Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Dutch2

What would be a good benchmark flight for VR

Recommended Posts

It seems I have now get FCAT VR working, as it shows the red bar in my VR HS screen, so it does regonize IL2 and the O+. 

To compare settings on my pc I need an mission to run this benchmark, so I would like to know what would be the best mission to do the testing on. 

Starting on the ground or airstart at ????meters

lonely flight or lots of AI planes enemy or friendly 

lots of ground activity or empty terrain 

Above Stalingrad, snow terrain or full of trees

Clear sky or max clouds, rain? 

max Ground smoke/fire

Bombers or fighters

flying a prefab mission on autopilot or using a recorded flight as ChiliW use it. 

 

I do feel the best methode would be if using the:

prefab mission, it has to be with as less as possible activities and very basic, like a clear sky, empty snow terrain, single mission, airstat etc. All to try to keep the mission much the same as possible. 

 recorded flight, I think it would be a combination from high activities, lots of planes alternating with a lonely part. Clear sky alterneted with a sky clouded with rain. I would say full CPU and low GPU load alternated with low CPU load and full CPU load. 

 

What are you ideas about this. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trouble is that live gameplay is more demanding than a recorded track. Or last time I checked it was and probably that hasn’t changed. Certainly running active FM and AI contributes to this. 

If you want to test your CPU just do a runway start on the ground with lots of other planes especially bombers. Like a whole flight of He111s

To test your GPU do a free flight. 

Make the missions simple like just fly straight or sit on the runway turning your head back and forth 20 times. 

The first time you look around the frames will drop a bit so start your benchmark after that point. 

Doing complex missions like dogfights, you can’t easily replicate them and it will vary what you’re testing. I usually want to know the worst case. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stalingrad City over flight with clouds and bombers, their escorts and 2 flights intercepting at 2000m ish.

 

Enjoy. 😁

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My best benchmark flight:

Any flight I get assigned in either my Career or in my PWCG campaign.

 

That is all I care about, as long as I get a good experience in those I am quite happy - and that is what I tune my system for.

Then I turn the fps counter off, and have more fun than is hardly imaginable!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After doing a couple of try outs, the whole problem is you have to compare and that can only if you using two equal missions. To get that I do use an single mission, snow, clear sky, no ground objects. I’m using the Camel on autopilot as testplane and I’m looking after the recordings on the details of the wing wires, wings edges and a quick look at the terrain. Recordings are done by FCAT VR software, which is actually working great now.  

 

Think SharpeXB has it right you need an mission and not a recorded flight. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Wasn't chilwilis test done with a recording? Worked pretty well. Test would have to be either flying over a large city or some other hard hitting area, getting a reading while in free flight with no other objects or action going on gives you a very positive outlook on how your framerate will hold up under scrutiny. This is my main issue with VR right now, the performance is all over the place, just looking in certain directions can drop the frame rate in half. It's extremely weird, believe its the cause of most stuttering issues, even in 2d it does the same.

Edited by JonRedcorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back during early access for BoS we were asked to do benchmark scenarios to help figure out the graphic presets. We posted descriptions of missions and hardware etc. 

I imagine if it had been possible for 1CGS to furnish a benchmark that they would have done that but I think the way this game engine works that’s not possible. 

The live play FM and AI take a good chunk of resources and those will be different very time. And recorded tracks don’t give you the same result as live. 

For myself I always want to know which hardware is limiting me. So I’ll purposly select what I know will test either and do some very simple runs like mentioned above. 

3 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

Wasn't chilwilis test done with a recording?   

If it was done with a recorded track then the results won’t equal what live gameplay would be. I suppose it’s at least consistent in some way but not representative of what you get actually running the game. Particularly with regard to the CPU load (FM and AI) which is the bottleneck for VR. 

I haven’t run those tests in a while myself but I don’t imagine that much has changed. And I’m just speculating on why there’s a difference but it seems logical from what I know about IL-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still say the best benchmark for VR is just playing the game.

Get acceptable performance (an individual taste), then turn fps counter off and have fun.

Share this post


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

I still say the best benchmark for VR is just playing the game.

Get acceptable performance (an individual taste), then turn fps counter off and have fun.

 

 

how do you compare two adjustments, the FPS, is in my case, a mid spec system, does fluctuating a lot and you still need two of the same missions. I have fpsVR payware from Steam and while this is so fluctuating, without logging it is impossible to check the difference. 

BTW as watching Nvidia’s Tom Petersen he explains the that tools like FRAPS and I guess the same for IL2 FPS ingame display is not the right tool to measure the VR performance. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dutch2 said:

 

 

how do you compare two adjustments, the FPS, is in my case, a mid spec system, does fluctuating a lot and you still need two of the same missions. I have fpsVR payware from Steam and while this is so fluctuating, without logging it is impossible to check the difference. 

BTW as watching Nvidia’s Tom Petersen he explains the that tools like FRAPS and I guess the same for IL2 FPS ingame display is not the right tool to measure the VR performance. 

 

 

 

I just mainly go for smoothness, I only fly single player so if I get good smoothness in the Career Mode and in PWCG I am happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2019 at 7:06 PM, dburne said:

 

I just mainly go for smoothness, I only fly single player so if I get good smoothness in the Career Mode and in PWCG I am happy.

Think your system is far better then my i7-7700k/GTX1080 so onlike my system, your system can handle the high setting much better, it has much more performance room, while mine is constantly trying to avoid being drowned. So in my case, tweaking is much more important and necessary to get the optimal adjustments. 

 

I did have the same when running RoF on an AMD 6400+ dualcore/HD4890 that was much more sensitive then my i5-2500k/HD7970 

 

On the other hand I think tweaking is also the part of the fun I have. 

 

Edit: smoothness in VR is all about a straight 11 sec Frametime and that is what I measure using FCAT VR. The FPS ingame is not suited for that mainly because you can not log it to compare, but also sinds 2012 we know it is all about a flat line in logged frame times and not FPS.  

Edited by Dutch2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point of any benchmark is to have reproducible results. To say "a recording doesn't perform the same as the game, so I'll just fly a bunch of different missions" will not produce consistent results. If you do a bunch of runs and change nothing, are you getting consistent results? How consistent? How often do you get significant deviation? That's the baseline you need before you start tuning stuff. Chili's benchmark track isn't actually intended to be representative of in-game gameplay, it's a benchmarking and tuning tool. Even with that benchmark track, where you take off the HMD and leave it on the desk and try very hard to reduce variations, I *still* get significant variation on some runs.

 

I'm going to argue that even with FCAT what you are looking for are the objectively measurable differences that come from changing settings, doing overclocks, that kind of thing. If you want to measure it, you need a consistent baseline. Otherwise all your figures are junk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2019 at 2:58 AM, Dutch2 said:

as less as possible activities

You can just look at FPS while track is paused. This readings are very consistent and don't require external measuring tools. I run this stall test before actual flying because FPS sometimes drops for no reason between game launches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Alonzo said:

The point of any benchmark is to have reproducible results. To say "a recording doesn't perform the same as the game, so I'll just fly a bunch of different missions" will not produce consistent results. If you do a bunch of runs and change nothing, are you getting consistent results? How consistent? How often do you get significant deviation? That's the baseline you need before you start tuning stuff. Chili's benchmark track isn't actually intended to be representative of in-game gameplay, it's a benchmarking and tuning tool. Even with that benchmark track, where you take off the HMD and leave it on the desk and try very hard to reduce variations, I *still* get significant variation on some runs.

 

I'm going to argue that even with FCAT what you are looking for are the objectively measurable differences that come from changing settings, doing overclocks, that kind of thing. If you want to measure it, you need a consistent baseline. Otherwise all your figures are junk.

If you have anything better then let me know, I’m still trying to figure that out.  But I did a couple of the same flights and did notice they were all the same. Only you have always fly in the same direction and use a very lonely mission, clear sky, disabled all groundactivities etc.  

About FCAT VR I think it is very clear that since this tool has been released, the most decent PC sites like, HWInfo, Tweakers, GAMERSNEXUS and Tomshardware are using it for testing, or did because not much activity on VR testing on these sites. 

 

BTW Here is what Gamernexus is writing down: If the tester is performing a manual benchmark, it is critical to the benchmark's reproduction that the same map, location on the map, and game events are experienced in each test pass. By introducing complex combat elements and dynamic events, the tester runs the risk of invalidating results.

 

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  

×