juanchioooo
Registered
in the root of the game in userdata / log / empty the folder Shaders and Cbash
Rfactor2 The VR thread -settings & tips
- Thread starter Adrianstealth
- Start date
Thanks a lot!
That was the problem. Now It looks much better. It still looks too bright, but very much comfortable.
Ricknau
Registered
When I disable VR and start the sim the HMD screen is not blank as I would expect. Instead the game intro page is displayed in what appears to be a small theater-like room. It looks as if it's projected onto a screen about 20 feet away. On the floor are some diagrams/switches that allow you to tweak the look. It looks nice and I want to see that when I play the sim in VR. But when I select HMD in the graphics configuration screen and then play the game all the displays are flat, in empty space.
How can I get that theater format while playing in VR?
How can I get that theater format while playing in VR?
Do you think that the performance from the following test/benchmark performed on a single screen in 4K with a good PC (i7 9700K @5.1 Ghz + RTX 2080 Ti OC + DDR4 4000 Mhz + SSD) can work in VR on HP Reverb G2 in a objective of at least 90 FPS in AVERAGE (not min)?
As a reminder 4K = 8,294,400 and Reverb G2 = 9,331,200 pixels, i.e. in terms of pixels only corresponds to + 12.5% of pixels to display (8,294,400 × 1.125).
I guess a 12.5% lower AVERAGE FPS is probably optimistic, I had envisioned a max drop -20% average FPS would be close to reality, what do you think ?
Attached in the first 2 columns are the results of 2 benchmarks, and the document shows the possible settings that I am considering.
You will notice that I decided to deprive myself of rain, as the rain destroys in an excessive way the performances.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DD5z4ChMrkyvQt1_ks1Bj0U9lBwWcL-9/view?usp=drivesdk
As a reminder 4K = 8,294,400 and Reverb G2 = 9,331,200 pixels, i.e. in terms of pixels only corresponds to + 12.5% of pixels to display (8,294,400 × 1.125).
I guess a 12.5% lower AVERAGE FPS is probably optimistic, I had envisioned a max drop -20% average FPS would be close to reality, what do you think ?
Attached in the first 2 columns are the results of 2 benchmarks, and the document shows the possible settings that I am considering.
You will notice that I decided to deprive myself of rain, as the rain destroys in an excessive way the performances.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DD5z4ChMrkyvQt1_ks1Bj0U9lBwWcL-9/view?usp=drivesdk
Kelju_K
Registered
You have calculated the reverb G2's resolution with panel resolution (2160x2160) x2 = 9,331,200 pixels.
But, and this is a big but. VR needs barrel distortion correction and a lot of extra pixels to do it.
About 1.5x the pixels of the panels.
In reverb G2 the distortion corrected pixel count per eye is 3172x3092. so (3172x3092) x2 = 19 615 648 pixels. That's hell of a lot more pixels to render.
(Peter Peterson is with HP's VR team, if that didn't come clear from the picture)
Last edited:
Kelju_K
Registered
Your CPU is ok, but that 2080ti is not gonna be able to run the Reverb G2 with it's full resolution (steam vr 100%SS resolution).
What makes the situation even worse with the Reverb G2, is that it doesn't look that good with much lowered resolutions.
80%SS (2836x2768 per eye) still looks good, for the money you payed for the G2.
Lowest i would go is 64%SS (2536x2476 per eye). After that, you are starting to waste pixels, and not getting much in return for the performance it takes to run. This you can run with 2080ti for sure. Propably higher than that. Somewhere between 80% and that 64% most likely.
But forget shadows (maybe low?), reflections, postprocessing, and high MSAA.
Opponent detail low is a must. Player detail can be full, track detail high, same for texture detail.
basically everything else off.
Running it at 50%SS (2240x2188 per eye) already looks worse that Valve Index, even tough there are considerably more pixels per eye still. So the whole purpose of the high res hmd is totally wasted. Better to get index or something else if that's all you can get out of the G2.
What makes the situation even worse with the Reverb G2, is that it doesn't look that good with much lowered resolutions.
80%SS (2836x2768 per eye) still looks good, for the money you payed for the G2.
Lowest i would go is 64%SS (2536x2476 per eye). After that, you are starting to waste pixels, and not getting much in return for the performance it takes to run. This you can run with 2080ti for sure. Propably higher than that. Somewhere between 80% and that 64% most likely.
But forget shadows (maybe low?), reflections, postprocessing, and high MSAA.
Opponent detail low is a must. Player detail can be full, track detail high, same for texture detail.
basically everything else off.
Running it at 50%SS (2240x2188 per eye) already looks worse that Valve Index, even tough there are considerably more pixels per eye still. So the whole purpose of the high res hmd is totally wasted. Better to get index or something else if that's all you can get out of the G2.
Last edited:
GTClub_wajdi
Registered
Me. I have the 2080ti OC plus the I9900K . SS-105%Thanks @Kelju_K for very good information.
Someone with some better positive feedback for 2080ti OC/good CPU/good DDR4 + Reverb G2 ?
Someone succeed to play at 100% without major issue ?
All setting on high-medium . Only shadow-low and no PP( I dint like PP). AA-4
AI-16
In almost all official tracks I can keep it between 88-90( average). In third party tracks some are very good and some are not.
FERNANDO CABRERA
Registered
I know this is old news...
.
..but has someone all ready tried openvr_fsr in rFactor2, it enable the use of FSR in openvr apps and recently NIS (NVIDIA Image Scaling) was added, it can be use to add additional sharpening to the image or even gain some FPS if render scale is used.
https://github.com/fholger/openvr_fsr
.
..but has someone all ready tried openvr_fsr in rFactor2, it enable the use of FSR in openvr apps and recently NIS (NVIDIA Image Scaling) was added, it can be use to add additional sharpening to the image or even gain some FPS if render scale is used.
https://github.com/fholger/openvr_fsr
lagg
Registered
I use it and works very well (in our web there are several people using it).
I haven't had any problem.
Seven Smiles
Registered
ACC update 1.8 tomorrow includes FSR and DLSS within the game code
Kelju_K
Registered
Thanks @Kelju_K for very good information.
Someone with some better positive feedback for 2080ti OC/good CPU/good DDR4 + Reverb G2 ?
Someone succeed to play at 100% without major issue ?
I run mine at 100%SS (3172x3092 per eye) when offline against AI.
Track detail = High
Player detail = Full
Opponent detail = Low ,with texture override to medium ("Opponent Texture Override":1, in player.json)
Texture detail = High
Shadows = OFF (or Low)
Anisotropic Filtering x 16
MSAA x4
PP = Off
Everything else = Off
I can have 9 AI cars, 10 visible (to include my car, it has to be 10 to see all AI cars)
In start grid @ SPA pos 10, i get 10.6ms Gpu frametime (so thats very much on the limit) With the BMW M4 Class 1
I use Openvr FSR to sharpen the image, with 0.6 sharpening and 0.6 radius
Alternatively For multiplayer i can shave 1-1.5 ms off with having 80%SS and 1.1185 multiplier in FSR.
Why use >1 values in FSR you might ask?
Well i have tested FSR both ways.
The way it is supposed to be used originally with monitors, ie. use <1 for target (0.77 being the ultra preset), to render image at lower res than monitor, and then FSR upsamples it back to monitor res.
In this case being vr, back to 100%SS res in steam VR (or what ever you use in steam vr SS%)
BUT. This is when it gets interesting.. i get less aliasing with using it in reverse.
So i set render target lower with steam vr (to 80%SS) and then upscale it back to 100%SS resolution by using >1 values in FSR.
For me this gives better image quality with less aliasing.
I can only guess why? But steam vr SS% seems to be much smarter at adjusting (lowering) the HMD's resolution, than FSR is.
FSR only sets lower render resolution target, but steam vr SS% slider seems to do more, as the picture in my previous message about different rgb channels for the barrel distortion correction suggests. This is just guessing about why, but the results are true non the less.
So how to calculate the correct >1 value if you wanna try it this way?
FSR target (0.77 being the ultra preset) is multiplier to both x and y resolution (like PD in oculus is).
So just divide the wanted end resolution in steam VR by what you lower it to.
Either x or y is good as it is multiplier to both.
Example:
So i set steam vr to 80%SS and i want to get it upsampled back to 100%SS with FSR
100%SS = 3172x3092 per eye
80%SS = 2836x2768 per eye
3172 / 2836 = 1.1185
So i set FSR to 1.1185
That upsamples the 80%SS image back to 100%SS res (3172x3092)
For me at least there is noticeable difference in aliasing using it in reverse. Im on AMD, and i have heard nvidia user say the opposite, so you gonna have to test it your self as ymmv it seems.
I tested this in SPA right after turn 1, looking at the stands on the left, (on the downhill before eau rouge), as the stands create most aliasing artefacts when using down->upsampling.
I'd say thats a good spot to do the test
Final note. I have noticed that many complain about the amount of aliasing FSR creates. That's is true, but mostly because the 0.77 is wayyyy too much below 1 for VR as "ultra preset".
0.77 being multiplier for both x and y res, it ends up being as much as 59%SS out of 100%SS. So i would use greater values than 0.77 to avoid huge amounts of aliasing artefacts.
0.8941 is equivalent to 20% decrease in render resolution in relation to 100%.
You get this by diving the res the other way, ie. 80%SS / 100%SS (2836 / 3172 = 0.8941).
Last edited:
I run mine at 100%SS (3172x3092 per eye) when offline against AI.
Track detail = High
Player detail = Full
Opponent detail = Low ,with texture override to medium ("Opponent Texture Override":1, in player.json)
Texture detail = High
Shadows = OFF (or Low)
Anisotropic Filtering x 16
MSAA x4
PP = Off
Everything else = Off
I can have 9 AI cars, 10 visible (to include my car, it has to be 10 to see all AI cars)
In start grid @ SPA pos 10, i get 10.6ms Gpu frametime (so thats very much on the limit) With the BMW M4 Class 1
I use Openvr FSR to sharpen the image, with 0.6 sharpening and 0.6 radius
Alternatively For multiplayer i can shave 1-1.5 ms off with having 80%SS and 1.1185 multiplier in FSR.
Why use >1 values in FSR you might ask?
Well i have tested FSR both ways.
The way it is supposed to be used originally with monitors, ie. use <1 for target (0.77 being the ultra preset), to render image at lower res than monitor, and then FSR upsamples it back to monitor res.
In this case being vr, back to 100%SS res in steam VR (or what ever you use in steam vr SS%)
BUT. This is when it gets interesting.. i get less aliasing with using it in reverse.
So i set render target lower with steam vr (to 80%SS) and then upscale it back to 100%SS resolution by using >1 values in FSR.
For me this gives better image quality with less aliasing.
I can only guess why? But steam vr SS% seems to be much smarter at adjusting (lowering) the HMD's resolution, than FSR is.
FSR only sets lower render resolution target, but steam vr SS% slider seems to do more, as the picture in my previous message about different rgb channels for the barrel distortion correction suggests. This is just guessing about why, but the results are true non the less.
So how to calculate the correct >1 value if you wanna try it this way?
FSR target (0.77 being the ultra preset) is multiplier to both x and y resolution (like PD in oculus is).
So just divide the wanted end resolution in steam VR by what you lower it to.
Either x or y is good as it is multiplier to both.
Example:
So i set steam vr to 80%SS and i want to get it upsampled back to 100%SS with FSR
100%SS = 3172x3092 per eye
80%SS = 2836x2768 per eye
3172 / 2836 = 1.1185
So i set FSR to 1.1185
That upsamples the 80%SS image back to 100%SS res (3172x3092)
For me at least there is noticeable difference in aliasing using it in reverse. Im on AMD, and i have heard nvidia user say the opposite, so you gonna have to test it your self as ymmv it seems.
I tested this in SPA right after turn 1, looking at the stands on the left, (on the downhill before eau rouge), as the stands create most aliasing artefacts when using down->upsampling.
I'd say thats a good spot to do the test
Final note. I have noticed that many complain about the amount of aliasing FSR creates. That's is true, but mostly because the 0.77 is wayyyy too much below 1 for VR as "ultra preset".
0.77 being multiplier for both x and y res, it ends up being as much as 59%SS out of 100%SS. So i would use greater values than 0.77 to avoid huge amounts of aliasing artefacts.
0.8941 is equivalent to 20% decrease in render resolution in relation to 100%.
You get this by diving the res the other way, ie. 80%SS / 100%SS (2836 / 3172 = 0.8941).
Hi.
Thx for your answer!
What is your AMD GPU ?
Concerning your tip, thx, I'll give it a try when I'll have my G2, probably in less than 2 weeks.
Kelju_K
Registered
First off, congratulations on ordering the reverb G2!!!
My system specs:
i7 10700K @5.2GHz / 4.8GHz cache
Aorus Elite z490 MB
Crucial Ballistix DDR4 @4200Mhz (oc'ed with manually tuned timings)
Power color Red Devil 6800xt @2600MHz Gpu / 2130MHz Vram, fast timings)
Win 10 OS (very stripped)
green serpent
Registered
Hi guys I know this is a VR thread but I didn't think it worth creating a new thread just for one question I have relating to a monitor. I'm throwing up between getting VR and getting a curved monitor. I am erring towards the monitor because I want to be able to experience hotlapping etc with friends so we can watch each others runs.
I'm looking at the Samsung G9 curved monitor. I know that there might be some distortion in the image, but I am hoping that it will be barely noticable... especially because most of the time I will be looking at or near the centre of the screen so any distortion will be in the peripheral vision? What are people's thoughts/experience with this? I'm about to drop a fair bit of cash on this thing so I thought it best to ask. I notice some esports gamers are using a curved monitor... the one I'm looking at has a pretty dramatic curve (I'll link it below)
Cheers.
https://www.pccasegear.com/products...-dqhd-240hz-freesync-qled-curved-49in-monitor
I'm looking at the Samsung G9 curved monitor. I know that there might be some distortion in the image, but I am hoping that it will be barely noticable... especially because most of the time I will be looking at or near the centre of the screen so any distortion will be in the peripheral vision? What are people's thoughts/experience with this? I'm about to drop a fair bit of cash on this thing so I thought it best to ask. I notice some esports gamers are using a curved monitor... the one I'm looking at has a pretty dramatic curve (I'll link it below)
Cheers.
https://www.pccasegear.com/products...-dqhd-240hz-freesync-qled-curved-49in-monitor
juanchioooo
Registered
I have a curved monitor of 32 "and 4 milliseconds 144 hertz, for me the resolution is fine, but since the immersion of Virtual Reality there is no comparison, I will never return to the monitor except to navigate or work
green serpent
Registered
I'm a bit lazy to read through the whole thread ... could you recommend a VR headset that kicks butt and works well with rF2? What is pretty much the latest and greatest, Pimax?I have a curved monitor of 32 "and 4 milliseconds 144 hertz, for me the resolution is fine, but since the immersion of Virtual Reality there is no comparison, I will never return to the monitor except to navigate or work
juanchioooo
Registered
price quality and performance I would say that the rift S is a very good option,
pimax is very good but it is expensive, it has good fov and the distortion does not worry me since it is in the corner of the eyes, and there is never focus, not even with human eyes, the sde is invaluable at 8k plus. Some new pimax are going to come out but they are very expensive, it all depends on the money, I do not recommend the quest 2 that work worse than the S because the graphic connection is not native....REVERT G2s perform poorly and look good but aren't perfect... small sweet spot,glare too
Last edited: