3080 vs VR?

[Voyager]

Finally believe I've got a VR headset that work for me and has good resolution and clarity, with enough GPU driving it (Vive Pro 2, for me, targeting 2900x2900)

 

My current rig is a 5800X with 32 GB DDR4-3600 and a GTX 1080 Ti. Have not gotten DCS tuned up for it yet. The 1080 Ti is a bit light to get everything out of this headset, but most of the games I've gotten to a good spot. However, DCS currently floods my VRam on the 1080 Ti. 

 

So. I'm wondering how does the 3080 handle DCS in VR, especially with the newer higher texture cockpits like the F-14? I really want to get things to a point where I can read the buttons without needing to zoom in on them. 

 

And if I go deep into a 3090, is the difference here going to be pretty large? 

 

At this point I'm torn between going for a new GPU in the near future, or holding what I have until the next gen CPU/GPU/Ram drop late next year, and doing a complete rebuild of the machine.

 

I can't help but think by then I could get a 16-20GB card that's significantly faster than a 3090 for significantly less than the 3090 series is going for. 

 

On the other hand, If I can ever locate a 3080 at retail or near retail price, it closes the loop on all of my other VR titles, but DCS is still an open question. 

[MelkorBorgir]

i have 6800xt and it works great.

[Voyager]

11 minutes ago, MelkorBorgir said:

i have 6800xt and it works great.

 

Ah. Yeah. One of my other core games does not work right with the 6000 series. Ends up having worse performance than the 5000 cards do. No-one is sure why yet, and there isn't a timeline for fixing it, so haven't been considering it yet. 

 

If this was a pure DCS build, it would be high on the option list. 

[SneakyBastd]

I went from a 1080Ti to 3080 and also have a vive pro 2. The 3080 is a huge upgrade and well worth it if you can get one near MSRP. I was lucky and got one at launch. The 3090 would obviously be a little better, but not for what they were charging imho.

The 3080 is enough to run the VP2 decently, but you have to make some compromises still. That's just VR in DCS.

I think a 4080 will run the VP2 with few compromises.

 

I run 150% steamvr, no msaa, and get decent fps. Locked 45 in the air usually, less on busy decks, etc.

[dburne]

15 minutes ago, SneakyBastd said:

I went from a 1080Ti to 3080 and also have a vive pro 2. The 3080 is a huge upgrade and well worth it if you can get one near MSRP. I was lucky and got one at launch. The 3090 would obviously be a little better, but not for what they were charging imho.

The 3080 is enough to run the VP2 decently, but you have to make some compromises still. That's just VR in DCS.

I think a 4080 will run the VP2 with few compromises.

 

I run 150% steamvr, no msaa, and get decent fps. Locked 45 in the air usually, less on busy decks, etc.

 

Surprised you are getting that good at 150% with a Vive Pro 2.

Mine at 150% is like app 4kx4k per eye, I reduce the Pixel Density for DCS to .8 and can maintain 45 fps with Motion Compensation off. That gives me around 3200 per eye and decent performance. I can't stand the Motion Compensation in the Vive Pro.

 

I think it is still using some form of Motion Smoothing though based on the fps I see whilst flying.

[streakeagle]

The big strike against the 3080 is the VRAM. If I end up buying a 3090, it will be for the VRAM since it is both fast and huge. But I am leaning toward either a 6800 XT or 6900 XT depending on how the prices fall. Right now, 6900 XTs on eBay are by far the best deal out of the 3080/3090/6800/6900 cards, almost down to MSRP. My only problem with the 6800/6900 series is the slower VRAM, but they also have stronger rasterization performance, which is exactly what I need for DCS. Why can't one card have it all: brute rasterization performance, fast and plenty of VRAM? 

[Voyager]

For the VP2 it's probably better to specify the pixel count rather than the SS% because of its different models. For me I'm looking for 2900 by 2900, since that seems to line up best with the headset resolution. 

[Voyager]

1 minute ago, streakeagle said:

[...]

Right now, 6900 XTs on eBay are by far the best deal out of the 3080/3090/6800/6900 cards, almost down to MSRP.

[...]

 

Huh. I had not seen that before. That is tempting, even with the hit in the other game. It's possible that once 6000 series cards become accessible, we may see more dev teams getting them in house and fixing weirdness issues with them. 

[FETUS]

I am running a 5900X and have a 6900XT and 3090. After some tweaking the 6900XT rips at almost 90FPS with high settings at ULTRA view distance. At EXTREME, it drops to 50 FPS. When flying the Harrier, ULTRA view works well for me.

 

I think anything 3080 and above will be a vast improvement over the 1080TI which is a great card. I ran a Rift S with it.

 

I am still tweaking the 6900XT but its right up there with my 3090 in DCS.  And it runs a lot cooler with no OC. Maybe the synergy between the AMD GPU and CPU have something to do with it.

 

Edited July 15, 2021 by FETUS

[SneakyBastd]

On 7/15/2021 at 9:16 AM, dburne said:

 

Surprised you are getting that good at 150% with a Vive Pro 2.

Mine at 150% is like app 4kx4k per eye, I reduce the Pixel Density for DCS to .8 and can maintain 45 fps with Motion Compensation off. That gives me around 3200 per eye and decent performance. I can't stand the Motion Compensation in the Vive Pro.

 

I think it is still using some form of Motion Smoothing though based on the fps I see whilst flying.

 

Yes you're right, I forgot I had 0.8PD in DCS set... doh.

[dburne]

9 hours ago, SneakyBastd said:

 

Yes you're right, I forgot I had 0.8PD in DCS set... doh.

 

Yeah that is more like it - in fact that is what I am running as well with my VP2.

[peachmonkey]

I don't understand how you guys can fly with an in-game PD less than 1.0.

 

In my tests I noticed that lowering the in-game PD makes the distant objects (planes, armor, trucks, etc) appear to be made out of very large pixels. I.e. an A-20 at 3-4km looks like 4-5 giant pixels. In IL2 the distant objects are just the miniature versions, i.e. the pixels aren't augmented...  I don't know it's hard to explain.

 

So I get a much better distant object rendering with PD=1.3 or 1.4 with a lower SteamVR resolution than vice versa.

 

I do use the kegety VR shaders mod, so I'm not sure if it's because of the mod or there's something else at play.

[SneakyBastd]

I was using 1.25 in pitool, and some extra super sampling in steamvr. I just forgot I had this setting when I changed to the VP2.