Qcumber

Yes. It's now an neverending journey. There is no going back. Be prepared for a steep learning curve in optimisation though. Luckily there is lots of support on this forum.

Does anyone have a direct comparison? The Quest Pro is a very good headset and can be bought for a similar price to the PSVR2 (in the UK at least). The QP lenses are excellent. The PSVR2 has Fresnel lenses so how does the quality compare?

The QP is often misunderstood. What I am looking for is a QP with a higher pixel density.

What are peoples experiences with the PSVR2 after a few months use? I am interested in this now that eye tracking is enabled and can benefit from Quad Views Foveated Rendering.

Thanks for your positive feedback. That is reassuring. It is often the case that the minority shouts the loudest. I have the impression that Pimax really wants to create a product aimed at DCS users. I respect that. At the moment I am not sure which is the best headset to get. The Super sounds great (all 3' versions) but the upcoming Dream Air and SE version are also very interesting.

That sums up the QP pretty well. Especially the open sides etc. It suits me perfectly. I have tried running without eye tracking and no DLSS but there is too much shimmer, even with MSAA x4. That's why I run a high but small Foveated region (equivalent to about 4800 pixels) as there are no artifacts with DLAA/DLSS. The Pimax Super is tempting but the reasons I am hesitant are: 1) It's expensive. 2) The form factor is huge. 3) There is a long wait for shipping. I am also interested in the Dream Air. Smaller, lighter and about the same FOV as the Quest Pro.

How does quality compare to the Q3? Do you have any experience with the Quest Pro? I would be interested in a comparison.

No. It just mirrors what's on the VR headset. You can find several comments on this in this forum over the years where people have compared low vs high monitor resolution (me included) and it makes no difference. The only reason I use 1080 on a 1440 monitor is so that I have a window rather than full screen.

I was hoping not to be the Guinea Pig!

The Ultrawide has less binocular overlap. To be honest that does not bother me too much as I can push the IPD out wide a still get good vision. I think it is because I have a strong astigmatism. The Ultrawide might be the best option for me. I'm not sure when shipping starts though.

My GPU is a bit behind yours but with QVFR CPU is important too so hopefully my 5080 will be ok How good is the FOV? That is another reason I am considering an upgrade. I wear glasses but use lens inserts and the QP allows you to get very close to the lenses as there is no face mask, so FOV is not too bad. Like wearing flying helmet goggles. What is the 50 PPD Super like from that perspective?

Thanks. The next Quest is unlikely to have eye tracking so I am not relying on that. I run my QP at a centre resolution of about 4800x4800 pixels. I know that seems extreme but I can get a steady 72 FPS using DLSS Quality with no ghosting. A very sharp and smooth image and my maximum VRAM is about 12gb. Based on that I should be able to run the Crystal Super with similar settings. I'm not in a rush to buy but the temptation is there. Which would be the better option: 57, 50 or Ultrawide?

Which one to go for? 50, 57 or Ultrawide? The other thing I would like to know is how good the Super eye tracking is compared to the QP?

On paper it seems that way but in reality the QP a very good headset. I have 12 months experience with the Pico 4 and the QP is much better even though the resolution is much lower. Weirdly the screen door was effect is worse on the P4. Ideally I need someone with significant experience with the QP who has upgraded to the super. It is a lot of money for something that seems very buggy at the moment. How is the resolution for distant objects? Will the Crystal Super run on my specs (in signature)?

Monitor resolution? No effect at all.

I'm not sure if I want someone to persuade me to buy one or not to buy one. Cost is a big issue as is reliability (or so it appears on this forum). That said they do appear to be very keen to develop what we need for DCS so that's a big plus. With foveated rendering my 5080 should be OK. I run my QP at pretty high resolution settings so that I offset DLSS ghosting.

Does anyone have any direct experience with both the Crystal Super and Quest Pro? Is it worth an upgrade?

That's odd. Are you capping your frame rate in DCS?

I would advise running at 72Hz rather than capping the frame rate in DCS. 90Hz is probably means that you are maxing out your system.

Flying low over Berlin is very demanding. I get about 40-50 FPS. I can maintain 72 FPS over Cairo and about 50-60 over London and Paris. This is without shadows and civilian traffic and with range set to extreme. I am using QVFR with Quest Pro.

The F4-U is definitely more demanding. I can still maintain 72 FPS on most maps but it has a higher GPU load. I need to do a direct comparison of frametimes with other modules.

It will be worth waiting for. Once it does arrive we can all live long and prosper.

Yes please!!!!

The only advantage to using a lower resolution is if you want to have a windowed mirror rather than full screen. I set mine to 1080 with a 1440 monitor. It has no effect on performance.

Interesting possibility for a future VR experience. YORO Increases VR Frame Rates By Rendering One Eye & Synthesizing The Other https://www.uploadvr.com/you-only-render-once-vr-frame-rate-improving-technique/