WipeUout

There are many options to gain FPS, depending on your tolerance to lack of realism or shimmers or... The point here is to have a baseline to compare between version and these are the settings I use to make sure I do not reach near my HMD's refresh rate of 72hz. This way I can see the accurate gain/loss between versions or settings changes. My personal preference to gain FPS is to reduce MSAA.

Sadly I have to report a further drop in VR performance with 2.8.0.32235.1. In my test track, I now have a 9.4% drop in FPS, it was previously 7.5% with 2.8.0.32066. The drop is caused by increased GPU frame time almost exclusively. Version Average FPS 2.7.18.30765 59.3 2.8.0.32066 54.8 2.8.0.32235.1 53.7 Settings and track attached. null performance track 277.trk

You are absolutely right. I think a lot lost the primary objective of this beta version which is to identify and squash bugs before it goes stable. Seems that the "early" access to new features and platforms became the primary reason to opt in the OB, forgetting why it is there mainly. I would also agree though that some warning before hand would've changed the reaction greatly.

Had similar drop, 7.5% less FPS in my test track (F-18 Caucasus) with increase in GPU frametime mainly the culprit.

Seems consistent with my 7.5% FPS drop. My HMD is at 72hz and my CPU frametime was around 11ms with a bit of headroom prior to 2.8. Now I am exceeding the limit of 13.7ms quite often hence the drop. CPU not a problem, still bellow 10ms in my test track but higher than before a bit.

I reverted to Stable 2.7.18... Very disappointing to say the least. Dear ED, please share with the community what is going on. I was expecting VR improvements as stated in GS`s great preview of 2.8 on YouTube ( https://youtu.be/GVlRcYaQMZ4) but instead we got serious dip in FPS. It would be much easier to swallow if you shared some of the challenges/problems/issues you faced before posting the update. In keeping and fostering collaboration, sharing information and transparency will only help. When information is missing, people make it up and most of the time it will be negative. Please help us understand.

Seems that part of the performance decrease comes from the shadows processing. Going from flat to high, I used to drop by about 2 FPS in my test track and now it is a 4 FPS drop. Shadows is one of those setting that is both CPU and GPU demanding. I will switch it off for now as no shadows is a 6+ FPS gain.

Drop also here, I am getting 7.5% less performance in my test track. Seems pretty much the same for all aircraft in all terrains.

Very good and valid point. I'm not sure anymore if it would be worth upgrading to 4090 now. We have 2.8 on the horizon which will have improvement for VR, and also progress on Vulkan and multi-threading which will be implemented first. There is also the 7000 GPUs from team red coming soon that should be more affordable. I thinking now that a 4090 is a lot of money spent for a marginal improvement and would require to spend even more on another CPU upgrade. I am very happy with my steady and smooth 72 FPS now. I will sit and wait for a while.

Makes you wonder if the jump to 4090 must be followed up with a CPU upgrade to the 13th gen or a 7700x in order to fully unleash it...

and for me it's like this at low settings also:

Not only in high settings, but low setting also shows a problem. With a GPU frametime of about 7.5 ms, the FPS value should be around 133 but because of the CPU completely bottlenecked spiking just below 13 ms. Hence, the FPS cannot reach more than 77. This is also confirmed by the very low usage of the GPU in the 40-60% range.

I have also an 8k+ and absolutely love it. I upgraded from a 5k Super and it was a big improvement. What I like about the 8k+ is the refresh rate of 72hz which is much more easier to achieve FPS above it than 90hz. I do not need to use re-projection (pimax compulsive smooth) and get butter smooth experience. The other great feature is the upscaling which takes much less GPU and CPU power to get the images as the HMD uses a 2.5k signal and bring it to 4k. You will not get as much as clarity as with the reverb G2 but the wide field of view makes a big difference, I would never go back to tunnel vision.

Have you tried different FOV, I use only normal FOV and never had this issue. Also make sure parallel projection is off. You may also try the 3Dmigoto mod (https://forum.dcs.world/topic/207154-3dmigoto-vr-mod-for-dcs-label-masking-color-enhancement-sharpen-fxaa-copypaste-of-radio-msg/) that give you the ability to play with some settings specific to NVGs.

Taxes in the U.S. are different depending in which state you live. They add taxes at checkout after you confirm you address.

If you only play DCS, or racing games such as Assetto corsa or F1 2022, then yes only the HMD is required. I would suggest to get at least one base station to get the 6 degrees of freedom tracking (lighthouse). It is sometime very useful to be able to move your head in the cockpit in the XYZ planes. Without the base station, your head will be fixed in space and you will only be able to swivel (yaw, pitch, rotate) around XYZ axis. But soon, you will want to experiment and explore more VR game and 3D shooters are a blast also. I bought two cheap refurbished HTC controllers on amazon and they work great.

Core clock speed is not core performance. To compare single core performance it is better to use benchmark such as Cinebench. Not regardless, core performance is not equal for all CPUs.

I would have a different opinion on this since I made the move from a 9900k to an 12700kf. CPU frametime dropped significantly and now I can use my 6900X to its full potential. I think that the 4090 offers a great performance leap but you also need to have a top CPU to give it breathing room. Granted that the actual DCS graphic engine using a single core is a serious limiting factor but you can mitigate it and get 100% out of your GPU by running your mission on a dedicated server, having a fast (or hugely cached) single core CPU and being careful with settings that are CPU taxing such as shadows.

Tried that with high settings with my resolution a bit higher with supersampling (3652x3004) and I'm getting 53 average FPS after 3 min but my CPU frametime is about 9 to 10 ms once airborne. Your CPU is bottlenecked and not giving enough breathing room to the 4090 to unleash it full power. I think that the gain is much higher than what is shown, probably in the 60-70% range.

Ok, but how much for a AM5 mobo compared to an LGA1700? Using your ''already paid for'' DDR4 instead of buying new memory will always be cheaper nevertheless.

Memory speed (DDR4 vs DDR5) does not play a significant role in DCS or most games. If you have infinite money, well go for the DDR5 and 13th gen or AM5. If you are looking at a cost effective solution then re-using your RAM is possible with intel 12th and 13th gen. What counts above anything in DCS(VR) is a fast single core speed and fast GPU. DDR5 vs DDR4 will not make a huge difference. With my i7-12700kf I have a CPU frame below 9 ms most of the time. It will jump over 13 ms on loaded supercarrier deck but once I'm airborne, no problem and no re-projection needed!

Going from 25 ms (40 FPS) to 18 ms (56 FPS) GPU frametime is quite impressive, that is a 40% performance increase. Still hard to judge the raw gain since the CPU is completely bottlenecked. We need to see benchmarking where the CPU frame rate stays well below the HMD refresh rate to see the real gain from the GPU.

The AMD X3D is a good solution but the intel 12th gen also with its high single core speed. The LGA1700 mobos are much cheaper and you can get DDR4 version and re-use your memory... And you will be able to upgrade to 13th gen also.

Having any kind of FPS lock or re-projection on will not give actual and accurate performance figures. If you activate re-projection, the CPU frametime will be artificially high and not representative. When you do benchmarking, it is better to let FPS free, set your HMD to the highest refresh rate and do not use re-projection. Get your settings to high quality across the board and make sure your FPS stays below the refresh rate to ensure you get a valid result. You can pump up the supersampling also if settings are not enough to keep your baseline FPS testing bellow the HMD refresh rate. And last but not least, use a track file to have a constant and stable testing environment.

I guess you play pancake. Lots of good point but VR is a different story.