-gaming-about-to-buy/?do=findComment&comment=623253

 

 

I'm with chili on this one in general. I don't have specific experience in IL-2 VR as I already had my current GPU when IL-2 introduced VR support, but I was into simracing in VR before, tweaking the settings all the time just like we do here, and simracing is similarly CPU intensive like flighsimming. And I didn't see too much improvement when I upgraded from a GTX 770 (!!!) to a GTX 1070 back then. And this was all about gaming experience. I wasn't doing any benchmarking at that time.

 

In very general, so far I was always dissapointed in all my GPU upgrades. Probably I have always been into CPU intensive stuff. On the other hand, when I upgraded from an AMD FX8350 to i7 4790K I had the wow moment when I first tried IL-2. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

In your case I think you were using a very high SS when you had the 1080  (and being a bottleneck then) and then you lower the SS when you acquired the 1080Ti. You subjetive impression was that you gain some fps but I believe it was due to a lower SS. Just my thought that could be a wrong theory.

 

 

Correct that is a wrong theory.

Edited by dburne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mordrac said:

I was on 1.27 core voltage.

My CPU cooler is the Alpenföhn Brocken Eco

 

1.27 seems a bit low for 4.8Ghz, I use 1.29 for 4.8Ghz and it was already a good voltage, but it is a different CPU. Look the image of this post:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29881-overclocking-a-4790k-for-better-bos-performance/?do=findComment&comment=526461

 

Have you tried with 1.3 or 1.31 for 4.8GHz?

What about using 4.7GHz instead of 4.5GHz?

 

Before you upgrade your GPU (if you decide to do that) you can try first to reach your maximum stable OC and run the benchmark with the 1060. So, you will be able to know what you gain.

 

The set your maximum OC you don´t need to run IL-2, just follow the procedure I wrote in the above link.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

Before you upgrade your GPU (if you decide to do that) you can try first to reach your maximum stable OC and run the benchmark with the 1060. So, you will be able to know what you gain. 

You mean cpu overclock or gpu overclock here?

And yea, I'll try to squeeze more power out of the processor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mordrac said:

You mean cpu overclock or gpu overclock here?

And yea, I'll try to squeeze more power out of the processor.

 

I would urge caution, just keep an eye on temps and really test that thing with something like Prime 95 or LinX or similar to insure stability.

I run my i7 4820k at 4.50 GHz all day every day, and it is solid as a rock while maintaining very good cpu core temps. I could run it a little higher but at a cost of stability and higher temps, so I settled on where I am and it has been running this since Dec 2013 without a glitch.

 

And again as I  mentioned early on don't get too caught up in framerates. Turn the counter off and see how the experience is on your particular graphics settings, go for smoothness and a good experience. You can overclock cpu's and gpu's till the cows come home, and you still will not achieve a solid constant 90 fps in any flight sim in VR with today's technology.

 

And yes a 1070 or 1080 should help. With your rig a 1080 Ti would be sweet. But still won't get a solid constant 90 fps.

Or wait a few months for next gen cards.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Mordrac said:

You mean cpu overclock or gpu overclock here?

 

I refer to CPU OC. Work in that department first. You have an excellent CPU (i5-8600K) with a good RAM speed. According to Silicon Lotery at present day:

 

97% of the i5-8600K were able to reach 4.9GHz

88% of the i5-8600K were able to reach 5.0GHz

68% of the i5-8600K were able to reach 5.1GHz

36% of the i5-8600K were able to reach 5.2GHz

12% of the i5-8600K were able to reach 5.3GHz

 

99% of the i7-8700K were able to reach 4.9GHz

86% of the i7-8700K were able to reach 5.0GHz

50% of the i7-8700K were able to reach 5.1GHz

17% of the i7-8700K were able to reach 5.2GHz

3% of the i7-8700K were able to reach 5.3GHz

 

or the new CPU released recently

100% of the i7-8086K were able to reach 5.0GHz

92% of the i7-8086K were able to reach 5.1GHz

60% of the i7-8086K were able to reach 5.2GHz

14% of the i7-8086K were able to reach 5.3GHz

 

So, based in the price difference, the wise choice is your CPU.

 

When using Prime95 to test stability, as explained in the post, I only used with 1 or 2 threads, which is more than the load required by IL-2 VR.

 

Regarding the GPU upgrade, as I said, it is not worth to go above 1070 or 1080. The benchmark table results speaks by itself.

Until now, nobody has demonstrated with objective facts, that a 1080Ti deliver higher fps than a 1080 for Supersampling in the 170% range.

Sometimes people prefers to cheat themselves with their buying decisions. In my case, when I buy something new (like the VivePro that I bought and sold 40 days later and lossing some money) I have no problems to tell the real truth. So, I say again, I upgraded from 1070 to 1080Ti and obtained zero gain.

Edited by chiliwili69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I saw a nice improvement with the 1080 Ti.

But I am talking playing the game.

 

For VR I would always recommend ( if money no concern) a 1080 Ti, if not a 1080, if not a 1070. 

Alternatively one can wait a few months for 1100 series card.

 

 

Edited by dburne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dburne said:

For VR I would always recommend ( if money no concern) a 1080 Ti, if not a 1080, if not a 1070.

 

I differ a little here.

Even if money is no concern, there is no reason to spend more money in a graphic card which is not going to give you extra fps. The only reason is to give you extra supersampling (but more than 200% in SteamVR is not practical) or to support future VR devices with more pixels (like Pimax "8K").

Yesterday I played a 1 hour mission in the career mode with my favourite plane (Spitfire) and at the same time I trended some variables (CPU & GPU temps, GPU load, CPU & GPU clock,etc).

The interesting number was the GPU %load. It was always around 55-65% with High Graphics and 200% SteamVR SS. So it means that it is quite quite enough for Il-2 VR.

When I had the 1070, using High Graphics and 170%SS, the GPU load was in the 75%-95%.

 

Bottom line, if you have a 1070 or 1080 you are quite OK for IL-2 VR (Rift&Vive), then, if you have an extra money, use it for a better CPU and/or CPU cooling, but don´t go to the 1080Ti.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess improving performance has to wait. I'm back to random game freezes.

 

But thanks for all the input guys. It really helps a lot

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  

×