Hi, I came here specifically to explain and say the following.
If you have let's say an Oculus Rift CV1 and you are not using Super-Sampling (So Pixel-Density/PD set to default 1.0 and Steam set to 100% as well) your rig will have to spit out 1080×1200 pixels, times TWO (one for each eye).
-1080 X 1200 X 2 = 2,592,000 pixels total per frame generated for both eyes combined = 100% (Let's call this 100% since this is the default demand on PD 1.0, no Super Sampling)-
If you set P.D to 1.6 in DCS and keep Steam at 100%/no SS in Steam, then the total rendered SS resolution per frame, per eye, will be default resolution (written above) x 1.6:
1080 X 1.6 = 1728
1200 x 1.6 = 1920
~1728 X 1920 X 2 = 6,635,520 pixels in total (1.6 PD = 257% demand on your rig when compared to the 100%/default setting of 1.0 PD)~
When you also set Steam to 200% on top of your already 160% SS in DCS, you're essentially applying Super-Sampling on top of Super-Sampling (bad idea), before it is downsampled back to the native resolution of the two screens inside of your headset (1080 x 1200 each) and shown to you.
So in your case, 160% SS on top of 200% SS will yield:
~ 3456 x 3840 x 2 = 26,542,080 pixels total per frame (More than 1,000%- TEN TIMES the default 1.0 PD resources are required from your rig and mainly vidcard!!)~
Does it also provide you with a 10x better graphical experience? Cus it's using 10x as much computing power to deliver those frames.. My guess is not.
Ultimately it's up to you if this sacrifice is worth it or not, but if I were in your place I would definitely give up the SuperDuperSuperSampling for a smoother constant 90FPS experience with a lower ONE-LAYER PD boost :doh: :joystick:
The "Sweet Spot" in terms of PD in DCS is 1.8 to 2.0. Any perceived improvements above 2.0 is most likely placebo; so my advice to you (and anyone else reading this, with a beast GFX card in their rig) would be to use either SteamVR's Super-Sampling and set it to 180% to 200% or (better yet) use DCS' own PD slider and set it between 1.8 and 2.0.
1.8 PD =
1944 X 2160 X 2 = 8.398.080 Pixels (324% Compared to Default 1.0 PD)
2.0 PD =
2160 X 2400 X 2 = 10,368,00 Pixels (400% Compared to Default 1.0 PD)
I'm forced to do 1.0 (No super-sampling at all) and still it's not buttery smooth on my R9 390, 5820K & 16GB DDR4 :cry:
I wish I had even half of the graphical resources some of you have.
No more 45fps 'allday 'errday and no more choppy game-play with a sidewinder hot on my tail, or worse a flanker moving in for the gun kill :pilotfly:
Also, MSAA is very resource intensive (It's a form of SS also) and so are shadows in DCS VR (don't use high and up in settings). Be mindful of that also if FPS and smooth gameplay is what matters most to you.
Edit: The number of pixels in this post are referencing the Oulus Rift CV1, and will differ from headset to headset, but the (increase in) percentages will be the same, irrespective/regardless of what headset or resolution you are on.
Edit: PD = Super Sampling and Super Sampling = PD. The only real difference are the words themselves, Pixel Density & Super Sampling.
Last-Edit-i-Promise: As imacken will point out in the next page of this thread, it seems that SteamVR will now show your headset's native resolution at 50%, not 100%... Now... At 100%... You will be already SuperSampling quite heavily it seems. My advice is to just avoid playing around with Super Sampling in Oculus Debug Tool and Steam VR and keep SS strictly within DCS' own PD option.
Cheers!
IT--
