Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Adrianstealth, Apr 30, 2017.
Is it possible that you are using old content, not adapted to DX11?
No. I'm using oficial content. Sebring and Ferrari GTE now.
Then it's strange.
You can use reshade to reduce the brightness.
There is info here
Eliminate the shaders that when entering the game will create new ones for you
As per Agahnim's question:
What is the "in game" resolution you're talking about ?
Because to me there is only two different resolution settings :
- SteamVR resolution
- Display resolution (from rFactor2 configuration panel, same place where you can set "HMD only", and only affect UI size in VR)
How can I do that??
in the root of the game in userdata / log / empty the folder Shaders and Cbash
Thanks a lot!
That was the problem. Now It looks much better. It still looks too bright, but very much comfortable.
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?
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.
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)
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.
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 ?
Not me. I've a 2080TI too.
My experience is similar to what @Kelju_K said.
Me. I have the 2080ti OC plus the I9900K . SS-105%
All setting on high-medium . Only shadow-low and no PP( I dint like PP). AA-4
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.
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.
I use it and works very well (in our web there are several people using it).
I haven't had any problem.
ACC update 1.8 tomorrow includes FSR and DLSS within the game code
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
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.
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).
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.
Separate names with a comma.