Spectre1986

I returned the Odyssey and got a rift last night. More SDE but it runs DCS well on my old OCed i7 920 with a 1060 6Gb. Their sub 90FPS tech is far superior to SteamVR's. The lenses are much better on the Rift IMO, almost no God Rays. The clarity is surprisingly good despite the SDE. Text is almost the same, setup sucked, HMD tracking is better from the front but worse at some of the important DCS angles... The hand controllers trade blows, can't turn away but tracks better when in view. Robo Recall is actually lots of fun, wish I tried it with the Odyssey. I'd say I am more satisfied with the Rift, but only because my CPU is old and GPU is weakish.

I am debating between building a new computer (MR requires AVX) or returning the odyssey for a Rift. The portion of the video where he describes the text as much more visible in the Odyssey is the most telling for our DCS World issues. If it wasn't for needing a $1,000+ computer for the Odyssey I would definitely keep it. I am probably going to return it tonight and look for BF deals on the RIft.

I just went into settings and used "Show pilot model when available."

$10-$20 Bluetooth USB dongle.

On second thought... It looks like the motherboard, i5-8600K CPU, 16GB DDR4-3200 RAM, and a 500 GB SSD is going to run about $900! Yikes! That's without a new video card, case, or PSU! I'm sure my 1060 6GB will still work pretty well but that is expensive!

Sorry, I just got home from my brother's house. My i7 920 at 3.65 GHz doesn't have the AVX instruction set and it won't let me run it, the stupid thing is that it is only needed for the controllers, and I don't use them. I may run down to Microcenter and build me an i5-8600k tomorrow but I doubt it.

I edited to fix the link, here is my second video.

Another Video of Samsung Odyssey in DCS World 1.5 Here is a second video, just landing at Lochini. My computer is too old to run Windows MR so I am at my little brother's house, he doesn't have DCS Wolrd 2.0 so I can't test yet.

Well, I was finally able to pry myself away from the Odyssey long enough to upload a video. This is just a quick video showing off the tracking quality of the Windows Mixed Reality HMD. This was recorded from the preview shown on the 2D monitor. It is lower quality and frame rate than what is seen in the HMD. It also looks a little jumpy, that was NOT the case in the VR headset, it is very smooth and accurate. :thumbup: This is running on an i5-3570 at 4.1 Ghz with 16GB DDR3, and a GTX 970. This quickstart mission ran mostly at 45-60 fps jumping to 90 every now and then (only when looking straight up). This isn't my computer, my i7 920 is too old and won't even run Windows MR, so time to upgrade. I didn't have rudder pedals and was on a cheap joystick with unfamiliar controls mapped, so cut me some slack on the flying. I was so impressed with the tracking that I followed the enemy plane in. :joystick: The VR headset has a better quality picture and better tracking than the Rift. As you can see, I can look in any direction and still move around positionally without worry of staying in view of a camera. :thumbup: Spotting is better than the Rift, I can see my AIM 120s all the way until they hit the target. With the Rift in the A-10C Hard Quickstart (1.5) I can barely make out the trucks at the first waypoint and can't see the AAA. In the Odyssey, I can see the trucks no problem and barely make out the 2 AAA encampments next to them. Huds are clear but some gauges and MFCD text require a little leaning in. I may still return it and wait for the other Gen 1.5/2.0 offerings that are launching soon. I like the sound of the Pimax's 200 degree FOV With dual 4K screens but their costs won't even be close.

Well I was finally able to pry myself away from the Odyssey long enough to upload a couple videos. This is just a quick video showing off the tracking quality of the Windows Mixed Reality HMD. This was recorded from the preview shown on the 2D monitor. It is lower quality and frame rate than what is seen in the HMD. It also looks a little jumpy, that was NOT the case in the VR headset, it is very smooth and accurate. This is running on an i5-3570 at 4.1 Ghz with 16GB DDR3, and a GTX 970. This quickstart mission ran mostly at 45-60 fps jumping to 90 every now and then (only when looking straight up). This isn't my computer, my i7 920 is too old and won't even run Windows MR, so time to upgrade. I didn't have rudder pedals and was on a cheap joystick with unfamiliar controls mapped, so cut me some slack on the flying. The VR headset has a better quality picture and better tracking than the Rift. As you can see, I can look in any direction and still move around positionally without worry of staying in view of a camera. Spotting is better than the Rift, I can see my AIM 120s all the way until they hit the target. With the Rift in the A-10C Hard Quickstart (1.5) I can barely make out the trucks at the first waypoint and can't see the AAA. In the Odyssey, I can see the trucks no problem and barely make out the 2 AAA encampments next to them. Huds are clear but some gauges and MFCD text require a little leaning in. I may still return it and wait for the other Gen 1.5/2.0 offerings that are launching soon. I like the sound of the Pimax's 200 degree FOV With dual 4K screens but their costs won't even be close.

Well I was finally able to pry myself away from the Odyssey long enough to upload a video. This is just a quick video showing off the tracking quality of the Windows Mixed Reality HMD. This was recorded from the preview shown on the 2D monitor. It is lower quality and frame rate than what is seen in the HMD. It also looks a little jumpy, that was NOT the case in the VR headset, it is very smooth and accurate. This is running on an i5-3570 at 4.1 Ghz with 16GB DDR3, and a GTX 970. This quickstart mission ran mostly at 45-60 fps jumping to 90 every now and then (only when looking straight up). This isn't my computer, my i7 920 is too old and won't even run Windows MR, so time to upgrade. I didn't have rudder pedals and was on a cheap joystick with unfamiliar controls mapped, so cut me some slack on the flying. The VR headset has a better quality picture and better tracking than the Rift. As you can see, I can look in any direction and still move around positionally without worry of staying in view of a camera. Spotting is better than the Rift, I can see my AIM 120s all the way until they hit the target. With the Rift in the A-10C Hard Quickstart (1.5) I can barely make out the trucks at the first waypoint and can't see the AAA. In the Odyssey, I can see the trucks no problem and barely make out the 2 AAA encampments next to them. Huds are clear but some gauges and MFCD text require a little leaning in. I may still return it and wait for the other Gen 1.5/2.0 offerings that are launching soon. I like the sound of the Pimax's 200 degree FOV With dual 4K screens but their costs won't even be close.

It is refreshing to see honest reviews surfacing here. Thanks Thick and Walleye! As someone who has tried both the Rift and Odyssey I can tell that you two are giving accurate reviews. Would you both agree that saying the Odyssey has WORSE SDE than the Rift is laughable? There are already tons of reviews for Elite Dangerous comparing the Odyssey to the Rift. They are all honest too and talk about the Rift-to-Odyssey switch being an upgrade in every way for cockpit experiences. The SDE on the Rift is painfully obvious, it punched me right in the retinas every time I put it on, no matter what scenes were playing. I need to look for the SDE on the Odyssey to notice it and it needs to be the right type of scene to show it. I have better than 20/20 vision and don't need glasses. Oh, and my head is normal shaped and my eyes are a normal distance apart. Maybe that is the key? Having a normal-ish head size, face shape, and eye spread? "My old Rift was about twice as good as the Odyssey and the Rift was 3D while the Odyssey isn't, it also had about double the FOV!" (but doesn't tell everyone he sold his Rift after losing one and a half eyes in some accident, lol). I did notice the "light text on a dark background causes some reflections under the text" too on the Odyssey. It reminds me of projectors' SDE (this is very different than VR SDE, look it up). It is kind of like a fuzzy holographic mirror image of the text right under the real text (but only when it is light text on a black background at the peripheral of your vision). I adjusted the headset positioning on my face and it DID minimize/disappear as I got closer to the sweet spot and I didn't get to adjust my IPD during the demo. I hope to pick one up after work from my local MS store today, 30 day trial so no risk... My PC will struggle with it but even if it is a slideshow, I will still get to check the readability of the gauges for my next PC build.

When did you return it? Did you even try it when it had steam VR support on the 15th? I've seen reports of people saying they just used the full screen theater mode and stretched it to their field of view before steam VR support launched. If that is what you did then your comparison is worthless.

I would use the VR preset; it should be nice and re-creatable for us. Try it at 1.0 pixel density too, you can try going up but I am curious about native performance. I have a few requests and questions. 1. What versions of DCS, terrains, and aircraft have you tested with? How is the performance of those you have tested? I hear Ryzen kind of sucks for DCS, especially VR. 2. If you have the A-10C could you try your experiment with the DSMS page? See how close you need to get to read what it says for the various weapons. Can you read the HUD? I am pretty sure it doesn't get larger if you get closer, so readability is a must. 3. How is the tracking in DCS? It was flawless in my testing during the demos I have done and I tried hard to mess it up, but they were short demos and they weren't as demanding as DCS. 4. Does any drift or other errors appear after prolonged use? Do you need to re-center periodically or is that good too? 5. What do you like the least about it? The most? I am probably going to buy one tomorrow and try it out over the weekend, then return it next week. If I like it I'll go up there on Black Friday and pick one up for $100 off. I am running an old i7-920 OCed to 3.6 Ghz with 12 GB Ram and a 1060 6GB so I'll need to build a new rig soon...

I just got back from my local Microsoft Store where I tried the Samsung Odyssey. It was amazing looking, I could barely notice the pixels if I tried very hard (and I have better than 20/20 vision) and the tracking was spot on. The best thing about the tracking is that it is all internal, no cameras or sensors to set up or stay in view of. I currently have the HDK2, it has the same specs as the Rift/Vive but has garbage tracking. Because of this, I tested the positional tracking of the headset at all angles and it was flawless, even when looking straight down and backwards, or under the table the laptop (i7-7700 with Gefore 1060) was sitting on. Cockpit switches shouldn't be a problem no matter where they are. I feel like gauges shouldn't be an issue at all because of the clarity from the higher resolution, it is basically double the pixels of the Rift/Vive/HDK2 with the same FOV (1440x1600 vs 1200x1080 = 2,304,000 pixels vs 1,296,000 pixels). If anyone knows of YouTube (or whatever) videos that will playback correctly in a VR headset give me some links so I can go back a try to get them to let me watch them. The controllers were very accurate but needed to stay in the front 180 degrees relative to the headset for best accuracy, which is hard not to do. We won't be using them anyway. It was light and very comfortable too. I'll wait to see what other offerings come out soon, like the Pimax 8k (can't wait to try its huge FOV), but this one is a definite contender that blows the rift/Vive away in my limited testing. It should work with Standalone DCS through SteamVR in a few days too. Was "only" $500 US. Note: I have seen two "professional" reviews done by women that claim the visuals aren't as good or are only as good as the Rift/CV1 and that is complete garbage. Obviously they didn't go into more detail and gave other clues about their lack of VR experience. One complained about needing to aim with her hands instead of the center of the headset (so she has only done phone VR) and the other mentioned that the headset didn't give her immediate nausea like the Rift/Vive do (so she doesn't even have VR experience). The rest of the reviews are more accurate, just be weary of these women. It has a 30 day return so I will probably just pick it up from my local Microsoft Store on the 15th, when SteamVR support launches.

I just got back from my local Microsoft Store where I tried the Samsung Odyssey. It was amazing looking, I could barely notice the pixels if I tried very hard (and I have better than 20/20 vision) and the tracking was spot on. The best thing about the tracking is that it is all internal, no cameras or sensors to set up or stay in view of. I currently have the HDK2, it has the same specs as the Rift/Vive but has garbage tracking. Because of this, I tested the positional tracking of the headset at all angles and it was flawless, even when looking straight down and backwards, or under the table the laptop (i7-7700 with Gefore 1060) was sitting on. Cockpit switches shouldn't be a problem no matter where they are. I feel like gauges shouldn't be an issue at all because of the clarity from the higher resolution, it is basically double the pixels of the Rift/Vive/HDK2 with the same FOV (1440x1600 vs 1200x1080 = 2,304,000 pixels vs 1,296,000 pixels). If anyone knows of YouTube (or whatever) videos that will playback correctly in a VR headset give me some links so I can go back a try to get them to let me watch them. The controllers were very accurate but needed to stay in the front 180 degrees relative to the headset for best accuracy, which is hard not to do. We won't be using them anyway. It was light and very comfortable too. I'll wait to see what other offerings come out soon, like the Pimax 8k (can't wait to try its huge FOV), but this one is a definite contender that blows the rift/Vive away in my limited testing. It should work with Standalone DCS through SteamVR in a few days too. Was "only" $500 US. Note: I have seen two "professional" reviews done by women that claim the visuals aren't as good or are only as good as the Rift/CV1 and that is complete garbage. Obviously they didn't go into more detail and gave other clues about their lack of VR experience. One complained about needing to aim with her hands instead of the center of the headset (so she has only done phone VR) and the other mentioned that the headset didn't give her immediate nausea like the Rift/Vive do (so she doesn't even have VR experience). The rest of the reviews are more accurate, just be weary of these women.

My current rig is an i7 920 OCed to 3.6 Ghz (3.8 for the first 5ish years, too hot rendering) with 12GB of RAM and some SSDs/HDDs. I have the GTX 1060 6 GB running the Razer HDK2 VR headset (same stats as Rift/VIve but with extra overhead for their software) and an older 720p/1080i 110 inch HD projector. Modern games are never an issue taking advantage of up to 8 threads on my 9 year old beast, I max the setting on all of them and get great frames at 720p or 1080i. DCS World is a different story. I spend about 80% of my DCS time on the projector/TrackIR running at 720p (so CPU limited for sure) while sitting 12 feet away getting 90FPS, max'ish settings. In the other 20%, VR (more CPU/GPU balanced), i get 40-90 fps while away from cities, mostly around 45 or so. I enjoy the hell out of it, competing against/with other VR players is a blast. I've adapted to the low FPS so I know my next upgrade will blow me away when I see it running at a silky 90 fps most of the time, hopefully, with a 4k VR headset. My main point is that progress has slowed to a crawl. Being able to keep your motherboard/cpu for 6-10 years with overclocking kind of negates buying the cheaper slower platform that can, but MUST, get the new CPU every year for the next 3-4 years before it even catches up to that 4 year old OCed Intel setup (in DCS World anyway). I'm not sure if I want to wait for cannon lake\zen2 or get an 8700K. My main goal is to have a platform that can do "next gen" 4k VR, with future video cards obviously. DCS VR is my main driver so Intel is a must at this point but we will see what the future holds, I am no brand loyalist.

Can anyone create, or point me to, a guide showing me how to use this in my missions?

Yea, some people are too dumb to "show picture" so I fixed it, I'll admit that was my mistake (but you can still learn how to do it yourself with your quote so you won't be worthless and argue stupid points in the future). You are so wrong on so many points still. Just FYI, it is moronic to conclude that 50% on thread one plus 50% on thread two equals 100% for the core. It is 50% for the core dummy. That is just a fact. Here is proof, even though you obviously struggle with pictures it may help to keep your ignorance from spreading to others reading this in the future. Tj1376 argues from a position of ignorance and should not be taken seriously everyone. The Pimax takes a 1080 signal at 60Hz and upscales it to a 4k screen. This means your image is 1080 but the physical pixels are smaller and the SDE is less noticeable. It is impossible for the cable it uses to even carry a 4K VR signal. It isn't 4K VR and is very easy for a computer like mine to max out the 60Hz @ 1080 but 60Hz is VR garbage from 2-3 years ago. Like I said, it is closer to the DK2 as far as your computer is concerned... It doesn't even have positional tracking either. You should try to educate yourself on a topic before you argue like you are educated on the topic. You will look less foolish. If you are uneducated on a topic, you really shouldn't tell someone that is that they need to do research. You are also wrong about Moore's law on the CPU too. Did you know the difference between the 6XXX and 7XXX is only about 5%? If you clock them the same they are completely equal... Go get Mr. Moore and have him explain to you how his law CLEARLY doesn't apply here. With AMD competing again, I bet you the 8XXX is going to be far more than 5% better than the 7XXX. That is yet another reason why upgrading now would be dumb. Futile, I know, but you really should try to educate yourself before making stupid claims. https://www.nextplatform.com/2016/05/31/age-gpu-upon-us/ The only part where you are correct is when you agreed with me, yes, my CPU/RAM is bottlenecking my video card in DCS World VR, thanks for telling me what I told you in my very first post, and every single one after it. I get good DCS performance on the hold-me-over, not-good-enough-anyway, gen1 VR with my current rig. I get GREAT performance in every other VR title that I have tried, at MAX settings. I get GREAT performance in every non-VR game at MAX settings. My thought process isn't skewed, I am not a moron that wants to blow money to improve the gen1 experience IN ONE GAME that already runs well just to need to do it again in a couple years for gen2. If that is your thought process, IT is skewed (or you are filthy rich). Consider that DCS 2.5 could have better threading and/or VR optimizations for free, then the first upgrade would be a complete waste of money. That 7XXX you would get now could be an 8-9XXX for the same price in two years and I expect real advancement soon. I was wondering about the low utilization of all my measurable components. I feel like I have said that many times now. I am running out of ways to word it in the hope you may understand.

LOL, so much WRONG in here it is comical. Go read up on the Pimax, it upscales and runs at 60Hz, it is MUCH easier on your PC than a CV1, Vive, or HDK2... It is more like the DK2... :megalol: I didn't see any videos with what you described. I see a bunch of these though Go give the comments a read too, educate yourself. WOW! They are a whole 1-8 FPS apart, gasp! Or this one Poor performance? 125 FPS :lol: You can pause it and see the OCed 920 mopping up in several titles there... Give those comments a read too. Modern games have better threading and are more GPU bound, DCS is a different story... So you are saying the TM is underreporting the load? Got a link discussing this major issue in windows? Strange that my temperatures reflect the load reported by TM, it is almost like it is accurate or something... BTW that picture works fine here, I uploaded it to imgur, clicked the picture button up top in the comment window and pasted the image URL. If it isn't working did you try R-clicking then "show pic in new tab", shouldn't need to tell anyone that in 2017 but there is an idiot born every 5 minutes. I'd love to run the benchmark for you, but this old man is 500 years old in CPU years, making him run as fast as he can would probably be a bad idea, lol. Thanks for telling me what I already know and have admitted in every single post here. I am platform limited, I know that... I was just wondering about the low utilization.

Well, I saw a huge improvement over my last card, VR works GREAT, DCS VR is playable for hours, and it comes with a 2-year trade in so a free upgrade when I build my next rig. Those are reason enough for me. There was a large performance increase compared to a GTX-970 in my system, granted, probably something to do with the 10XX's VR capabilities and not having extra CPU overhead. On my 720p projector with everything on low I get around 50-90 FPS in DCS. If I crank everything to high, I get 120-130 FPS. I haven't tested with my monitor because I have a 110 inch projector with great looking resolution (when you sit 12 feet away, and spotting is easier on the lower res) and a HDK2 VR HMD. I already knew that I was CPU/RAM bound, and have said as much in every single post here... That poor dead horse... I've just never seen Task Manager misrepresent the load like you claim it does. A quick google search about that subject returned no relevant results. I am still leaning towards RAM speed being the bottleneck. Do you have a link that details the TM underreporting the load? Also, my temps are what is expected at this load. Here is a video of me playing DCS World 2.0's A-10C quickstart mission. As you can see, I get GREAT performance for a 10 year old CPU. Keep in mind, this is playing DCS in VR with High Textures and 1.6 PD, displaying a preview on the projector, running SimShaker, and recording the gameplay all at the same time. I am down low with 3 other aircraft, about 11 moving ground units, smoke, fire, and bullets flying... . If you can't see the TM screenshot (I can at home and at work) then you need to right click it and "show image" or "open image in new tab" most likely. A 10 year newer CPU being less that twice as good isn't "leaps and bounds" above. It is actually VERY VERY pathetic. Am I the only one that understands this? You could expect that from a 1.5 years newer CPU back when AMD could compete. :music_whistling:

My question was about the low utilization of my CPU. I already know my 10 year old CPU and RAM has to be the bottleneck... I just find it strange that nothing is even close to maxed out. The bottleneck is usually maxed out. I guess it has to be memory speed bottlenecking everything else and I don't have a way to measure that. I was asking for an informed opinion not guesses but thanks anyway.

I thought I was pretty clear on the situation. You need to work on your English and/or your reading comprehension. Maybe a picture will help? That is from the A-10C CAS quickstart in DCS World 2.0 with SimShaker running too. As for that link, are you familiar with overclocking? That link is worthless for any meaningful comparison when the only i7-920 on the list is at the stock 2.6 GHz and mine is at 3.8 GHz... Don't be fooled by my screenshot, task manager just reports stock clocks at the top there, it is running 3.8 GHz. If you search YouTube for "i7-920 vs" you will see tons of videos that will show you how good this CPU is still. It comes within 0-7 FPS of the 6700K when only overclocked to 3.5 Ghz and mine is at 3.8. Obviously it does better in threaded games but it holds its own when overclocked, especially for being 500 years old in CPU years. Keep in mind, you will not be getting anywhere near an extra 1.2GHz overclocking the more modern CPUs with simple air cooling, unless you win the silicone lottery BIGTIME. As I mentioned already, I know it is a CPU/RAM bottleneck, I am just wondering about the low utilization. I have only seen this behavior in DCS VR. My guess is that it is a RAM bottleneck (speed not capacity). I hear DCS loves fast RAM. I will be taking advantage of the FREE TRADE IN regardless of what you think, I would be a fool not to. Even if Gen2 hasn’t released yet in 2 years, I’ll still be taking advantage of that trade up, and it will still help in other games that are threaded well and/or GPU bound at high resolutions. As I already said, I am waiting on Gen2 to upgrade my mobo, CPU, and RAM because the top-of-the-line stuff out there right now can’t do 4K VR in DCS World, not even close. It would be a waste of money to buy upgrades to improve the “not good enough anyway” Gen1 experience, just to need to do it again in a couple years for Gen2. Obviously, there could always be some breakthrough that makes it easier on hardware than expected and my old CPU could always fall down and break a hip before making it to 600 years old. Less than twice as good as a 10 year old OCed CPU is GARBAGE progress! Maybe I am spoiled from the old days where CPU capabilities doubled every 1.5 years. Hopefully AMD will force Intel back into the advancement game and we will have good hardware to power 4K VR in a couple years because at this rate, it is going to be at least another 10 years.

How do you even determine the bottleneck? I have an old i7-920 OCed to 3.8 Ghz, 12GB ram, GTX 1060 6GB, and the OS on one SSD with DCS on another. I am sure I am CPU/Ram limited but I don't see it when I use MSI AfterBurner and task manager. My CPU will be using like 50-60% of a couple cores, the GPU will be sitting around 60% used, and the RAM is about 70% used while I will be getting 35-50 FPS over land/cities. If all of my components still have a ton of headroom, what gives with the low framerate? This is in DCS 2.0 BTW. I have found that turning up the quality settings will INCREASE my FPS in some cockpits. This is evidence of a CPU bottleneck but if so, why the low utilization? I plan on waiting for Gen2 VR before I upgrade the rig. I have a 2 year trade-in on the 1060, so that will probably be a GTX 1260 for free in a couple years. Hopefully Ryzen (and VR) will get Intel back into the advancement game and their CPU's will start to be more than 2-8% better than the previous generation by the time Gen2 VR hits. You can go on YouTube and see my CPU going toe-to-toe in many games with the newest offerings from intel... There is about 10 years between them and that is just sad... :(

Cannon's feel weak I agree. The cannon on the A-10C feels great but the guns on the P-51 feel weak. I have both set at 100 too. If you guys adjust the slider for the test volume does it create static as you slide the slider because mine does? You may need to output to regular speakers to hear it better.