VR performance in Racesims (including "next" gen VR)

[HoiHman]

I have been a VR enthusiast from the beginning.

I bought a Oculus Rift CV1 at launch day and it has served me well over the last 3 years, but.... the image quality and performance compared to a monitor is terrible.

So in those 3 years i upgraded from an Intel I7-4770K to an Intel I7-7700K, sold the GTX1080 and bought a 1080Ti.

For upcoming new HMD's i did another couple of hardware upgrades:

-The 1080Ti has been replaces by a 2080Ti
-The I7-7700K is overclocked to 4,7Ghz
-DDR4 memory runs now on 3200Mhz


My system gets a 11.000 score in VR benchmarks




Still i'm struggling with every single race sim between having a decent performance and good image quality. Even though my PC is "better than 92% of all results"

Most race sims are running most of the time locked at 45PFS with ASW enabled. Mainly because i run them with higher multisampling settings to compensate for the low image quality in the rift.

Yesterday i tried ACC.

The 1.0 release of Assetto Corsa Competizione is the worst of them all. I did a fresh install yesterday and set the game at the lowest settings, Steam VR settings are at 100% and i'm still not getting 90fps at the start in Spa with 20AI.

At those low settings the game looks worse than Grandprix 4 on a 1024x768 monitor more than 20 years ago.

The strange thing is that even with ASW disabled, i'm still getting not more that 65-70% load on both my GPU and CPU.

On my 34" widescreen monitor ACC runs like a dream and looks drop dead gorgeous.

I'm all in on the whole VR and simracing combo, but having suffered the low image quality of VR for the last 3 years i'm kind of growing tired of it.

Because i love VR, i invested in both a HP Reverb and a Valve Index and will decide which one is best. However my latest experience in ACC lets me to believe that with 2080Ti, both headsets will struggle to maintain a steady fps.

The main selling point of the Reverb is the number of pixels, but i doubt that a 2080Ti will be fast enough to run any simrace game with 20 cars on track at 90fps.

The main selling point of the Index is it's refresh rate, but again i don't think that a single 2080Ti will be able to deliver a 120fps frame rate in most of the current race sims with other cars on track.

Now we are starting to see all these reviews of the new gen HMD, but most of them are for normal games, not the high-end demanding racesims we use.

With my current hardware spec, i don't see any useful upgrade that would really boost my performance even more.

So my conclusion is: VR performance in race sims sucks, even if you have a high-end PC.

How's your performance in VR and what's your VR benchmark score?

 

[RobertR1]

9900k 5hgz all core/2080ti pimax 5k+ Large fov always. Ram CL16 3600mhz.

AC runs like a dream
Iracing is great also
Rf2 is a PoS due to parallel projections needed
ACC will test next week but beta versions were a mess

I waste no time on a game that won’t run well.

 

[RCHeliguy]

It does sort of suck being in that tweener space where we have experienced the potential of VR, but technology hasn't quite caught with what we want.

That said, I'm going to enjoy the ride every step of the way.

I will run 144Hz on some room scale games and I will run my sims as fast as I can.

 

[HoiHman]

You can afford both, but 120Hz will change things too and the immersion I believe over just the resolution or sharpness of the image. Also the wider FOV.

People with 120Hz 1440p monitors did not go jumping into 60Hz 4K gaming.
One unit is developed for "gamers" the other is not and the visual clarity is only one aspect not to get too, caught up in. Watch the TESTED video as they cover a lot of interesting aspects having tried them all.

In at least the next 2 years i don't see any of the current racesims reach 120 fps on a 2080ti or higher at native resolution. 120fps or even 144fps sounds really great, but it will be for simple games like beat saber not for race sims which are way too demanding.

As Andrew mentioned, for us, it's as useful as the frunk or the front cameras. It's a nice gimmick, but that's it.

The VR-performance is not there yet.

 

[Mr Latte]

In at least the next 2 years i don't see any of the current racesims reach 120 fps on a 2080ti or higher at native resolution. 120fps or even 144fps sounds really great, but it will be for simple games like beat saber not for race sims which are way too demanding.

As Andrew mentioned, for us, it's as useful as the frunk or the front cameras. It's a nice gimmick, but that's it.

The VR-performance is not there yet.

How VR is implemented needs to improve, much can be done on efficiency. You cant say now what will be the case in two years. How much harder is it on a system to push the Reverb and sustain 90Hz compared to an Index reaching 120Hz, I havnt done the math or seen yet in-depth testing for comparisons on sim titles. Do look forward to it though....

When 4K arrived a GTX 1080 didnt quite meet the mark for 60fps gaming at that res on some titles. Now just over 2 years later the industry is moving to 120Hz 4K already being the thing to have. GPU power will increase enough to make this possible in the next generation of cards with many games and I am sure some already are possible. We will see 8K gaming also become a reality.

What I would say is support for improved gaming in VR is very much likely going to happen with the Index and not a prosumer based headset generally made to suit industrial or professional usage applications. Windows based VR could get left behind if it does not continue to be developed, thats my concern with the HP unit.

As overall headsets I see it as a winner, maybe I am wrong but its what I will spend my money on.
I would rather have higher framerate at the cost of some visual fidelity but image satisfaction and quality is not just resolution based.

 

[anton_Chez]

Problem with sacrificing image quality for frame rate in VR is that there is already a very firmly set floor in what you need to achieve in image quality to even make it worth running. On a screen you can turn certain things down or off and achieve 144hz with a more than acceptable image. In VR this simply isn't the case. The image already starts off WAY worse than a monitor and if there's one thing a VR headset needs to look good is PIXELS and LOTS of them. They cost rendering budget and unfortunately we just don't have the hardware right now to achieve both.

Speaking of the way VR being impletmented needing to improve, I'm still waiting for the feature that I bought my GTX 1080 for over 3 years ago. Remember SMP? Yeah neither do it, as it was like 100 years ago that Nvidia bragged about being able to run 3 screen for render budget of 1, while also being able to render a single eye in VR and have it account for the full image appearing in the headset.

Man I hate that company. Now I am receiving 25% hit in some games in VR just because, no reason. Something that they actually used to sell their GPU's 3-4 years ago would practically destroy any of the hurdles we now face while trying to achieve optimum frame rates whilst maintaining a good image. Finding a way to mirror the image or at least use a great portion of what is being rendered in one eye to display in both would be a miracle for us high end users. Sim racing is very demanding and I think something needs to change on a fundamental hardware level for it to get any better for us.

That being said, another thing that GREATLY helps us is hz options as well as a kick-ass Smoothing or Warping implementation. Hearing that the Reverb supports 60hz is fantastic news. Take it from someone who runs 64hz on the Pimax no problems, this will change the game for a lot of you. You don't need smoothing, yet you reduce the render requirement by a third, with hardly any noticeable impact to frame rate smoothness. In my experience anyway. FOV options are also great as they allow you to tailor the experience personally and use the pixels where you most need them. It also gives you flexibility in working around titles that may not be as optimised as they should be.

Long story short, I think we have a great range now of next gen HMD's to make our way through and even with a 1080Ti, I am having a pretty great experience with most titles (even rF2 if Nvidia decides it's OK for me to have my remaining 25% performance back that I paid a thousand dollars for) that I run and that includes full grids, online.

Oh and another thing. Robert, I think rF2 has a big problem with running Large FOV on the Pimax, along with the required parallel projections. I know you like to run large, but, give normal a try. See if it changes anything significantly for you. I know that when I tried to run Large it just didn't want to know about it, it looked awful. Over and above just being short on performance, I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the Large FOV on rF2. For now.

 

[sjb266]

Henk I feel the same way.. I pretty much abandoned VR as I got sick of how bad it looks.. no matter how cool the immersion factor is.. When I built the SFX100 I didn't know which way to go as mounting a monitor seemed out of the question. But I came up with some mounting solutions (using my newly acquired 3D printer!) and put my Samsung Super Ultra Wide on the rig solid as a rock.. I honestly haven't looked back.. The balance between FPS, Resolution and Immersion is nearly spot on for me... add Simvibe and SFX goodness and

This week I had the new Rift S delivered and I was very underwhelmed by it.. for me it was an OVERALL downgrade from the CV1.. even If some elements were better.. needless to say it's going back next week!

So yeah I hear ya.. Love your enthusiasm for this hobby man.. it inspires me!

PS - Using a monitor you get to actually see all the cool **** you've spent tens of thousands of dollars on while you drive!... steering wheels.. button boxes.. you know... all that crap!

 

[HoiHman]

Henk I feel the same way.. I pretty much abandoned VR as I got sick of how bad it looks.. no matter how cool the immersion factor is.. When I built the SFX100 I didn't know which way to go as mounting a monitor seemed out of the question. But I came up with some mounting solutions (using my newly acquired 3D printer!) and put my Samsung Super Ultra Wide on the rig solid as a rock.. I honestly haven't looked back.. The balance between FPS, Resolution and Immersion is nearly spot on for me... add Simvibe and SFX goodness and

This week I had the new Rift S delivered and I was very underwhelmed by it.. for me it was an OVERALL downgrade from the CV1.. even If some elements were better.. needless to say it's going back next week!

So yeah I hear ya.. Love your enthusiasm for this hobby man.. it inspires me!

PS - Using a monitor you get to actually see all the cool **** you've spent tens of thousands of dollars on while you drive!... steering wheels.. button boxes.. you know... all that crap!

Agreed Simon, when i ever i race on the monitor, i'm surprised how good it looks and i can max out any game and run it at 100fps.

and...I can look at all nice steering wheels i made myself.

If i didn't have to move my rig through a 90cm wide door everyday, i would buy the new samsung 49"display instantly. But..... when i do drive in VR, it's great and if i can run the reverb or the index with decent performance, it will be awesome.

I suspect i will keep both headsets and use the Reverb with high res in the less demanding race sims and the Index in the more demanding ones.

If both headsets and their performance are disappointing only then i will sell them both and find a solution for mounting the new 49" samsung on the rig. Somehow

 

[sjb266]

Mate if anyone can work out a way of doing it.. it’s you..!

Make the door wider!

 

[Deleted member 197115]

There was a video review of Index by H3 developer, he literally chuckled at people expecting to run it at 120hz.
Other than that he was quite happy, except lack of isolation with open speakers.
If optics is indeed as good as they say, edge to edge clarity can outweigh boosted resolution when only center is crisp clear.

 

[RCHeliguy]

I fully expect to run 120 -144 Hz for my room scale games.

I think it is much more likely that I would run 60 Hz reprojected to 120 Hz in a Sim. Given that I'm running 90fps native with some SS. I'm pretty sure that is doable.

I think the audio will be a great addition. Then again my motion system and transducers are pretty quiet.

Looking forward to finding out in a couple months.

 

[Deleted member 197115]

There was a video review of Index by H3 developer, he literally chuckled at people expecting to run it at 120hz.
Other than that he was quite happy, except lack of isolation with open speakers.
If optics is indeed as good as they say, edge to edge clarity can outweigh boosted resolution when only center is crisp clear.

The video, jump to 14:50 for 120fps comments, great review btw

 

[RCHeliguy]

Very cool that there is new stuff coming on supporting the new controllers!

Synopsis:
Great Design, Great Build quality throughout, everything feels right
Most comfortable HMD he ever used
Loves the cushion material, loves quick release of face cushion with magnets
Most profound increase in immersion with this headset was because it is edge to edge is in focus and clear.
Sees higher resolution than the panel resolution numbers alone would suggest because of how clear and sharp the image is.
Has noticeable wider field of view.
Only complaint was about the black and near black levels compared to Vive Pro, but got used to it and forgot about that with time.
Loves the audio, considered them fantastic.Says don't worry about them not being able to block out the room. However he says that because of the quality it shows failures in an audio track.
Runs at 80,90,120,144
Says he can run 120 fps in a build, but not in the editor so he leaves it at 90.

I didn't get the chuckling at people thinking it could run 120 fps.

 

[Deleted member 197115]

I didn't get the chuckling at people thinking it could run 120 fps.

15:10 exactly.
Thanks for short recap for those who can't access the video or don't understand English.

 

[RCHeliguy]

15:10 exactly.
Thanks for short recap for those who can't access the video or don't understand English.

So basically he is saying ask other people about it. Just because he can't run his game in the editor at 120 isn't saying it doesn't work.

The bottom line is that the consensus continues to grow, that this is a class leading VR HMD, and quite honestly if it looks great at 90 fps and even better at 120 and 144, doesn't that just give this headset legs to improve your experience as PC hardware improves. I still don't see a downside here.

 

[Andy_J]

Who needs VR anyway? It's a fad. Move on.

 

[HoiHman]

Pimax 8KX with 3840x2160 per eye

 

[Deleted member 197115]

Best of luck to Pimax, hope they will stay in business long enough to release this monstrosity.

 

[EsxPaul]

Wrong thread. Sorry

 

[RCHeliguy]

"my system could get to a comfortable, high-res 120Hz refresh on nearly every game and app I tested."

...until I get into a traditionally tricky genre for VR gaming: high-speed racing. Holy cow, folks. I have gone on the record as being Ars' most sensitive VR gamer, the kind who becomes mayor of Puketon, Massablewsetts when a VR game pushes uncomfortable tricks like lateral movement. But booting into the sim-racing game Project Cars 2 on the Valve Index was a revelation, and I'm prepared to start charging people $20 to play 15-minute PC2 sessions on my home's Index rig. The full Index experience—higher frame rates, clearer peripheral pixels, and a wider FOV—unlocks something phenomenal in the brain that makes high-speed racing a far more approachable and comfortable VR prospect than ever before. (While I enjoyed similar thrills in the future-racing VR game Redout, that game had some serious washed-out color issues within Index, perhaps owing to Index's pre-release state.)

Just to be clear, he is saying that he was running PC2 at higher frame rates successfully. So I think that does mean that we can run car racing sims at 120 fps. PC2 may not be your favorite, but it has excellent visuals with lots of detail and weather or what should be a serious load on VR. Now I can't tell you if he was running 60 fps with reprojection to 120, but apparently it was a much better experience for him.

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019...-a-vr-game-changer-with-a-few-question-marks/

 

[RCHeliguy]

Let me add to that. I was playing PC2 the other day in an F1 car going about 200mph and at that speed the there are noticeable jumps in the video from frame to frame and it was enough to bother me. I didn't spend much time there.

This makes me almost understand why F1 2019 doesn't support VR. I believe at those higher speeds you need a higher refresh rate or it looks like a 24fps movie with too much motion in the shot. I can't imagine how that would look even slower at 60 fps. You are covering too much ground for a slower frame rate to make anything look continuous unless there was a heck of a lot of motion blur.