Is VR with maxed out settings and 2k resolution per eye possible now?

[Nocke]

Hi folks,

 

I am sitting on the fence, thinking of going VR. 

But I am demanding

I am running the game now on a 9700k cpu, 2080 gpu, 2k monitor, all graphics settings maxed out, it runs smoothly.

I do not want to fall back behind that, and I don't want to be on the edge and have to optimise and fine tune things all the time.

So that's the question - is that now possible with the best available hardware in VR, or should I wait another 1 or 2 years?

Thx for any comment!

[slikslik]

Absolutely.  I'm not so sure you can do it with a 2080, but yes, 2k and even better.

[dburne]

Don't confuse what you see in 2k on a monitor with what you will see with 2k in a VR headset.

Totally different.

And no it is not going to be as crisp and sharp in your headset as it is on your monitor.

 

I have been using VR since 2017 and personally find it freakin awesome.

Edited October 11, 2022 by dburne

[Dallas88B]

19 minutes ago, dburne said:

And no it is not going to be as crisp and sharp in your headset as it is on your monitor.

 

I have been using VR since 2017 and personally find it 

 

I have no experience with VR. I live in the sub tropics without air conditioning, so I dont think I will ever be using VR. But I am interested in your experience. Given VR is not as crisp and sharp I am curious as to what makes it awesome. Is aircraft spotting and identification an even bigger challenge in VR.

 

My old business partner living in a cooler part of Australia, and with AC, absolutely loves his VR. He mostly races cars.

[dburne]

20 minutes ago, Dallas88B said:

 

I have no experience with VR. I live in the sub tropics without air conditioning, so I dont think I will ever be using VR. But I am interested in your experience. Given VR is not as crisp and sharp I am curious as to what makes it awesome. Is aircraft spotting and identification an even bigger challenge in VR.

 

My old business partner living in a cooler part of Australia, and with AC, absolutely loves his VR. He mostly races cars.

 

The immersion for me is beyond everything else, absolutely incredible. It is like you are actually in that plane.

Spotting easier - ID'ing is harder.

I only do single player and have no problem toggling labels on and off if needed. 

VR has come a long ways and the image at least in the cockpit is pretty darn sharp these days, looking out in a distance at the horizon - not so much.

But that immersion - that is why I will only do gaming in VR now.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

9 hours ago, 216th_Nocke said:

Hi folks,

 

I am sitting on the fence, thinking of going VR. 

But I am demanding

I am running the game now on a 9700k cpu, 2080 gpu, 2k monitor, all graphics settings maxed out, it runs smoothly.

I do not want to fall back behind that, and I don't want to be on the edge and have to optimise and fine tune things all the time.

So that's the question - is that now possible with the best available hardware in VR, or should I wait another 1 or 2 years?

Thx for any comment!

With that cpu and gpu, I would say max settings and reverb g2 native resolution are not possible.

 

With an upcoming Ryzen 7000/Intel 13th gen cpu with ddr5 and an rtx 4080 or better, it will be possible.

[Nocke]

I am not thinking about using my current equipment for VR, but about getting a completely new rig, possibly containing the best hardware available.

Under the condition that I do not have to switch on labels or such for identification, get an image as clear and crisp as on my 2k monitor, and do not have to make graphics compromises.

I also do not want to have to update again 2 years later.

 

Seems we are not yet there?

[Bando]

Started flying VR about 6 weeks ago.
I will never go back to 2d.

Never!
2D was sharper, had a larger view on the surroundings (FOV in VR - Reverb G2-) and on that 40" screen it looked all awesome. Still, I will not go back to 2d. @dburne was right about immersion. The feeling of "being there, doing that" is fantastic. I only regret I didn't do it sooner. Whatever your specs are; if you can go VR,..........GO!

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

1 hour ago, 216th_Nocke said:

I am not thinking about using my current equipment for VR, but about getting a completely new rig, possibly containing the best hardware available.

Under the condition that I do not have to switch on labels or such for identification, get an image as clear and crisp as on my 2k monitor, and do not have to make graphics compromises.

I also do not want to have to update again 2 years later.

 

Seems we are not yet there?

ID for me is much easier in VR because you can really see shapes and the size of planes well. I also run ultra in vr mostly and 100% resolution on my G2 (Ryzen 5600X and RTX 3080 with Open Composite and reprojection). Really there is no comparison between 2D and VR...it's not even the same experience.

Edited October 12, 2022 by drewm3i-VR

[chiliwili69]

1 hour ago, 216th_Nocke said:

get an image as clear and crisp as on my 2k monitor

 

To have an aproximate idea about the crispness of VR you ca check the pictures I took through the Reverb G2 and Index, and compare them with a 1080p monitor and 4K monitor.

 

You will see that G2 gives a lot of details in the center of the vision, I think it is equivalent to 2K (above 1080p and below 4K).

The Reverb G2 is a 2 year old device. Using fresnel lenses and display port.

 

The best current crispness is deliver but Varjo Aero (I have not tested but Dburne and other say it delivers the best vision over other devices). So since it is better than G2 and G2 is around 2K, I suposse Aero will be above 2K. But has Don say, it is difficult to compare what you see in a VR device with what you see in a monitor.

 

This year new device are in the table with pancake lenses which provide a better vision (Pico 4 today, next year Quest 3 and Deckard).

 

If I were you, with your current system, I would buy a second hand G2 or a Quest 2 or a new Pico 4. Just to test water on VR. Don´t worry for performance, this is something solvable by a better rig.

So if you like it ---> upgrade rig

If you don´t like --> sell the VR device (almost at the same price) and continue with monitor 2K.

[Nocke]

Thanks, that was helpful!

Maybe I'll look for some second hand device.

It seems to me now that maybe the cpu is the bottleneck.

A friend is running VR on a Ryzen 5800, and is seriously limited when we fly demanding DCS coops. Runs fine for everybody with a monitor, absolutely not for the VR guys. To solve that one would apparently need a cpu that is not yet existing.

Why is that? I believe I have heard in other places that the cpu is often limiting in VR. I would not have expected that. I thought the simulation calculations on the cpu would be the same, and one would just need to render twice?

[WIS-Redcoat]

If you plan to buy VR in order to fly and race you simply need this:

 

 

 

The quest 2 would be a far inferior experience.  

[BOO]

7 minutes ago, WIS-Redcoat said:

If you plan to buy VR in order to fly and race you simply need this:

 

 

 

The quest 2 would be a far inferior experience.  

.....and move to Murca. 

 

In Eup 650 Eupcoin, UK 599 of my english pounds (today - lord knows tomorrow)

 

 

[dburne]

52 minutes ago, 216th_Nocke said:

Thanks, that was helpful!

Maybe I'll look for some second hand device.

It seems to me now that maybe the cpu is the bottleneck.

A friend is running VR on a Ryzen 5800, and is seriously limited when we fly demanding DCS coops. Runs fine for everybody with a monitor, absolutely not for the VR guys. To solve that one would apparently need a cpu that is not yet existing.

Why is that? I believe I have heard in other places that the cpu is often limiting in VR. I would not have expected that. I thought the simulation calculations on the cpu would be the same, and one would just need to render twice?

 

Probably because running the game in VR requires processing two images rather than one and merging them.

[Customizer171]

16 hours ago, dburne said:

 

The immersion for me is beyond everything else, absolutely incredible. It is like you are actually in that plane.

Spotting easier - ID'ing is harder.

I only do single player and have no problem toggling labels on and off if needed. 

VR has come a long ways and the image at least in the cockpit is pretty darn sharp these days, looking out in a distance at the horizon - not so much.

But that immersion - that is why I will only do gaming in VR now.

 

I have the same feeling, cockpit and the wings of my own plane are very sharp, but more distant objects are definitely more blurry.

Do you have any idea why it is like that?

It would be amazing if we could have the same clarity at all distances!

I use a G2.

 

[dburne]

6 minutes ago, Customizer171 said:

 

I have the same feeling, cockpit and the wings of my own plane are very sharp, but more distant objects are definitely more blurry.

Do you have any idea why it is like that?

It would be amazing if we could have the same clarity at all distances!

I use a G2.

 

 

Not really, I think it is just the nature of 3d and the affect of having real depth to the image. Lot more pixels to draw for sure.

Even with my Varjo Aero which currently is about the best when it comes to image clarity, stuff off way in the distance is still somewhat blurry.

I suppose as technology advances there will come a time that is not the case, but probably at least a couple of generations or more of devices away from that.

[Nocke]

Maybe I did not formulate my question correctly or clear enough, I'll try again, differently:

So far, when talking to or flying with others, VR people always told me that they where handicapped in identifying planes, had trouble to achieve acceptable framerates, had to fiddle around with all sorts of settings to get it running acceptably, and had to reduce the graphics options.

I don't want that.

My next PC will probably be the last one I am ever going to buy (that's age related), I am willing to spend a lot of money on it, and I want no hazzles. The question is therefore: Are we there already, or do I wait one or two more years? I have no problems with waiting either.

[chiliwili69]

5 hours ago, 216th_Nocke said:

Why is that? I believe I have heard in other places that the cpu is often limiting in VR. I would not have expected that. I thought the simulation calculations on the cpu would be the same, and one would just need to render twice?

 

I don´t know about DCS, but we have been testing a lot IL-2 in monitor and VR using the SYN_VANDER benchmark (look in hardware section).

 

You will see that in the CPU test (monitor at 1080) DBCOOPER gets 150fps with his i9-12900K, and in the VRTest2 (VR G2 at 100%) he get 88fps over 90.

In my case I get 117 fps with my 5600X and 82fps in the VR test2.

 

VR needs to calculate the geometry of the scene twice, one for each eye. That´s the reason to be CPU limited in certain cases.

1 hour ago, 216th_Nocke said:

Are we there already, or do I wait one or two more years? I have no problems with waiting either.

 

If you buy the latest CPUs and GPUs you will be 99.9% of the time at 90fps with all settings maxed out for the resolution of G2. (except mirrors and MSAA perhaps).

This is what you wanted to hear, right? ?

 

In CPU department:

In fact, with the 5800X3D or the i9-12900K, you will not be CPU limited under almost any scenario (well, less than 30 planes/tanks around).

But next AMD 7600X or the intel i9-13900K are bringing even more single-thread performance.

You only need to go to this page and sort by single-thread:

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/CPU_mega_page.html

So, yes, the Nirvana CPUs for IL-2 VR exist today.

 

In GPU department:

This is totally dependent on the VR device that you use and the number of total pixels to render.

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

In the above link you will see a sheet called "SS per device). In green you will see the total pixels demanded for every device in VR using default resolution (100% SS).

For example the G2 uses 19.5 million pixels, The Aero (high settings) uses 16.9 million pixels, the Index uses 9 million pixels, the Pico4 9.3 million pixels, etc.

I could say that a top card today (3090Ti for example) can handle well the G2 at 100% with all settings maxed out (maybe except MSAA).

The next series of cards 40XX are well above over the 30XX series, so , if required, (only if required) you can go to the 40XX series.

Take into account that the future devices with pancake lenses (Pico4, Quest3, Deckard, etc) will need less internal supersampling since the lenses need less supersmpled image in the display. It means that even if the panel resolutions of future devices go higher and thanks to the pancake lenses, the total number of pixels will be below 19.5 million. In fact, to reach 19.5 million pixels with pancake lenses you will have a physical display of 3100x3100!! (devices are not there yet, maybe in 3-4 years )

So, yes, the Nirvana GPUs for IL-2 VR exist today.

 

 

 

Edited October 12, 2022 by chiliwili69

[Nocke]

Thx a lot, Chiliwili!

That was exactly the information I was looking for.

I guess I'll wait a couple of months more to let prices for the 4090 calm down a little, and then go for it

[Drum]

I own the latest VR headset (Varjo Aero) and until I got this HMD I was frustrated with the poor medium to long range clarity of the G2 Reverb because although it's very clear in the sweet spot (center 25% of lens) I found scanning the distant sky for a dot takes a long time and it's like your head is a typewriter carriage as you scan from top to bottom, side to side.  That's where the other HMDs fail IMO, in close the image is really impressive, but when you're looking for other aircraft (dots) it takes too long to find them.  At least with this Aero HMD the lenses are clear everywhere so when looking in an area of sky you just have to scan with your eyes (naturally) without the head movement required with the cheaper HMDs, plus because the whole lens is the sweet spot you notice movement when just looking in the same general direction as you do when on a monitor.  Also, you don't lose targets around you in a dogfight as quickly because of the narrow sweet spot limitation.

 

Otherwise, the lack of image clarity is minimal now and more to do with having to turn down the graphic settings in game to push 70+ FPS.  I only have a 10900K cpu and 3080 gpu but with a new 13900K & 4090 that will pretty much make this Aero HMD experience the same (eye candy wise) as the monitor experience, but with the added 3D effects which even further improve spotting and IDing.  VR is the way of the future IMO, but only after you break free from the HMDs still sporting a lens with a sweet spot.  When you get an HMD with full lens clarity, you won't be enticed by a monitor anymore.

Edited October 12, 2022 by Drum

[Nocke]

Thx again. Confirms my growing impression that we are, technologically, somehow on the edge of what I'd like to have.

Just a couple of months of patience required.

And the hope that this entire system will not have broken down by then.

But that's a different discussion ...

[dburne]

You really - just have to try it. Ain't a benchmark around that will give you a clue as to what you are actually going to be seeing in the headset. IMHO of course. If I had to guess I would say of folks that try it for the first time, around 85-90% are thrilled with it, and the other 10-15% go back to monitor.

Edited October 12, 2022 by dburne

[Drum]

Yes, and it can also be a real catch 22 when it does hook you, if when you find you can't go back to using the monitor again due it's lousy head tracking and/or the loss of 3D but you're also not happy losing the full screen clarity and having to run with lower graphical settings.

 

IMO, save your money until you own a system capable of running the sim at 70+ FPS in an HMD with 'edge to edge' lens clarity.

Edited October 13, 2022 by Drum

[Youtch]

On 10/12/2022 at 10:00 AM, drewm3i-VR said:

ID for me is much easier in VR because you can really see shapes and the size of planes well. I also run ultra in vr mostly and 100% resolution on my G2 (Ryzen 5600X and RTX 3080 with Open Composite and reprojection). Really there is no comparison between 2D and VR...it's not even the same experience.

Would you be kind to share your startup.cfg and OpenXR toolkit settings? I have the same specs and I feel it is still far from being optimum.

 

Many thanks in advance.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

3 minutes ago, Youtch said:

Would you be kind to share your startup.cfg and OpenXR toolkit settings? I have the same specs and I feel it is still far from being optimum.

 

Many thanks in advance.

Happy to, but I also use process lasso, have 32 gb ram at 3800 mhz and cl15, etc.

 

I also only play online which has way better performance.

[Youtch]

55 minutes ago, drewm3i-VR said:

Happy to, but I also use process lasso, have 32 gb ram at 3800 mhz and cl15, etc.

 

I also only play online which has way better performance.

Many thanks in advance, I am just curious of your settings if you manage to find a neat combo. Are you using upscaling?

 

I am unfamiliar with Process lasso and what actual effect it has on IL2 performance, but I have similar memory profile.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

11 hours ago, Youtch said:

Many thanks in advance, I am just curious of your settings if you manage to find a neat combo. Are you using upscaling?

 

I am unfamiliar with Process lasso and what actual effect it has on IL2 performance, but I have similar memory profile.

I am using some upscaling, yes. I honestly have forgotten the setting so I'll have to look. 

 

Process lasso helps prioritize/optimize cpu and ram scheduling/resources:

https://bitsum.com/process-lasso/

 

I mainly use it to make sure il-2 never runs on a virtual thread.