Hardware Advice (new purchase)

[wheeliemonsta]

Hi guys,

 

Just wanted some advice from those with slightly newer hardware than I have on what next to buy!

 

I'm currently running a Rift CV1, with an i5-8600K, z370 motherboard, 3200MHz RAM and a GTX1080Ti.

I get good (I'm happy with it) performance in both IL-2 BOS and XP11, which are my two sims of choice!

 

I've got a budget of around GBP450ish, so looking at maybe the i9-9900K, i7-9700K or possibly the Rift-S.

 

Anyone got any feeling around which is the better thing to go for?

 

I know this is the IL-2 forum, but I'm also considering XP11 performance, especially as they look to be moving towards a Vulkan implementation, which might improve multi-core performance on the CPU.

 

Any thoughts welcome!!

 

Thanks.

 

'monsta

[-332FG-Gordon200]

Have you considered the HP Reverb?

Your computer specs look good as they are.

 

These two guys tested the Reverb with a 1080 (non ti).

 

[TUS_Samuel]

14 minutes ago, wheeliemonsta said:

i5-8600K

Just overclock it. Maybe invest in cooling/delidding.

[wheeliemonsta]

Thanks both.

 

So it seems that neither of you feel that the CPU upgrade is worthwhile...

 

I am running the 8600K at 4.7GHz already anyway, so maybe I shouldn't bother with the CPU and wait for the 10nm Intels...

 

Looks like it's a new HMD for me then!

[Alonzo]

11 hours ago, wheeliemonsta said:

Thanks both.

 

So it seems that neither of you feel that the CPU upgrade is worthwhile...

 

I am running the 8600K at 4.7GHz already anyway, so maybe I shouldn't bother with the CPU and wait for the 10nm Intels...

 

Looks like it's a new HMD for me then!

 

I would +1 on the new HMD. There's a lot to decide on which HMD, of course. Rift S is an excellent baseline choice and is about four hundred quid I think. Reverb is a bit more expensive and a bit crap for non-simulators, but it's also a strong contender. What's your CPU cooling solution? You might be able to throw a 280mm AIO at it and get another couple hundred megahertz.

[wheeliemonsta]

Yeah, I'm definitely leaning towards the Rift-S as I'm pretty pleased with the Rift ecosystem generally and although the Reverb has that exceedingly tempting resolution jump, from the reaction of the guys on here who have got the Rift-S, it seems like a good unit and worth the upgrade, even from the CV1.

[chiliwili69]

with an 8600K there is absolute not need to upgrade your CPU to the 9th-gen.

Invest in good cooling (and delliding?) and you could reach 5.0 GHz.

For the Rift-S the 1080Ti is more than enough.

For the Reverb or Pimax5K you will need obviously to tune the SS to reach 95% GPU load.

 

BTW, I don´t think the Rift-S is a worth upgrade for current Rift users unless you can not get the Index/Reverb/Pimax due to budget or delivery. Just MHO.

Edited May 24, 2019 by chiliwili69

[dburne]

58 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

with an 8600K there is absolute not need to upgrade your CPU to the 9th-gen.

Invest in good cooling (and delliding?) and you could reach 5.0 GHz.

For the Rift-S the 1080Ti is more than enough.

For the Reverb or Pimax5K you will need obviously to tune the SS to reach 95% GPU load.

 

BTW, I don´t think the Rift-S is a worth upgrade for current Rift users unless you can not get the Index/Reverb/Pimax due to budget or delivery. Just MHO.

 

Just my opinion but going from Rift to Rift S I was very pleasantly surprised.

I am very happy with my decision - the image clarity is so much better, price is reasonable, and performance I find about the same

as I was getting with the Rift. I can still fly with the same nice graphics settings as I was using in the Rift.

 

It has some early glitches, like mine and several others will go to black screen in headset after closing Oculus Home and then relaunching in the same session. A restart a couple of times of the Oculus service, or reboot of computer will get it back. I am sure Oculus will get this 

addressed hopefully soon in a firmware update.

But overall there are many like myself that are surprised it is so good.

Edited May 24, 2019 by dburne

[wheeliemonsta]

1 hour ago, dburne said:

 

Just my opinion but going from Rift to Rift S I was very pleasantly surprised.

I am very happy with my decision - the image clarity is so much better, price is reasonable, and performance I find about the same

as I was getting with the Rift. I can still fly with the same nice graphics settings as I was using in the Rift.

 

It has some early glitches, like mine and several others will go to black screen in headset after closing Oculus Home and then relaunching in the same session. A restart a couple of times of the Oculus service, or reboot of computer will get it back. I am sure Oculus will get this 

addressed hopefully soon in a firmware update.

But overall there are many like myself that are surprised it is so good.

 

Thanks Don. I've obviously been reading around the forums (this and others!) over the last few days while mulling over my decision and I saw that you'd had a bit of an issue which you've thankfully resolved!

 

I've been surprised at the pleasant reception which the Rift-S has received, especially given the lukewarm reviews prior to it's release.

 

Have you tried it other sims yet? If so, is it as impressive an upgrade in those as it seems to be in IL-2?

(Sorry everyone, but I fly other sims too  )

[dburne]

13 minutes ago, wheeliemonsta said:

 

Thanks Don. I've obviously been reading around the forums (this and others!) over the last few days while mulling over my decision and I saw that you'd had a bit of an issue which you've thankfully resolved!

 

I've been surprised at the pleasant reception which the Rift-S has received, especially given the lukewarm reviews prior to it's release.

 

Have you tried it other sims yet? If so, is it as impressive an upgrade in those as it seems to be in IL-2?

(Sorry everyone, but I fly other sims too  )

 

Well it is not totally resolved for me yet, I thought it was but the issue came back. To avoid it I just leave Oculus Home running and minimized after the first use of

the Rift S for the day. I started a support ticket and will see what they say. So first use of day it is perfectly fine, but if I close Oculus Home and then

relaunch it during day without computer being shut down or restarted then I have black screen. I can restart Oculus service  2-3 times and then it works fine again.

Probably something in firmware.

 

Yeah the reception overall that I am seeing is very positive, I think folks are surprised at the image quality with good performance they are getting.

Yes, I have used it in DCS also with similar results. About the only negative is the audio strap, but I actually prefer earbuds and am using Klipsch R6 II earbuds and the

sound is phenomenal. 

 

 

 

[chiliwili69]

3 hours ago, dburne said:

going from Rift to Rift S I was very pleasantly surprised.

 

If you upgrade from Rift S to Reverb or Index or Pimax5K or Pimax5XR or Pimax8K you would be also pleasantly surprised without compromising performance.

 

Your stellar PC deserves more than this poor Rift-S resolution  

[dburne]

22 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

If you upgrade from Rift S to Reverb or Index or Pimax5K or Pimax5XR or Pimax8K you would be also pleasantly surprised without compromising performance.

 

Your stellar PC deserves more than this poor Rift-S resolution  

 

How do you know that? Just curious.

What I love about my Rift S is the ability to run the same higher GFX settings while maintaining about the same in performance as I was getting in the Rift CV1.

With a much improved image and clarity. I think a lot of folks have been surprised at how good it is based on what I have been reading across the forums.

 

I may grab a Reverb or Index down the line a bit just to try it, right now though I am very much ok.

If I have to give up much in the way of GFX settings though just to get reasonable performance I would not be so happy.

 

There is also more to image clarity than resolution alone.

 

Edited May 24, 2019 by dburne

[BlackMambaMowTin]

If you had to buy right now, I would say buy the Rift-S no doubt. But I would recommend waiting for the Index and its reviews. 

 

The Rift-S is a great upgrade visually. I'm blown away by how clear things are now. Small planes flying low over forest are now much easier to see. It's a huge difference. 

 

I plan to also get the Index so I didn't wait. But I suspect the index will be better. I don't bother with the HP Reverb because it has no IPD adjustment and that's the biggest weakness of the Rift-S for me and my high IPD. 

[Alonzo]

7 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

If you upgrade from Rift S to Reverb or Index or Pimax5K or Pimax5XR or Pimax8K you would be also pleasantly surprised without compromising performance.

 

Your stellar PC deserves more than this poor Rift-S resolution  

 

There's a lot more to the Rift S than the panel resolution. Oculus lens tech is the best in the business and that's part of why everyone's so impressed with "only" 1440p resolution. The guy who runs the VR Discord channel (with 14k members!) prefers his Rift-S to the Odyssey+, for example.

[dburne]

2 minutes ago, Alonzo_LW said:

 

There's a lot more to the Rift S than the panel resolution. Oculus lens tech is the best in the business and that's part of why everyone's so impressed with "only" 1440p resolution. The guy who runs the VR Discord channel (with 14k members!) prefers his Rift-S to the Odyssey+, for example.

 

Yeah I saw that too.

I have logged several hours in my Rift S since getting it Tues, and it is way more than I expected.

I was very hesitant to order it, but I sure am glad I did now.

[chiliwili69]

3 hours ago, Alonzo_LW said:

with "only" 1440p resolution

 

I think it is not correct to name the Rift-S resolution as "1440p resolution" (which is what it is used when we refer to monitors: 1080p means 1920x1080, 1440p means 2560x1440,  2160p or 4K means 3840x2160).

But the Rift-S is not 2560x1440 per eye (3.7 million pixels per eye), is just 1280x1440 (1.8 million pixels) which is even less than a 2D-monitor 1080p resolution

 

The Pimax5K is 2560x1440 per eye, so this is like a 2D-monitor 1440p resolution

 

The Reverb is 2160x2160 per eye (4.6 million pixels per eye, more than double the Rift-S!), but it is far from a 2D-monitor 2160p resolution (or 4K)which is about 8.3 million pixels.

[BlackMambaMowTin]

25 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

But the Rift-S is not 2560x1440 per eye (3.7 million pixels per eye), is just 1280x1440 (1.8 million pixels) which is even less than a 2D-monitor 1080p resolution

 

So the Rift went from sub HD to essentially 1080p with the Rift-S. That's why it looks like such a big improvement. Previously, we were looking at sub HD resolution up close. 

 

Also the Rift-S image has a bit of supersampling so it's like a cleaned up 1080p image. 

 

A lot of us where disappointed by the specs but the image is impressive. I'm still disappointed by the lack of IPD adjustment and ear phones. That would make it perfect. I would cancel my Index preorder if that were the case. 

Edited May 24, 2019 by BlackMambaMowTin

[-332FG-Gordon200]

14 hours ago, dburne said:

but if I close Oculus Home and then

relaunch it during day without computer being shut down or restarted then I have black screen. I can restart Oculus service  2-3 times and then it works fine again.

Probably something in firmware.

I traded my Rift CV1 in for an Odyssey+ and saw an increase in clarity and performance but experienced problems similar to what you describe with the WMR app. Mine would try to initiate on start-up and fail to establish a connection.

While checking to insure power management was on max for all USB ports I right-clicked my HMD and under Properties clicked Update Driver. Instead of the usual 'you have a current driver already' message it showed 'No Driver Installed -Do you want a driver?' Some newer HMDs also require a separate driver for hololens.

Not only did the image improve but I no longer have the start up problem as you describe.

 

PS: The image improvement was the addition of more depth and a better defined landscape below. More 3D in VR if you will.  

[Dutch2]

22 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

with an 8600K there is absolute not need to upgrade your CPU to the 9th-gen.

Invest in good cooling (and delliding?) and you could reach 5.0 GHz.

For the Rift-S the 1080Ti is more than enough.

For the Reverb or Pimax5K you will need obviously to tune the SS to reach 95% GPU load.

 

BTW, I don´t think the Rift-S is a worth upgrade for current Rift users unless you can not get the Index/Reverb/Pimax due to budget or delivery. Just MHO.

 My old i7-7700k was running 4,8Ghz is now after a delid on the 5,1Ghz and finally my VR is running great.  I think whatever type of CPU you are running, the 5+ is absolute needed for this kind of VR game.  

[chiliwili69]

10 hours ago, BlackMambaMowTin said:

So the Rift went from sub HD to essentially 1080p with the Rift-S. That's why it looks like such a big improvement. Previously, we were looking at sub HD resolution up close. 

 

This is a wrong simplification. The Rift was not sub HD. The Rift had 1.3 million pixels per eye and HD is just 0.9 million pixels.

Also, The Rift-S is not FullHD, it is 230.000 pixels less than FullHD.

 

In fact when you go from HD to FullHD in a monitor you get an resolution bump of 125%!

 

Going from Rift to Rift-S you only get a resolution bump of 42%!!, which is about 3 times less than going from HD to FullHD!!

 

 

So why people like the clarity of the new Rift-S??,

it is mostly due to the LCD panels which have 3 RGB subpixels per pixels. An a minor upgrade in lenses.

In fact the better lenses are in the Quest, not in the Rift-S. This is another reason to F... the Facebook guys. Why they kept the better lenses, the high-res displays, the mechanical IPD adjust and the better ergonomics for the Quest!! for the same price !!!  and the Quest include battery and snapdragon chip!!. 

 

Sorry guys but the Rift-S is the clear loser here. I tend to be a quite loyal guy, but here I can not be silent.

Absolutely, the Oculus guys could do better for sure after three years of "intense" research work fo the PhD guys. But Facebook business is another matter, they just want to get as much as people in VR (not to please them but just the grab their info)

[dburne]

7 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

Sorry guys but the Rift-S is the clear loser here. I tend to be a quite loyal guy, but here I can not be silent.

Absolutely, the Oculus guys could do better for sure after three years of "intense" research work fo the PhD guys. But Facebook business is another matter, they just want to get as much as people in VR (not to please them but just the grab their info)

 

There are a lot of Rift S users that might disagree with you on this one, myself included.

Also I have seen folks comment that have both, the Rift S image clarity "appears" better to them than Quest.

I will probably order a Quest here in the next 60-90 days and will be able to comment then from having seen them both, which is what matters.

 

I was so disappointed in the specs of the Rift S when it was officially announced. Seriously considered not getting one, in fact I wasn't at first.

All I can say for me, I am very glad I did. Image clarity is fantastic. Tracking has been very good for me, both in flight sim and some Touch games.

No we didn't get all we wanted with this updated Rift, but I think we got more than what we expected of it after seeing the details. At least that appears to be

the sentiment of the majority of folks that upgraded - that it was a pleasant surprise.

 

The two main drawbacks IMHO:

Audio - I solved that easily by getting Klipsch R6 II earbuds. Thankfully Oculus designed the thing to have an audio jack, my audio is fantastic.

No physical IPD adjustment. There is software adjustment, but does not help that much if one's IPD is out of the recommended range. Mine falls in 

the recommended range so no issue there for me.

 

I will be quite happy with the Rift S for a while now.  Reverb and Index, only other two I might consider, can't really get yet. I think Amazon has pulled the Reverb from even pre-order.  I will wait down the road to hear reports on them on image clarity and performance.

 

 

 

[TUS_Samuel]

4 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

it is mostly due to the LCD panels which have 3 RGB subpixels per pixels.

 

I think we at this point cannot ignore this in calculations. We can no longer compare resolution just by pixel count (remember Pimax 5K+ vs 8K). Some other metric is needed, maybe subpixel count or something more accurate.

If you compare subpixels you will get around 110% impovement in Rift-S over Rift which is close to going from hd to fullhd.

 

But who cares about oculus given that Reverb is coming.

[chiliwili69]

The Oculus R&D team captured at their heavy duty and intense work to create Rift-S in these three years:

 

 

[BlackMambaMowTin]

7 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

This is a wrong simplification. The Rift was not sub HD. The Rift had 1.3 million pixels per eye and HD is just 0.9 million pixels.

Also, The Rift-S is not FullHD, it is 230.000 pixels less than FullHD.

 

In fact when you go from HD to FullHD in a monitor you get an resolution bump of 125%!

 

Going from Rift to Rift-S you only get a resolution bump of 42%!!, which is about 3 times less than going from HD to FullHD!!

 

 

 

Sorry, when I said "HD" I meant Full HD. I think most people now just say HD to refer to 1920x1080.

So the Rift-S pixels are 1.8M and Full HD is 2M pixels. So the Rift-S is closer to Full HD.

 

So it's fair to say that moving to the Rift-S feels like a move to Full HD from something below that. And the added subpixels make it more like a 100% increase in pixels. Your chart doesn't count the subpixels. 

 

I agree with you that Oculus messed up by not giving us what they already had in the Rift, the IPD and headphones. They already manufactured millions of those. 

 

But regardless it's a very noticeable boost in image quality no matter how we quantify it. 

 

 

Edited May 25, 2019 by BlackMambaMowTin

[dburne]

25 minutes ago, BlackMambaMowTin said:

 

Sorry, when I said "HD" I meant Full HD. I think most people now just say HD to refer to 1920x1080.

So the Rift-S pixels are 1.8M and Full HD is 2M pixels. So the Rift-S is closer to Full HD.

 

So it's fair to say that moving to the Rift-S feels like a move to Full HD from something below that. And the added subpixels make it more like a 100% increase in pixels. Your chart doesn't count the subpixels. 

 

I agree with you that Oculus messed up by not giving us what they already had in the Rift, the IPD and headphones. They already manufactured millions of those. 

 

But regardless it's a very noticeable boost in image quality no matter how we quantify it. 

 

 

 

 

Agreed. Been flying in IL-2 all day today - probably have logged around 16-18 hours in the Rift S since receiving it on Tuesday.

The image quality is quite nice, and along with the performance it is very impressive.  Certainly better than I had anticipated.

Tracking for me has been flawless so far also.

[chiliwili69]

26 minutes ago, BlackMambaMowTin said:

And the added subpixels make it more like a 100% increase in pixels. Your chart doesn't count the subpixels.

 

Yes, Samuel and you are right on that. We can only compare resolution when the devices has the same subpixels per pixel, so we can compare Rift-S, Index, Pimax5K+ and Reverb between them. But not with the OLED panel of the Rift, (or any other OLED display) since the Rift OLED onaly had 2 subpixels per pixel.

 

[Alonzo]

I saw a chart that had pixels per degree and sub-pixels per degree and since Rift S is still gen1 FOV it actually does quite well on that metric. It’s going to be ahead of the Index on that metric, and behind the Reverb. I still think Index is going to be the best all around headset, subject to availability and cash. Rift S is pretty great for a mainstream, go-buy-it-in-a-store headset.

 

Also, Chili, your bashing the Oculus dev team is sort of funny, but you do realize two senior execs quit over the Rift S, right? It’s not what (at least part of) the Oculus team wanted to release. 

[dburne]

1 hour ago, Alonzo_LW said:

I saw a chart that had pixels per degree and sub-pixels per degree and since Rift S is still gen1 FOV it actually does quite well on that metric. It’s going to be ahead of the Index on that metric, and behind the Reverb. I still think Index is going to be the best all around headset, subject to availability and cash. Rift S is pretty great for a mainstream, go-buy-it-in-a-store headset.

 

Also, Chili, your bashing the Oculus dev team is sort of funny, but you do realize two senior execs quit over the Rift S, right? It’s not what (at least part of) the Oculus team wanted to release. 

 

Also it is also not really fair for bashing them taking three years to bring out what is now the Rift S.

 

1: They were working on the Half Dome tech during much of that time.

2: They have been continuing their software development with some nice improvements. They don't just rely on Steam VR or WMR to provide it.

3: They brought out the Oculus Go.

4: They brought out the Oculus Quest.

5: They changed direction from Half Dome for the interim, and brought out Rift S. ( partnered with Lenovo).

 

So they have been pretty busy during those three years. Trying to truly create and expand the markets for VR, which it needs

in order to remain a viable market. They have not been sitting on their laurels.

 

I was disappointed to with the change of direction for now, but looking at the overall scheme of things and truly growing the market and not just catering to a very

small niche, it makes good sense. And now being a Rift S owner, I am quite pleased with what they brought us even though it was not

what I had hoped for. It is a fantastic VR headset. 

I think Oculus is still leading the way in the attempts to grow VR into a stable and viable market. 

Edited May 25, 2019 by dburne

[BlackMambaMowTin]

20 minutes ago, dburne said:

Trying to truly create and expand the markets for VR, which it needs

in order to remain a viable market.

 

I agree but I don't see why they couldn't grow the market with the Quest and still sell and Rift-S with  IPD and earphones. 

 

But cost cutting on the Rift-S some with out of range IPDs may get a negative impression of VR after getting headaches. That's not good for the market. The Index sold out so there is a strong market for premium VR headsets. 

[dburne]

21 minutes ago, BlackMambaMowTin said:

 

I agree but I don't see why they couldn't grow the market with the Quest and still sell and Rift-S with  IPD and earphones. 

 

But cost cutting on the Rift-S some with out of range IPDs may get a negative impression of VR after getting headaches. That's not good for the market. The Index sold out so there is a strong market for premium VR headsets. 

 

Oh I definitely agree, the Rift S at the least should have had physical IPD adjustment and better included audio than that strap.

The audio driver is very good, just that head strap audio makes it sound poor.

Thankfully it has the audio jack.

[Alonzo]

17 hours ago, BlackMambaMowTin said:

But cost cutting on the Rift-S some with out of range IPDs may get a negative impression of VR after getting headaches. That's not good for the market. The Index sold out so there is a strong market for premium VR headsets. 

 

16 hours ago, dburne said:

Oh I definitely agree, the Rift S at the least should have had physical IPD adjustment and better included audio than that strap.

The audio driver is very good, just that head strap audio makes it sound poor.

Thankfully it has the audio jack.

 

Well again, this depends. Oculus have the numbers that really tell the story. How many people are going to be outside the comfortable IPD range and play for long enough each day to actually get discomfort? There was some statistic from Steam like the average HMD usage is 6 hours per month or something. That's pretty low (and yes, discomfort would further reduce adoption, I get that). But if Rift S can accommodate 80% of people with its fixed lenses and that lets them bring it to market cheaper, they have to run the numbers and make a decision.

 

What's interesting is the Quest. It's absolutely more hardware for the money. Standalone headset, snapdragon or whatever SOC, adjustable IPD, etc etc. So why are the two the same price? We don't know, of course, but it's likely the Quest falls more into the "console" style of device -- walled garden, you must buy their apps, they expect to make money back on the games. Rift S is less of a walled garden because you can play Steam content easily. Oculus probably know this and so can't sell the Rift S at as much of a loss as the Quest.

[chiliwili69]

On 5/24/2019 at 2:01 PM, dburne said:

How do you know that? Just curious.

What I love about my Rift S is the ability to run the same higher GFX settings while maintaining about the same in performance as I was getting in the Rift CV1.

With a much improved image and clarity. I think a lot of folks have been surprised at how good it is based on what I have been reading across the forums.

 

I may grab a Reverb or Index down the line a bit just to try it, right now though I am very much ok.

If I have to give up much in the way of GFX settings though just to get reasonable performance I would not be so happy.

 

Don, I really know that for sure.

 

With the Index you will be pleased with the extra FOV and the great audio.

With the PIMAX5K+ you will be pleased with large FOV and resolution and image clarity. 

With the Reverb you will be pleased with the extra bump in resolution.

 

But with any of the three above you will be unpleased in terms of performace. Given the fact that you run a 9900K at 5.1GHz  with a 2080Ti.

The total number of pixels to be rendered is determined just by your GPU. This is given for every GPU. Your GPU handles well 12 million of pixels at 90Hz.

Now with every device you need to play with SS and Display freq (in case of Pimax and Index) to have an equivalent load.

 

I made a table for you:

[BlackMambaMowTin]

On 5/26/2019 at 12:27 PM, Alonzo_LW said:

There was some statistic from Steam like the average HMD usage is 6 hours per month or something.

 

Averages are meaningless. I was excited to work for this Investment bank when I heard the average salary was $300K. But that average is totally distorted by the fact that some people are making millions. 

 

Moreover, a lot of VR owners are older and have families and jobs. Some just play on the weekend if they can. I know a lot of sim gamers just play on the weekends when the wife is not around and they don't have to drive the kids to soccer practice. 

 

I think screwing over customers who supported you with cv1 is not worth the $50 the IPD adjust would have added to the cost. 

 

It's still a pretty good headset overall and I'm really enjoying the visuals in IL-2.