volk_50

I use rudder pedals (when airborne) - left for long zoom, right for short (+ close one eye). Takes a bit to get used to but works pretty well.

Getting back the NAV from DGFT? Once in DGFT mode I can’t figure a way to switch back to navigation on HUD. It must be something simple but I’m stumped :cry:

For the latest NVIDIA drivers update - - set VR pre-rendered frames to “4” with this new update. I’m seeing noticeable performance improvement (ghosting etc). Not perfect, but much better.

For Pimax 5k+ — set NVIDIA settings of VR pre-rendered frames to “4” with this new update. I’m seeing noticeable performance improvement (ghosting etc). Not perfect, but much better.

I’ve had Pimax 5K for about the same time. I get good frame rates, GPU/CPU frametimes BUT ghosting on aircraft and stutter on (moderately complex) terrain while rolling is a norm at this point.

This is a step in the right direction! Thanks ED. To make this a complete feature, please: (1) control axis driven function (using latching trick but it's so-so) (2) NOT parallel projection dependent (kills PIMAX performance) (3) stabilized frame function (we need this for VR)

Highest CPU core is cruising at 60% while FPS is around 35 (below ASW limit) and GPU @ 70% — plenty of room to push FPS higher. There are some hacks to temporarily increase GPU/FPS but none are sustainable as far as gameplay goes.

I bet (1) some ED developer tried couple things and got 50% FPS boost -- showed off for a quick second this was picked up further up the chain in excited frenzy. (2) "50%" announcement was made. (3) they started looking at it in more detail and realized it was more "nuanced". (4) "dang it" moment for any more public statements/mention of roll-out in beta. (5) damage control. (6) we're here now. p.s. great mystery is why GPU is running at around 70-75% and refuses to break higher for more FPS. If ED can figure out how to kick that render pipeline in the rear, that'd be a great start (70% to, say, 95%)

nope, 2.5.5.32299 open beta was out yesterday but nothing on VR front: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=200724&page=6

You are right -- "steamVR.use.native.FOV" was set to '0'. after setting it to '1' I was able to get 2560x1400 in SteamVR slider. This slider increment stays true until PiTool render target value of 1.3 (target set via profile.json file, not PiTool UI) with "fov_outer_adjust_degree" = -2.32. I tried playing around to get similar at render target 2.0 but couldn't get it to dial-in quite right. If someone figures this out -- please share :) it makes so much sense not to waste pixel render in the pipeline that it's surprising this isn't out-of-the-box algorithm in PiTools.

"-2.32 is accurate with render target setting 1.0 and 1.25 in Pitool. To meet the exact aspect ration with a higher render target 1.5, 1.75 or 2.0, there would be need a 3rd or maybe 4th position after the comma." I had trouble reproducing this "-2.32" setting at Pitool 1.0 etc. -- SteamVR's scale just wouldn't get exactly to the 2560 scale, always a little off. I tried to to calibrate the value to dial-in but to no avail. It was always a little off and would stop scaling completely after 3-4 precision digit.

Just got my VPC MongoosT-50 Throttle (yay!). Wondering if anyone would care to share their mapping setup for Su/Mig planes in DCS?

Thanks for the reply! Couple things: (1) the assertion that when reducing FOV (PIMAX 5K+ has 3 settings: 170/150/125) - the “edge” pixels are simply disabled and go unused so total PPD goes unchanged. I’d love to see a link about this if you don’t mind. (2) binocular overlap for PIMAX 5k+ is 100 degrees (“central view”) - I couldn’t find anything official about this unfortunately. If you can share a link or some such I’d greatly appreciate it. (3) PPD calculations here don’t include another important aspect - the distance between retina and the screen. The greater the distance, the greater the PPD. At 3cm in a headset the difference is non-trivial. Is this traditionally taken into account?

Please correct me if the math is wrong as far as calculating PPD. For example in PIMAX 5K+ we have: 1) let’s say 150 horizontal FOV total (not per eye) 2) at 2560 pixels per eye horizontally 3) binocular (horizontal) overlap between two eyes - let’s say 80 degrees 4) (150+80)/2 = 115 FOV horizonal per eye 5) at 2560 pixels per eye over 115 degrees per eye we get 2560/115 = 22.26 PPD disclaimer: I couldn’t find anything official about the true binocular overlap for PIMAX 5K+ p.s. for sake of keeping it simple let’s ignore this isn’t a flat projection but an “oval bubble” and that binocular overlap also overlaps the number of pixels per degree so PPD is higher in that region (?).