Best settings for VR

So i have a oculus rift, i use oculus tool and 1.2 super sampling, i leave pixel sampling at 1.0 in game, was wondering if anyone has figured out best settings for vr/dcs 2.5

gtx 1080, 16gb ram, i7 4790k

Mags, I did a full analysis on VR performance in the VR section of the forums. The only thing I've changed since then is turning AF up to 16x.

You may have to invest some time and work to get acceptable performance from your hardware. You have both a CPU and a GPU that will be strained by VR. If you had a 4790k and a 1080ti, or a newer processor and a 1080 standard, it would be easier. I think it is doable though. My analysis contains information that may help.

Analysis: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=201647

VR Section: https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=497

Mags, I did a full analysis on VR performance in the VR section of the forums. The only thing I've changed since then is turning AF up to 16x.

 

You may have to invest some time and work to get acceptable performance from your hardware. You have both a CPU and a GPU that will be strained by VR. If you had a 4790k and a 1080ti, or a newer processor and a 1080 standard, it would be easier. I think it is doable though. My analysis contains information that may help.

 

Analysis: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=201647

VR Section: https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=497

Will check it out, cheers.

Just curious before i check out your post, do you use Oculus Tool with multisampling or do you have that at 0 and use the ingame pixel sampling instead? or do you use both?

use the ingame PD

I have it at 1.5 with no msaa and runs pretty good most of the time at singleplayer

use the ingame PD

I have it at 1.5 with no msaa and runs pretty good most of the time at singleplayer

So have Oculus Tool Supersampling at 0 then?

So have Oculus Tool Supersampling at 0 then?

at default setting mate...if it was at 0 leave it there

WARNING WILL ROBINSON

I would highly recommend that you run PD in game with 1.2 and MSAA at x2 with deferred shading. I used to have to run PD at 1.5 to see the gauges, but that's no longer the case. Lowering it to 1.2 gives you some headroom to engage MSAA and DS. It's an entirely different (better) sim with these settings. See the analysis linked above for science.

I would highly recommend that you run PD in game with 1.2 and MSAA at x2 with deferred shading. I used to have to run PD at 1.5 to see the gauges, but that's no longer the case. Lowering it to 1.2 gives you some headroom to engage MSAA and DS. It's an entirely different (better) sim with these settings. See the analysis linked above for science.

also that is a solution i will try myself

i had it at 1.3 with x2 but this didnt work very well in caucasus Nevada is different story

what nvidia drivers are you running?

Cheers for the info folks

I'm running the latest NVidia drivers. I always do unless there's a bad build.

The difference between 1.2 and 1.3 PD is pretty significant if you're running MSAA and DS. There's a link in my analysis that explains why a single point of PD can be a big resource drain with little return.

Here's how I quantify the difference in the analysis. I loaded a mission I created for graphics testing with each setting combination. After collecting data and analyzing I found that 1.2 PD and 2xMSAA were the best balance for me. The mission starts as a blank map then slowly adds 38 aircraft attacking an invincible target. Values are taken at 8 different points in the mission then calculated to average.

Excerpt. See full analysis for more.

 

[TABLE]

__PD__

|

_MSAA_

|

_Quality_

|Performance

1|

0

|

0

|

10

1.2

|

0

|

2

|

10

1.4

|

0

|

4

|

10

1.6

|

0

|

4

|

10

1.8

|

0

|

4

|

8

2.0

|

0

|

6

|

6

1

|

2

|

6

|

10

1.2

|

2

|

8

|

8

1.4

|

2

|

8

|

6

1.6

|

2

|

10

|

4

1.8

|

2

|

10

|

2

2.0

|

2

|

10

|

2

1

|

4

|

8

|

4

1.2

|

4

|

8

|

4

1.4

|

4

|

8

|

2

1.6

|

4

|

10

|

0

1.8

|

4

|

10

|

0

2.0

|

4

|

10

|

0

1

|

8

|

8

|

2

1.2+

|

8

|

10

|

0

[/TABLE]

 

So i have a oculus rift, i use oculus tool and 1.2 super sampling, i leave pixel sampling at 1.0 in game, was wondering if anyone has figured out best settings for vr/dcs 2.5

 

gtx 1080, 16gb ram, i7 4790k

I play this on Oculus Rift on a 1060 6 GB card and it plays very well in VR. Your card will run circles around mine. I can set SS to 1.5 in Oculus tool tray, so you can crank that up no problem. I also leave sampling at 1.0 in DCS itself. Use Oculus Tool tray to set priority to high on CPU and force it to 45, ASW sucks in this game, but if you're already acclimated to VR you'll be able to handle DCS at 45 FPS no problem. Don't power through it the first time though, I did and felt dizzy for 3 days. After that, no VR game makes me sick.

I turn off MSAA and set Antisotropic filtering to 2x. Your card can probably handle these so play with those two. I have Draw distance set to 100,000. I also changed some settings in Nvidia Tool tray to try and get the Anti Aliasing to get applied in post so it wouldn't slow down the GPU but changes in that control panel don't appear to have any effect on the game. Your card also has 2 additional gigs.

You should be able to maintain 45 FPS almost all the time with your GPU. I'm not sure how much of a bottleneck your CPU is, I have an I7 7700k but these processors are so fast now, the only thing I can really see noticeable difference on on these later I7 CPUs is how quickly they can encode video.

I play this on Oculus Rift on a 1060 6 GB card and it plays very well in VR. Your card will run circles around mine. I can set SS to 1.5 in Oculus tool tray, so you can crank that up no problem. I also leave sampling at 1.0 in DCS itself. Use Oculus Tool tray to set priority to high on CPU and force it to 45, ASW sucks in this game, but if you're already acclimated to VR you'll be able to handle DCS at 45 FPS no problem. Don't power through it the first time though, I did and felt dizzy for 3 days. After that, no VR game makes me sick.

 

I turn off MSAA and set Antisotropic filtering to 2x. Your card can probably handle these so play with those two. I have Draw distance set to 100,000. I also changed some settings in Nvidia Tool tray to try and get the Anti Aliasing to get applied in post so it wouldn't slow down the GPU but changes in that control panel don't appear to have any effect on the game. Your card also has 2 additional gigs.

 

You should be able to maintain 45 FPS almost all the time with your GPU. I'm not sure how much of a bottleneck your CPU is, I have an I7 7700k but these processors are so fast now, the only thing I can really see noticeable difference on on these later I7 CPUs is how quickly they can encode video.

Thanks for the information, ye my CPU is not bottlenecking me in the slightest believe it or not lol, the 4790k is still a beast in my opinion and it uses at best 50% of cpu usage during DCS. I could use more ram though due to being ddr3, maybe that will be a future upgrade.

The 4790 was a beast no doubt. With the 1k series of cards it will be somewhat of a bottleneck, as will the motherboard. I like to put data flow in terms of water, for logical comparison. Think of your 1070 as a showerhead (pixel shower) you installed, which is capable of putting out a lot of water pressure. If your motherboard and CPU are of a previous generation of architecture, it's like having skinny water pipes in the wall. Even though the showerhead is 'capable' of high pressure, the old pipes can only feed it so much water per second. Therefore, you still get decreased water flow from an otherwise capable showerhead. Is it better than a previous generation showerhead? Sure, but it's still not operating at it's full potential.

The 4790 was a beast no doubt. With the 1k series of cards it will be somewhat of a bottleneck, as will the motherboard. I like to put data flow in terms of water, for logical comparison. Think of your 1070 as a showerhead (pixel shower) you installed, which is capable of putting out a lot of water pressure. If your motherboard and CPU are of a previous generation of architecture, it's like having skinny water pipes in the wall. Even though the showerhead is 'capable' of high pressure, the old pipes can only feed it so much water per second. Therefore, you still get decreased water flow from an otherwise capable showerhead. Is it better than a previous generation showerhead? Sure, but it's still not operating at it's full potential.

the 4790k is still one of the best cpu's for gaming

the upcoming 1170 will have the same performance or a liitle better as a 1080ti

it will not bottleneck anything 6700k vs 4790k is intentical with maybe 2-3 fps difference

the 4790k is still one of the best cpu's for gaming

the upcoming 1170 will have the same performance or a liitle better as a 1080ti

it will not bottleneck anything 6700k vs 4790k is intentical with maybe 2-3 fps difference

Ye the only real bottleneck with a 4790k is the fact it runs on a motherboard for ddr3 ram, that's literally the only drawback on it, but if i get 32gb or more i should be fine, right now it's playable for sure, i just notice in multiplayer it seems to be laggy at plane selection screen etc, might be because i have blackdesertonline running in tray mode though

Yeah, you should do some research on the differences between the 4790k and 6700k. Two very different architectures. One is 4 years old, the other one is 5 years old.. so upgrade should happen soon with either one. 4790k has a 25gb bandwidth and the 6700k has a 35gb memory bandwidth. This is important for flight sims, and dictates your 'bottleneck'. The benchmark on the 6700k is 700pts where the newest processors are in the 3000s. In contrast, the 4790k is in the 500s. The newest processors are more capable, despite their 'megahertz' number because they're more capable at math. The 'megahertz' or 'frames per second' isn't always the best way to rate a CPU.

With this being said, I still have an old 5960x (runs away).

It's odd. I have an i5 4950 with 16GB RAM and a GTX970 card and it works OK in VR.

It can be a little stuttery with the Vive but I have found that if I load the scenario without VR and then start up VR and run it, it runs acceptably. I have PD set to 1.5 but I may lower it to see if I can increase performance without impacting on the gauge-readability too much.

It's odd. I have an i5 4950 with 16GB RAM and a GTX970 card and it works OK in VR.

 

It can be a little stuttery with the Vive but I have found that if I load the scenario without VR and then start up VR and run it, it runs acceptably. I have PD set to 1.5 but I may lower it to see if I can increase performance without impacting on the gauge-readability too much.

I used to have PD set to 1.5 as well, until a few days ago when I wanted to see how many fps I could get if I set all graphics options to minimum and PD to 1.0. To my surprise I was still able to read the gauges. I haven't tried to run the game with that low DP settings since 1.5 and they were not readable then. But in 2.5 it is enough for me to have it at 1.0.

Ye the only real bottleneck with a 4790k is the fact it runs on a motherboard for ddr3 ram, that's literally the only drawback on it, but if i get 32gb or more i should be fine, right now it's playable for sure, i just notice in multiplayer it seems to be laggy at plane selection screen etc, might be because i have blackdesertonline running in tray mode though

same

Yes, the main genuine bottleneck with a 4790k is the reality it runs on a motherboard for ddr3 slam, that is the main disadvantage on it, however, in the event that I get 32gb or more, I ought to be fine. you ought to do some examination on the contrasts between the 4790k and 6700k. Two altogether different models. One is 4 years of age, the other one is 5 years of age. 4790k has a 25gb transfer speed and the 6700k has a 35gb memory bandwidth. The benchmark on the 6700k is 700pts where the most up to date processors are during the 3000s. Conversely, the 4790k is during the 500s. for best showerheads check this

Necro-ed , but welcome to the forum !

Necro-ed , but welcome to the forum ![/QUOTe]

 

 

the user the necroed the thread is a spammer..