New VR Features.

[DerekSpeare]

I'm just happy the mouse pointer appears to be returning :D

 

Anyone else see the FA18C icon between the F86 and FC3 on Matts screen? Or is it me being wishfull?

 

Here's a screenie from his livestream...dunno which icon it is...

Edited June 6, 2016 by DerekSpeare

[SkateZilla]

Nvidia is used by more than 70% of the simmers ? Now that sounds like a assumption based on speculation, of a fanboy

 

 

nVidia does own 70% of the Discrete GPU Marketshare..

 

However, Discrete GPU marketshare is down to 14% of Total GPU Marketshare.

[SkateZilla]

nVidia at the moment has a marked share of 71% overall (Q1 2016) for the desktop market.

The above percentage is higher for the mid-end/hi-end solution (for the previous gen: 970/980/980Ti-TitanX; to be substituted by 1070/1080/1080Ti).

The simmers (FSX/X-Plane/DCS/...), because of the hardware demand, are normally concentrate in the upper market, where nVidia is stronger (you can make a poll yourself to figure it out).

That's the reason of why the overwhelming majority of simmers own a nVidia.

"fanboy"? (nor I have the age anymore to make console wars, gfx wars, CPU wars.. and this childish things anymore.. :) ), I adopt both the solutions, where it is convenient to do so.

 

 

 

Implementing the new viewports is a two week man job (for a game that already supports the multi monitor), and projected to the future it will give an advantage to your customers at "zero cost", it would be naive to not look at it.

 

 

 

If you look at how it work: the single pass rendering is hardware driven, it cannot be done externally (not until the DX will permit it), that's why it give a such boost in performance, it's because it splits the "viewports" before the DX call.

You can say AMD could do the same (probably they will do...), and in fact you could implement their solution as well as soon it's ready.

None have asked to limit the others, I have suggested to look at the new tech because the boost in performance is huge.

 

 

 

Indeed, we have a performance issue.. and it's especially evident while in multiplayer, and this issues are amplified when in VR because the fps is a crucial factor. While on a normal monitor you will notice the low fps but you can continue to play; in VR having a frame drop will make the game unplayable, so why not looking at the new solutions?

 

 

 

It's a "free" solution, so again there's really no practical reasons to not adopt it. I know Project Cars is currently looking at it (from their forums), and they uses a independent engine.

 

I honestly struggle to understand why someone is so reluctant to embrace a new technology, if there's some technical limitation of the current engine, it can be understandable.. but to ignore something that could help you and your customers to have a better performance.. hmm... dunno it sounds wrong. I'm not asking you to sell your soul to the devil.. I'm asking the devs if there's a chance to look at it.

 

 

 

I'm not gonna argue w/ you over it, the tech is interesting, compelling and a step in the right direction,

 

Just sayin, dont expect it in DCS.

 

There are legit reasons Most Gamers and Studios Boycott GameWorks and it's Family of API's (WaterWorks, HairWorks, etc etc etc).

 

You keep repeating a VAST Performance increase,

Outside of nVidia's Tech Demo, please show me benchmarks of a actual Simulation w/ the DirectX API Load of DCS that uses this feature on and off to show the performance increase... You Cant, because outside of nVidia's Carnival Games tech Demo w/ a Minimal DX API Load, nothing is even running this technology yet.

 

It's Hypothetical, The same "xx% Raw Performance Increase" they touted in their press release between 980 and 1080, was no where to be found by Users Running DCS.

Edited June 6, 2016 by SkateZilla

[npole]

Just sayin, dont expect it in DCS.

 

This is the part that I do not agree.. negate something without even looking at it, because of a preconception is IMO wrong.

 

There are legit reasons Most Gamers and Studios Boycott GameWorks and it's Family of API's (WaterWorks, HairWorks, etc etc etc).

 

There's a reason for this, and it's due to the fact that in some circumstances the devs are trying to obtain the same results where that result is not possible, I call it: being lazy.

Here's we're talking about a different matters: we won't a more realistic sea or the grass moving with the wind, we're talking about the frame rate, and apply a solution that could give a benefit to a potential large slice of users, the others will be unaffected. You can't say "no", just because you're scared of the nVidia evil and possible impact to the competitors, without testing/trying/looking at it.

 

You keep repeating a VAST Performance increase,

Outside of nVidia's Tech Demo, please show me benchmarks of a actual Simulation w/ the DirectX API Load of DCS that uses this feature on and off to show the performance increase... You Cant, because outside of nVidia's Carnival Games tech Demo w/ a Minimal DX API Load, nothing is even running this technology yet.

 

It halves the pixel count (this alone should be already a strong reason to look at it..). It also makes use of the SLI in VR, delegating each graphic card to each angle rendering, that is another strong point to give a look at it (SLI configurations are almost unused in VR nowadays), that's why I say that potentially the improvement could be huge.

 

It's Hypothetical, The same "xx% Raw Performance Increase" they touted in their press release between 980 and 1080, was no where to be found by Users Running DCS.

 

It's all hypothetical of course.. I'm not a DCS coder, so I don't know how this engine works, you can only guess about the benefits. In fact I'm not saying that they MUST introduce it at all costs, I'm asking to investigate a little more to see if it's worth it (and eventually they are already doing it.. while we're debating if it's worth it or not).

[SkateZilla]

Multi-Projection, VR-SLI, VR Works Audio, etc Have all been done way before VRWorks.

 

Split Frame Rendering is not New...

Dont know why everyone is going Gaga over VR-SLI, it's Split Frame Rendering.

DX11 and 12 both support it at it's core, you dont need VRWorks to Program Split Frame Rendering for SLi or Crossfire.

 

Multi-Projection / Single Pass Rendering is not New

is also an Advanced DX11/12 Command Set already Part of DirectX's Capabilites.

 

Multi-Projection is simply a DX Command Set that uses their PolyMorph Engine Instruction Block of their GPU, an Instruction Set that's also on GF10x, GM10x and GK10x

They Simply didnt care about using it for SinglePass Stereo/MP at the Time because VR was no Mainstream, the PolyMorph Engine Block had other functions (Tessellation).

 

VRWorks Audio is not New,

XAudio, True Audio, Aureal 3D Audio, DirectX 11/12 Audio all do the same thing.

 

 

So, AMD's GPU's Can All of the Above without VR WORKs API, Using Simply The DirectX, Vulkan/OpenGL, or Now Discontinued Mantle API, Which Means nVidia's GPU can do them without the need to use their Proprietary API.

 

 

No one's dismissing anything, GameWorks/VRWorks etc just isnt part of their plan, there's no point in pushing it,

ED has their own in house Engine, they dont use Proprietary Tech (GameWorks, PhysX, VR Works, etc etc), They Dont Need to use GameWorks or it's Sister Tools.

 

 

As for Integrating VRWORKS being a "2 Week Job", You do not know that for certain, there's no compatibility guarantee that VR Works API will even work w/ the EDGE Engine.

 

 

nVidia has a habit of taking something that has already been done, Slapping a Works Label on it and re-releasing it under their Developer Works Program.

Edited June 6, 2016 by SkateZilla

[adrianstealth]

Nothing new but isn't the point that these features are to be handled 100% (or close to ......or to a much much larger degree than previously)

by the gpu board thus taking off load of the CPU

 

Eg NVIDIA are designing their gpu boards to take on more software features to free up CPU's

If software developers wish to use the gpu for these features

[Kirin]

I really don't care which company does support what under what name. I just want DCS to perform better in VR.

 

If all the tech mumbo jumbo Skate is talking about is already possible without NVidias proprietary API all the better. The question remains why it's not implemented - I am not looking at DCS alone - but other demanding VR games. Heck, I would pay extra money to get a VR optimized version of DCS. ED could even Kickstart it to see what kind of demand there is and to get a little funds beforehand.

[SkateZilla]

I really don't care which company does support what under what name. I just want DCS to perform better in VR.

 

If all the tech mumbo jumbo Skate is talking about is already possible without NVidias proprietary API all the better. The question remains why it's not implemented - I am not looking at DCS alone - but other demanding VR games. Heck, I would pay extra money to get a VR optimized version of DCS. ED could even Kickstart it to see what kind of demand there is and to get a little funds beforehand.

 

 

VR is Still new,

Small Kiddly CrashBandicoot Clone Games will see decent performance regardless.

 

Large Scale Engines' with Large DirectX API Work Loads will take time to optimize.

 

DCS is Being optimized for VR, there's Features coming, as stated by Wags.

[cichlidfan]

I really don't care which company does support what under what name. I just want DCS to perform better in VR.

 

How many DCS players are also VR users? Do you think ED should spend loads of time and money just to 'possibly' improve that aspect of the game? What about all of the other things that they already have on their plate? Should they stop work on everything else? What about all of the other folks that don't give a hoot about VR performance?

[Enduro14]

Can we keep this thread full of useful info and not fanboys slapping each other's hand saying their brand is better than yours crap.

[SkateZilla]

Im sorry,

 

It's a Discussion on VRWORKS API and Pascal Technologies Integration,

 

No where was it ever declared an AMD vs nVidia fan debate.

 

Your Kung Fu is not strong..... All your base are belong to us.

Edited June 6, 2016 by SkateZilla

[SkateZilla]

How many DCS players are also VR users? Do you think ED should spend loads of time and money just to 'possibly' improve that aspect of the game? What about all of the other things that they already have on their plate? Should they stop work on everything else? What about all of the other folks that don't give a hoot about VR performance?

 

While VR Marketshare is still a Small % of gaming market, it's growing, and growing quickly.

 

unlike mid-90s, VR is here to stay this time, and will eventually evolve into AR/Holograms..

 

Computer.... Play Program Skate Zilla Pi Alpha 2-5-4, Disable Safety protocols.

[cichlidfan]

While VR Marketshare is still a Small % of gaming market, it's growing, and growing quickly.

 

unlike mid-90s, VR is here to stay this time, and will eventually evolve into AR/Holograms..

 

Computer.... Play Program Skate Zilla Pi Alpha 2-5-4, Disable Safety protocols.

 

Yes, but right now it is reserved for a small minority of the market due to cost. Besides, my post was directed at the 'I want..." crowd. VR is just like MP, it is used by only a small percentage of ED's customer base and should be allocated resources accordingly based on that fact.

[SkateZilla]

Yes, but right now it is reserved for a small minority of the market due to cost. Besides, my post was directed at the 'I want..." crowd. VR is just like MP, it is used by only a small percentage of ED's customer base and should be allocated resources accordingly based on that fact.

 

No Worries...

 

AMD is Releasing a Dirt Cheap VR Capable GPU in little more than 3 weeks.

 

I've seen companies prepping $279 HMD Solutions (lower Res, etc).

 

As for anyone thinking a RX-480 wont run DCS.

 

I Run DCS Currently on a AMD 7870XT which is Essentially a Laser Cut 7970 w/ 25% of it's Shaders Disabled, and 1/3 of it's Memory

 

2048SP vs 1536 (Both are Tahiti GPU Die)

3 GB vs 2GB

1100 Mhz vs 900 MHz.

 

Etc.

 

w/ My 7970 Lightnings, DCS Runs in OR VR w/ everything on low/ed but textures and vis. distance Turned on High or above,

I however cant get a clear picture due to lack of HDMI (if i use adapters I can get a picture, but it has color spacing issues).

 

Add some more SPs (about 256), Another 200-300MHz GPU Clock, another 2GHz Memory Clock.. and it'll be fine for entry level.

Edited June 6, 2016 by SkateZilla

[npole]

Multi-Projection, VR-SLI, VR Works Audio, etc Have all been done way before VRWorks.

 

Split Frame Rendering is not New...

Dont know why everyone is going Gaga over VR-SLI, it's Split Frame Rendering.

DX11 and 12 both support it at it's core, you dont need VRWorks to Program Split Frame Rendering for SLi or Crossfire.

 

Multi-Projection / Single Pass Rendering is not New

is also an Advanced DX11/12 Command Set already Part of DirectX's Capabilites.

 

Multi-Projection is simply a DX Command Set that uses their PolyMorph Engine Instruction Block of their GPU, an Instruction Set that's also on GF10x, GM10x and GK10x

They Simply didnt care about using it for SinglePass Stereo/MP at the Time because VR was no Mainstream, the PolyMorph Engine Block had other functions (Tessellation).

 

VRWorks Audio is not New,

XAudio, True Audio, Aureal 3D Audio, DirectX 11/12 Audio all do the same thing.

 

 

So, AMD's GPU's Can All of the Above without VR WORKs API, Using Simply The DirectX, Vulkan/OpenGL, or Now Discontinued Mantle API, Which Means nVidia's GPU can do them without the need to use their Proprietary API.

 

I can't even quote each single sentence.. but this is all wrong and no sense. The single pass rendering has nothing to do with split frame rendering and the viewports introduced by VRWorks is nothing like what you wrote above.

May you please get the proper documentation and the sample codes to figure out what's this about? You are mixing the dx calls with the VRWorks API that happen at driver level.

 

As for Integrating VRWORKS being a "2 Week Job", You do not know that for certain, there's no compatibility guarantee that VR Works API will even work w/ the EDGE Engine.

 

This is why I'm asking the devs to look at it...

 

nVidia has a habit of taking something that has already been done, Slapping a Works Label on it and re-releasing it under their Developer Works Program.

 

I think it's better to continue this discussion with someone which is working at the code and that is interested to the tech, I don't wanna be driven in the gfx politics. Thanks.

[tintifaxl]

I think it's better to continue this discussion with someone which is working at the code and that is interested to the tech, I don't wanna be driven in the gfx politics. Thanks.

 

Then better try your luck in the Russian forums. Albeit I think you'll not get a response from a dev there, either.

[npole]

Then better try your luck in the Russian forums. Albeit I think you'll not get a response from a dev there, either.

 

I'm 99.9% sure that a dev is reading this discussion.. thinking at it, I don't really need to have a conversation with the devs, since I have my job and they have theirs, I just wanted to give an input, and they are smart enough to put an eye on it. They are interested to make their customers happy (more money), we are interested to have a better product (we'll give to them more money), this is how a business should be run properly. ;)

[hansangb]

How many DCS players are also VR users? Do you think ED should spend loads of time and money just to 'possibly' improve that aspect of the game? What about all of the other things that they already have on their plate? Should they stop work on everything else? What about all of the other folks that don't give a hoot about VR performance?

 

 

Well.....Yeah! :D

 

VR is the future. Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.

 

Dead or alive, VouR (see what I did there??? :D) coming with me.

 

But in all honesty, it is the future, and I for one am glad that DCS jumped on it early.

[Kirin]

This reminds me of the discussion when TrackIR hit the scene. There were voices that put it down as a gimmick and unusable. It turned out different. VR IS the future and one of the reasons the sim genre will rise again. Sure, the first generation is not quite up to the task - but that is a matter of time.

[cichlidfan]

This reminds me of the discussion when TrackIR hit the scene. There were voices that put it down as a gimmick and unusable. It turned out different. VR IS the future and one of the reasons the sim genre will rise again. Sure, the first generation is not quite up to the task - but that is a matter of time.

 

This discussion is about Nvidia's VR Works, no VR in general. Proprietary software, or anything else, is certainly not necessarily the future. Remember betamax?

[Fab]

This discussion is about Nvidia's VR Works, no VR in general. Proprietary software, or anything else, is certainly not necessarily the future. Remember betamax?

 

Lol dude BetaMax was the future, so was VHS untill DVD took over, its called progress. But at the time its invented and used, its the future allright...

 

I do belive VR is the future, in time we will get Holo, or maby electro waves at your scull will come before Holo.

[npole]

This discussion is about Nvidia's VR Works, no VR in general. Proprietary software, or anything else, is certainly not necessarily the future. Remember betamax?

 

The problem is not who own the right of (or invented) a certain technology, you are only interested in its availability.

Without looking into exotic solutions, I think that people are forgetting that the whole modern gaming (if we exclude rare occasions) are based on a proprietary set of API: DirectX ...that is owned by Microsoft.

And that's only the top of it, there's dozens of proprietary technologies used in a videogame (including DCS), there's nothing wrong with it, just not use those ones which will limit your freedom, avoiding the witches hunt: proprietary doesn't mean always evil.

 

VR is the future, if you ever tried a VIVE you understand what you mean.. it's not just using a HMD instead of using your monitor.. it's a completely different experience that will make everything else so old that you won't come back. Today's issues are about its cost and availability, but wait a couple of years when the prices will be fallen and the console users will start to experience it, and you will use your monitor only to write the text on the forums. :)

Edited June 7, 2016 by npole

[DerekSpeare]

VR is the future. Screens are irrelevant. Resistance is futile.

[SkateZilla]

This discussion is about Nvidia's VR Works, no VR in general. Proprietary software, or anything else, is certainly not necessarily the future. Remember betamax?

 

What about BetaMax? lol..

 

If the world didnt want proprietary standards w/ royalty fees... HDMI woulda Died off to Display Port years ago.

 

Lol dude BetaMax was the future, so was VHS untill DVD took over, its called progress. But at the time its invented and used, its the future allright...

 

I do belive VR is the future, in time we will get Holo, or maby electro waves at your scull will come before Holo.

 

 

Betamax and VHS Competed for the Standards, BetaMAX had better Video and Audio Quality, however they had a steep Licensing and Royalty fee, and had a Strict "no porn" policy.

 

Thus VHS Won, and Betamax was pretty much a thriftstore item outside of Japan.

 

I Still have 2 Betamax players, and a BetaMAX Shoulder Camera, along w/ a VHS Counterpart Setop Player that retailed for $300 at the time and a Shoulder Camera.

 

That being Said...

 

 

VRWorks isnt a STANDARD, it's a set of Tools to Help Developers make use of Features usually Specific to nVidia GPU's, however, there are opensource/industry standards for each of those functions, which I've already explained.

Edited June 7, 2016 by SkateZilla

[DerekSpeare]

Will those tools help make the radio comms menu and messages easier to read for VR people?