NVIDIA 1070ti: Which VR headset should I get?

[girarcat]

Hi,
I have a 1070ti in my PC. I play mostly AC, Richard Burns and Flight Simulator 2020.
Which VR headset should I get, if any?
I'm considering both Quest 2 (with Oculus Link) and Reverb G2, which right now have a very decent price on Amazon (even lower than Quest2+Oculus Link).
Do you think my GPU will be enough to handle any of these VR goggles? I assume the G2 are better in terms of image quality, resolution, etc. but I guess they will be more demanding for the GPU, and I may need to end up lowering the settings so much that image quality will become worse than with the Quest 2.
On the other hand, AFAIK the Quest 2 need to compress the video and send it through the Link as data and then uncompress that again to convert that into video once again. Not sure if after all this may hamper the performance even more than the G2 with their higher resolution.

What would you recommend? Which do you think will provide the best compromise between performance and image quality? Or maybe I should just skip VR until upgrading my GPU?

Thanks

 

[RCHeliguy]

I would take that last option.

I don't believe a 1070Ti is adequate for any modern VR headset running either a flight or driving simulation. For playing Beat Saber and some other games it might be OK with a 1st gen headset, but just barely. Simulators are hard on GPU's.

If you don't have enough power for your VR headset, it will have issues giving you a solid frame rate and will be much more likely to make you nauseous.

 

[crooksy]

Just get a Quest 2 that way if your card isn't good enough you can at least use it stand alone. Otherwise pickup a cheap second hand Rift S the lower spec with the Rift S makes it a little less demanding on a system.

 

[girarcat]

I would take that last option.

I don't believe a 1070Ti is adequate for any modern VR headset running either a flight or driving simulation. For playing Beat Saber and some other games it might be OK with a 1st gen headset, but just barely. Simulators are hard on GPU's.

If you don't have enough power for your VR headset, it will have issues giving you a solid frame rate and will be much more likely to make you nauseous.

Thanks for your honest opinion. I've seen several Youtube videos where they played games such as Project Cars or Half Life at 1/2 resolution with the G2 and a GTX1070 or even 1060 without issues, and it didn't look that bad. In fact, some claimed the G2 at 1/2 their resolution provided better visuals than Rift S at max resolution, so I don't know if that would be enough for me or not. Probably not for Flight Simulator 2020, but maybe it would be fine with Asseto Corsa and similar games...
What's the minimum frame rate I should get to avoid motion sickness?

On the other hand, if we rule out VR, what would your suggestion be in order to upgrade my current single 37" 1080p TV that would suit my GPU better? Triple 1080p monitors or an ultrawide monitor? Which is more demanding, performancewise? I'm quite bored of my single monitor and could use an upgrade.

Just get a Quest 2 that way if your card isn't good enough you can at least use it stand alone. Otherwise pickup a cheap second hand Rift S the lower spec with the Rift S makes it a little less demanding on a system.

I don't really mind playing casual VR games, so I don't consider getting a Quest 2 just to play as a stand alone device. If I cannot run at least AC and RBR, I'll just let it go.

 

[girarcat]

According to HP:
Cards that typically run Reverb at full resolution: • Consumer o NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1080, NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1080 Ti
Cards that typically run Reverb at half resolution: • Consumer o NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1060, NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1660, NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1660ti, NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1070

My 1070 Ti should be somewhere in between the 1070 (1/2 resolution) and the 1080 (full resolution), so on paper I should be fine with the Reverb G2, at least at 1/2 resolution (maybe 3/4 even?), but of course I guess it will depend a lot on the game's optimization and graphic settings. I don't mind if I cannot run Flight Simulator 2020 on VR, as long as I can properly run Asseto Corsa and Richard Burns.
Not sure if I should give it a try. I can always ship them back if the results are unsatisfactory.

PS: I've looked for a new GPU but prices have gone bonkers. The 3070 was meant to cost around 500€. I couldn't find it for less than 1200€. What the f**k is wrong with this world? There's no way I'm paying 2x or 3x the actual price.

 

[RasmusP]

My 1070 Ti should be somewhere in between the 1070 (1/2 resolution) and the 1080 (full resolution), so on paper I should be fine with the Reverb G2, at least at 1/2 resolution, but of course I guess it will depend a lot on the game's optimization and graphic settings. I don't mind if I cannot run Flight Simulator 2020 on VR, as long as I can properly run Asseto Corsa and Richard Burns.

I tested the Oculus Rift (CV1) with my GTX 1070 and it was quite okay. I tested it with 200% supersampling and only 45 fps and the quality didn't increase that much.. Sure, edges became smoother but it doesn't help the screendoor look that simply comes from the low resolution of the headset.
Otherwise it was okay for AC! 90 fps, no issues! Only ACC was tricky.. You could run it, but it looked worse than AC with lowered settings. I have to say 45 fps + interpolation was okay for me for racing.
Or rather.. I got a bit motion sick no matter if 90 fps or 45 fps+interpolation.. But I could drive for about an hour at a time

So I'd say, if you don't want to use the Quest 2 for anything else, get the HP reverb! Even at half the resolution, the screendoor effect will be reduced a LOT! Sure, the image quality itself will probably be "as blurry" as the Rift or Quest, but you won't see the physical pixels of the headset.

Not sure if I should give it a try. I can always ship them back if the results are unsatisfactory.

If you're living in a country where that's easily possible (I'm in Germany, easy peasy here), then do it! It's definitely worth a try. My 1070 was okay for some fun! HP Reverb with half resolution should be just as good or better!

PS: I've looked for a new GPU but prices have gone bonkers. The 3070 was meant to cost around 500€. I couldn't find it for less than 1200€. What the f**k is wrong with this world? There's no way I'm paying 2x or 3x the actual price.

Yep.. Don't buy anything until mid 2022 probably.. Or longer...
I was very lucky to get a 3070 for 679€ for a friend a week after release, before prices went crazy.
The 500€ are marketing BS. 650-700€ is the true price imo. And for the performance it's actually okay for that price, putting all generational leap and price increases into a plot.

 

[RCHeliguy]

FWIW, I ended up using an 1080Ti to drive my Rift CV1. I wanted a real 90fps. Some titles like Dirt Rally 1.0 back then worked well with the Rift CV1. Dirt Rally 1.0 was designed to work with Oculus and required ReVive when running a Steam headset. So when I moved to the Index, I found that the 1080Ti couldn't quite keep things happy with Dirt Rally all the time. It would occasionally stutter and didn't feel right. Dirt Rally 2.0 was a bit rough out of the gate, but after they cleaned it up the 2080Ti worked well. Early on it was still struggling.

I'm sure my experience is highly impacted by what I was willing to accept in terms of resolution. I've also gotten used to running my Index at 120 fps in iRacing and I like the high detail settings.

If you are willing to drop your settings way down low there are ways to get things working.

This is extremely relative to what you are willing to accept.

One person here purchased a 3090 so they could run ACC well with the Index. ACC is extremely demanding, but I'm sure he has all of his settings up pretty high.

Also worth mentioning is that I do not have any means of running on a screen. So I need to run everything in VR.

 

[Terry Rock]

I ran an Oculus Rift CV1 with a GTX1070 XLR8 non-Ti card for about 1.5 years with great success in early, unoptimized ACC.
It'd probably run even better, now that the software is more streamlined.
Many settings were on high and a few epic.
It can be done and offers a good experience with the right settings adjusted.

 

[girarcat]

I ran an Oculus Rift CV1 with a GTX1070 XLR8 non-Ti card for about 1.5 years with great success in early, unoptimized ACC.
It'd probably run even better, now that the software is more streamlined.
Many settings were on high and a few epic.
It can be done and offers a good experience with the right settings adjusted.

Thanks, that's encouraging. The 1070ti should be quite close in performance to the 1080, and AC should be less demanding than ACC. I'm just a casual user, I enjoy driving some hot laps every now and then, playing maximum for 1h. If graphics and resolution are not horrendous, I think I will be happy with the extra immersion provided by a VR headset. If were a hardcore user, with the intention to drive for hours every day, probably VR would not be a good choice given my performance/graphics limitation, but if I'm just looking to have some fun from time to time, and try to replicate the real life feeling of driving in a racetrack, VR can be a good way to go if I can make it run with acceptable graphics.

 

[Robin Cook]

Just upgraded my GPU and finally able to enjoy vr Sims.
Old card was a rx4808gb and borderline. (Paired with a r7 3700x )

Sim experience was ok for playing about but for serious racing it wasn't an enjoyable experience. Couldn't keep my frames high and consistent enough and imotiom sickness became an issue.

This time around with a 3060ti I'm not suffering sickness at all and able to get solid stable frames at my refresh rate and keep the graphics high enough to enjoy the view


My old card faired well on HL alyx and other vr titles but racing. Meh.

First post in some time. Got the bug again with a vengeance. Finding racing in vr so much easier to be consistent. Especially with close racing

 

[Robin Cook]

Also something to bare in mind. From what I recall the quest via link has some performance hits and what runs well on a rift s may not run as well on a quest.

 

[Terry Rock]

Thanks, that's encouraging. The 1070ti should be quite close in performance to the 1080, and AC should be less demanding than ACC. I'm just a casual user, I enjoy driving some hot laps every now and then, playing maximum for 1h. If graphics and resolution are not horrendous, I think I will be happy with the extra immersion provided by a VR headset. If were a hardcore user, with the intention to drive for hours every day, probably VR would not be a good choice given my performance/graphics limitation, but if I'm just looking to have some fun from time to time, and try to replicate the real life feeling of driving in a racetrack, VR can be a good way to go if I can make it run with acceptable graphics.

This run was done with an I7-3820 as well.

 

[girarcat]

Well, I'd really like to give VR a try, it's something that has always appealed to me a lot, but TBH I've never tested a VR headset, not even a few minutes demo. However, I don't fancy the idea of spending quite a lot of money on something that I'll only be able to use at 50% of its capabilities at best. I guess VR at full resolution must be remarkable, but I'm not sure how I'll feel like if the resolution is just passable and graphics are quite poor, let alone if the frame rate is too low.
Maybe I should focus on increasing my sim racing immersion in some other way, while I wait for GPU prices to go back to normal and I can upgrade my GPU and properly experience VR once and for all.

Meanwhile, what other ways to increase immersion would you suggest?

-HP Reverb G2 at full resolution requires to move 2160x2160 per eye, making a total of 9.3M pixels, at at least 80-90fps. Absolutely impossible with my current GPU.
At 1/2 resolution it would mean to move around 4M pixels... Sounds quite feasible with graphics at medium, though I'm not sure about the frame rate.

-Quest 2 at full resolution requires to move 1832x1920 per eye, total 7M pixels at 80-90fps at least.

-Triple Full HD monitors mean 1920x1080 per monitor, total 6.2M pixels, which would be perfectly playable at 60fps (never played at a higher frame rate, so don't really feel like I need more than that)

-Ultra Wide Monitor (like the 49" Samsung Odyssey) means 5120x1440, total 7,4M pixels, at 60fps at least.

On the VR options I could lower the resolution to 50%, but this would be quite a big loss.
The Triple monitors are quite demanding as well, and resolution cannot be lowered any more, and they can only be used for simracing
The ultrawide 4k monitor is even more demanding than the triples, but I guess I could reduce resolution a bit, increasing performance significantly and the resolution would still be higher than with my current Full HD TV... The ideal thing with the ultrawide monitor would be to set it up on my desktop, to be used with everything else I do with my PC aside from sim racing, and then try to move my rig towards the desk and place it in front of the monitor... not sure if that would be feasible, though (as of now, I have my rig placed in front of the Full HD TV, several meters away from my desktop computer, which is the one I use to run the games together with long cables to reach the rig).

 

[RasmusP]

Get the HP reverb. Yes, graphics might not look great but I really got a massive immersion kick with the old oculus cv1!
You can't replace seeing everything in 3D! It was just too much hassle for me in combination with getting a bit motion sick that made me sell it again.
But I'm only driving about 3 hours per week and only casual online clubraces. I'm very sensitive to motion sickness, even without vr...
So moving my head left/right while driving was impossible and doing clubraces was therefore too.

But your thread sounds like you might get pretty happy with the reverb on half resolution!
You can always either use some supersampling on top to make things look a bit better or you might be able to use full resolution but undersample a bit to tune in the maximum for your gpu.

 

[girarcat]

You convinced me. Just ordered the Reverb G2. The deal was too good to let it go. Besides, thanks to Amazon's X-mas return policy, I can ship them back for free until January 31st. I'll have more than two months to properly try them and see if I'm comfortable or not with them.
Will keep you updated.
Thanks!

 

[Robin Cook]

Well, I'd really like to give VR a try, it's something that has always appealed to me a lot, but TBH I've never tested a VR headset, not even a few minutes demo. However, I don't fancy the idea of spending quite a lot of money on something that I'll only be able to use at 50% of its capabilities at best. I guess VR at full resolution must be remarkable, but I'm not sure how I'll feel like if the resolution is just passable and graphics are quite poor, let alone if the frame rate is too low.
Maybe I should focus on increasing my sim racing immersion in some other way, while I wait for GPU prices to go back to normal and I can upgrade my GPU and properly experience VR once and for all.

Meanwhile, what other ways to increase immersion would you suggest?

-HP Reverb G2 at full resolution requires to move 2160x2160 per eye, making a total of 9.3M pixels, at at least 80-90fps. Absolutely impossible with my current GPU.
At 1/2 resolution it would mean to move around 4M pixels... Sounds quite feasible with graphics at medium, though I'm not sure about the frame rate.

-Quest 2 at full resolution requires to move 1832x1920 per eye, total 7M pixels at 80-90fps at least.

-Triple Full HD monitors mean 1920x1080 per monitor, total 6.2M pixels, which would be perfectly playable at 60fps (never played at a higher frame rate, so don't really feel like I need more than that)

-Ultra Wide Monitor (like the 49" Samsung Odyssey) means 5120x1440, total 7,4M pixels, at 60fps at least.

On the VR options I could lower the resolution to 50%, but this would be quite a big loss.
The Triple monitors are quite demanding as well, and resolution cannot be lowered any more, and they can only be used for simracing
The ultrawide 4k monitor is even more demanding than the triples, but I guess I could reduce resolution a bit, increasing performance significantly and the resolution would still be higher than with my current Full HD TV... The ideal thing with the ultrawide monitor would be to set it up on my desktop, to be used with everything else I do with my PC aside from sim racing, and then try to move my rig towards the desk and place it in front of the monitor... not sure if that would be feasible, though (as of now, I have my rig placed in front of the Full HD TV, several meters away from my desktop computer, which is the one I use to run the games together with long cables to reach the rig).

All the bells and whistles aren't important to me for racing. Smooth consistent frames and a reasonable clear image.
While your racing you don't have time to take in the scenery.
Rift s is old tech now but I'm having a blast in vr.

I can't justify a grand on an index for an occasional passion.
Too many other hobbies. Fair amount of cash tied up in drum machines and synthisisers.

 

[Robin Cook]

You convinced me. Just ordered the Reverb G2. The deal was too good to let it go. Besides, thanks to Amazon's X-mas return policy, I can ship them back for free until January 31st. I'll have more than two months to properly try them and see if I'm comfortable or not with them.
Will keep you updated.
Thanks!

Look forward to hearing how you get on.

With regards to motion sickness.

Take your time. When you start feeling queasy stop for a while.

If you keep pushing till it's really uncomfortable you won't want to play again that day.

 

[girarcat]

All the bells and whistles aren't important to me for racing. Smooth consistent frames and a reasonable clear image.

Same here. I really appreciate nice visuals when playing casual videogames, but for sim racing, I don't really care about them, I only care about the car physics. I've been racing RBR for a while, which is a 2003 game, and I'm perfectly fine with how it looks. Of course Dirt 2.0 would look waaay nicer, but I prefer a more realistic simulation over the visuals.

Regarding motion sickness, I'm not sure how I will react to that. Never used a VR headset before, so who knows. Fingers crossed it is not a big issue after som time.

Thanks a lot for your insights.

Cheers

 

[Deleted member 1066209]

I have a Reverb G2. I use it at half-resolution and I'm pleased with the display. I notice that it's blurry if I don't wear my contact lenses, lol. The VROptician (https://vroptician.com/) sells lens inserts that can be optimized to your prescription, so you won't need to wear contact lenses or glasses during usage - if you even use them at all. I have a set of the "plano" lenses, without any prescription embedded, which I really like because they reduce my eye strain, if that matters to you at all.

When I first played Assetto Corsa in VR, I got motion-sick somewhat easily. During the beginning, I could only drive for about 30 minutes before I required a break. The worst trigger was driving in reverse; I instantly got dizzy after doing that, haha! I also enabled the "Lock to Horizon" function, which greatly reduced vulnerability to becoming motion-sick.

After playing for a few weeks, I could drive for multiple hours at a time. On a whim, I disabled the "Lock to Horizon" function, and realized that the gameplay became even better! After fiddling with some VR-specific NeckFX settings I've found on RaceDepartment, cars became much more intuitive to drive.

NeckFX requires Content Manager and Custom Shaders Patch, and these additions to AC will also help improve your PC's performance, especially in VR. Get those if you haven't already.

The message that I really wanted to get across is that "Lock to Horizon" is great for helping you become accustomed to VR, but your driving experience is greatly enhanced when you disable it - just as long as you're no longer getting motion-sick!

 

[RasmusP]

I often read that about lock to horizon... Funnily I found it pretty weird on a monitor, depending on how much elevation change the track has.
When you, for example, drive the classic monza '66 oval part, lock to horizon will keep your view fully leveled, while the road and car go to 45°.
Super weird...

But I tried it again with the oculus and almost puked after the first elevation change. Immediately closed my eyes, hit esc, took off the headset and took some deep breaths.

Not saying lock to horizon can't be a great help. Only wanting to say that for some, it's a clear "nope" hehe.

I love "real head motion" though! It's simply damping the small, vibrating bumps but keeps the big one locked to your car.
I'm using about 30% with it.