Qcumber

Sorry but I have only just getting around to looking at this. Life has been busy. To clarify, you are suggesting that we look at the number of events where the Frame Interval exceeds that required to maintain the target frame rate. But we would also need to know the relative "size" of the deficit. So we would need to look at the number which exceeds the Frame Interval by levels. For example, if the target Frame Interval for 72 fps is 13.8 ms then we would need to look at perhaps 1 ms bins (13.9-14.8, 14.9-15.8, 15.9-16.8 etc.). Have I got this right? I will have a think about how I could do this and what information it would give us and how to display it in a format that makes sense.

Call for data If anyone is interested please could you use the guide in this thread to record tracks with various parameters and then send them to me so that I can collate and analyse data from different setups. I am interested in the following at first: DLAA/DLAA vs MSAA and no AA. Effects of QVFR Visibility range. Pre-load radius. Detail sliders. Shadow detail. If possible please send me recordings of the same track with only one parameter changed. I will need the following data alongside the XRFrametools log file: PC specs VR headset: including method of connection (e.g. Meta link, Virtual Desktop etc.), base resolution and any scaling. DCS settings Use of any other other third party software and/or XR layers (e.g. OXRTK, XRNecksafer etc.) If using QVFR the config settings. NB: Please remember to disable "Turbo mode" or "prefer framerate over latency" as these will invalidate the measurements.

Spreadsheet and original post updated (v4). Updated CPU latency to include both app and render time. Default latency setting on charts set to 30 ms Added FPS by occurrence and Frame Interval. Added new feature called "smoothness" which calculates the variation of FPS and Frame Interval from the mean. This is useful if the average FPS counter shows that you have 72 FPS but you still may have some stutters.

Why not use XRNecksafer as this is designed for open XR applications and is more recent. Also NobiWan usually responds to queries if asked nicely. He is on this forum. https://gitlab.com/NobiWan/xrnecksafer

Try checking the resolution in OXRTK to see if it matches the Godlike settings. You can view this by enabling FSR but without any scaling. As a comparison it woul be worth looking at what your resolution would have been with Meta link. What was the scaling set to in the Meta app? Was it set to x1 or to the far right, x1.5 I think. At x1 this would be about 1760 pixels. At x1.5 it would be about 2700 pixels. So if you add scaling from DCS through PD to 1.5 your final resolution could be anywhere between 2700 and 4000 pixels. VD Godlike is about 3200 pixels so if your meta link settings had given you a resolution of 4000 pixels the Godlike will not look as good. Try checking this using OXRTK.

I don't think the Mosquito saw action in the Marianas but it did in other areas of the PTO under British and Australian use.

Meta link does not work very well at the moment. It is very unstable for me. It just keeps dropping out of DCS. I have moved back to using Virtual Desktop. The latest update is very good. Equal if not better than Meta link and more stable.

Overall they are both about equal in terms of quality and performance based on my use and extensive testing. Meta has better reprojection than VD and has a higher Bitrate (up to 960 Mbps) but VD has better codecs. VD relies on a good internet connection via a dedicated router connected to your PC via ethernet. Meta link just needs a suitable cable which cost about $15 from Amazon. At the moment VD is my preferred choice, mainly due to stability but it also has slightly better quality and performance (subjective). That might change with the next Meta update. Things are that close. PS: I should add that I use an ethernet-usb connection to the headset through the router as this is much more stable for me but is not officially supported by VD.

Please could you provide some more information including your headset and pc specs? Are you using any other tools such as OXRTK?

It would be worth measuring this. If locking fps to 72 appears smoother then you would expect to see a tighter distribution of frametimes. I have been working on this using XRFrameTools and hope to publish my updated spreadsheet soon.

Have you looked at Chuck's guide? There are also lots of videos on this. https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/p-51d/#[120,"XYZ",0,540,null

This thread has become a bit confused and needs clarification. I asked above and was told that this pole related to DCS content elements only and not VR performance related 3rd party apps such as QVFR, OXRTK etc. @Dangerzone could you please clarify this in the original post? Most people who use VR (if not all) rely on third party software.

I presume 2 weeks or does TM stand for Two Months

The only way I can get rid of DLSS ghosting is to increase the centre resolution in QVFR very high (Godlike x2). The quality is amazing.

I am not sure what you mean by "the screens are too large". Do you mean that everything appears very large? If so then have you checked the IPD setting in DCS? Or do you have any other software running that might override IPD such as OXRTK? Or maybe be you need to recenter your view? It might be worth posting a screenshot.