OpenXR Guide - Deprecated - This time for real (▀̿Ĺ̯▀̿ ̿)

[edmuss]

12 minutes ago, Wali763 said:

Not sure though, if ED are willing to promote a mod.

Well technically openxr isn't a mod any more as you need to make zero changes to the DCS install, infact ED have actively made it so by removing the d3dcompiler from the bin directory.

I would say that they're onboard with the usage of it although I would guess native implementation isn't likely with the current engine. I dare say that the new engine build will incorporate openxr natively

Note that this is only my opinion and has no actually basis of fact as to which direction ED are going with the future vr engine

[speed-of-heat]

@BIGNEWY can we make this a sticky please? 

[M1Combat]

If we do can we remove a sticky?

[itsthatguy]

On 9/5/2022 at 1:03 AM, M1Combat said:

I assume you're calling frame rate "performance"???

 

Try to just get a sense for which one is smoother.  

 

OXR will almost always be smoother than SteamVR even at a slightly lower frame rate.  The only reason you really want Framerate is for a numerical smoothness confirmation...  The REAL thing you need is smoothness.  OXR is almost always smoother.

OXR with no reprojection is absolutely not smoother than SteamVR with reprojection, at least for my setup.
If OXR's reprojection didn't create horrible tearing then I'd use OXR. Without reprojection it's a no from me.

[freehand]

 

OXR reprojection is no match for Steam reprojection, OXR is good for clarity the rest is junk at the moment but you can balance things out I still run with OXR. 

[dburne]

35 minutes ago, itsthatguy said:

OXR with no reprojection is absolutely not smoother than SteamVR with reprojection, at least for my setup.
If OXR's reprojection didn't create horrible tearing then I'd use OXR. Without reprojection it's a no from me.

Steam VR did a really good job with their Motion Smoothing. I wish Varjo would just implement that for the Aero.

[M1Combat]

17 hours ago, itsthatguy said:

OXR with no reprojection is absolutely not smoother than SteamVR with reprojection, at least for my setup.
If OXR's reprojection didn't create horrible tearing then I'd use OXR. Without reprojection it's a no from me.

It is on my system.  100%

[Sr.]

2 minutes ago, M1Combat said:

It is on my system.  100%

Same.

 

And I just checked 

[edmuss]

3 hours ago, Sr. said:

Same.

 

And I just checked 

You're cheating, you're at 60Hz and above refresh rate most of the time aren't you?

Can't get smoother than refresh rate.

[speed-of-heat]

I'm back at 90hz with reprojection, after my flirtation with 60hz, and it works pretty well.

[Burt]

1 hour ago, speed-of-heat said:

I'm back at 90hz with reprojection, after my flirtation with 60hz, and it works pretty well.

Yeah me too. I’m gonna try turning on hags and see how it works now. It’s been disabled for quit some times now.

”Disregard”

Edited September 7, 2022 by Burt

[edmuss]

1 hour ago, speed-of-heat said:

I'm back at 90hz with reprojection, after my flirtation with 60hz, and it works pretty well.

Yeah, the reprojection on the latest runtime seems solid, still gets ugly at 22fps though

Now to wait for the head positioning code to get as good as steamvr and artifacts begone!

[Sr.]

3 hours ago, edmuss said:

You're cheating, you're at 60Hz and above refresh rate most of the time aren't you?

Can't get smoother than refresh rate.

Yep. Though I did also compare SVR at 60Hz. More noticeable flicker in SVR. 

[Roller25]

Anyone using reprojection with an AMD card? My image is quite wobbly...

[mbucchia]

26 minutes ago, Roller25 said:

Anyone using reprojection with an AMD card? My image is quite wobbly...

I've been looking at improving the quality of motion reprojection with AMD cards, but it's a dead end it looks like.

The video encoder block (needed to compute motion vectors, an essential component of motion reprojection) on AMD cards is just far inferior to the competition.

On 5000 series, it does not support 16x16 optimal block sizes (which requires us to downsample the input), creating a big loss of quality leading to "warping effects". On 6000 series, I have measured it to be 3 times slower than on Nvidia RTX cards, barely able to drive 90 Hz reprojection, causing added latency contributing to the "water effect".

I've been looking for alternatives to accelerate and improve the motion estimation and even asked AMD developers on the AMF project (their video SDK). They told me what I need is just not supported.

I've mostly run out of things to try for AMD. Nvidia on the other end, has delivered great innovation through their NVENC and NVOF...

Edited September 8, 2022 by mbucchia

[edmuss]

7 hours ago, Sr. said:

Yep. Though I did also compare SVR at 60Hz. More noticeable flicker in SVR. 

Interesting.

Is that due to the sunglasses filter or is it worse when without the filter?

23 minutes ago, Roller25 said:

Anyone using reprojection with an AMD card? My image is quite wobbly...

Check that you have movement damping (I think it is) set to zero on the inputs tab, there's a known bug that causes it to interfere with reprojection.

[Roller25]

27 minutes ago, mbucchia said:

I've been looking at improving the quality of motion reprojection with AMD cards, but it's a dead end it looks like.

The video encoder block (needed to compute motion vectors, an essential component of motion reprojection) on AMD cards is just far inferior to the competition.

On 5000 series, it does not support 16x16 optimal block sizes (which requires us to downsample the input), creating a big loss of quality leading to "warping effects". On 6000 series, I have measured it to be 3 times slower than on Nvidia RTX cards, barely able to drive 90 Hz reprojection, causing added latency contributing to the "water effect".

I've been looking for alternatives to accelerate and improve the motion estimation and even asked AMD developers on the AMF project (their video SDK). They told me what I need is just not supported.

I've mostly run out of things to try for AMD. Nvidia on the other end, has delivered great innovation through their NVENC and NVOF...

 

So... buy a Nvidia card then.. got it!  

28 minutes ago, edmuss said:

Check that you have movement damping (I think it is) set to zero on the inputs tab, there's a known bug that causes it to interfere with reprojection.

Will give that a try. I'm set at -40 at the moment.

[edmuss]

14 minutes ago, Roller25 said:

Will give that a try. I'm set at -40 at the moment.

I suspect that's the problem

[Sr.]

6 hours ago, edmuss said:

Interesting.

Is that due to the sunglasses filter or is it worse when without the filter?

Check that you have movement damping (I think it is) set to zero on the inputs tab, there's a known bug that causes it to interfere with reprojection.

Could be.

[mbucchia]

7 hours ago, Roller25 said:

Will give that a try. I'm set at -40 at the moment.

Not having it at 0 will indeed make things worse.

[Roller25]

Changed it to 0. Not as wobbly, but still no good. Back to 60hz no repro for me until I join the Nvidia club.

[obious]

On a slightly different but related note, I’m struggling to determine if OpenXR is having any benefit for my system (I wonder if it benefits non high-end systems more).

Without having a fpsVR equivalent for OpenXR, I’m finding it difficult to judge if there is much of a performance increase. I’m not using motion repo at all (either for OXR or SVR) and have my SteamVR res. set to 100% (native for my G1) and OpenXr res set to 50%. 

I must admit is quite discomforting not knowing where my system is in terms of resource utilisation when using OpenXR and not being able to tune settings according to how much available headroom I have. The only thing I’ve seen to far is that not running SteamVR saves about .8gb in RAM, thats about it (I must admit though, having a loading screen not flashing in front of my eyes is such a welcome relief though). 

I know there are arguments to be made of ‘put the FPS counter down and just enjoy the view’, thats true to an extent but I need a baseline to start from otherwise I have no idea if I’m utilising my system as much as possible! 

[edmuss]

27 minutes ago, obious said:

On a slightly different but related note, I’m struggling to determine if OpenXR is having any benefit for my system (I wonder if it benefits non high-end systems more).

Without having a fpsVR equivalent for OpenXR, I’m finding it difficult to judge if there is much of a performance increase. I’m not using motion repo at all (either for OXR or SVR) and have my SteamVR res. set to 100% (native for my G1) and OpenXr res set to 50%. 

I must admit is quite discomforting not knowing where my system is in terms of resource utilisation when using OpenXR and not being able to tune settings according to how much available headroom I have. The only thing I’ve seen to far is that not running SteamVR saves about .8gb in RAM, thats about it (I must admit though, having a loading screen not flashing in front of my eyes is such a welcome relief though). 

I know there are arguments to be made of ‘put the FPS counter down and just enjoy the view’, thats true to an extent but I need a baseline to start from otherwise I have no idea if I’m utilising my system as much as possible! 

The lower vram usage will help lesser GPU's somewhat more, but the big thing about openxr is the clarity gained by not needing to copy the framebuffers from api to api before spitting it out to the headset and the smoothness granted because it effectively works in the opposite way to steamvr.  To the best of my knowledge, if you've missed refresh rate target (90Hz) then even though the GPU is supplying the frames faster than 45Hz, it holds the frame until the 45Hz tick is reached and the positional data is fed into the compositor; in simple terms it's only actually rendering at 45Hz but because the headset positional data is synced up it feels much smoother.

The openxr performance overlays give you more granular information than fpsvr so you can read exactly where your bottlenecks are, have you not turned them on?
Why run openxr at 50% when you're running steamvr at 100%? (it's better to state resolutions as it gives a defined value rather than a potentially arbitrary one).

For reference I am currently running default recommended openxr resolution (calculated to around 3050 for 12GB I think), high DCS settings pretty much throughout and with reprojection it sits at 45Hz for the large part over Caucasus and Syria, it drops down to 30Hz over large cities like Beirut.  I do have to wind the settings back to keep it high enough on Marianas but that's a given for any hardware pretty much.

Since the recent runtime update the stability of reprojection is much better, still artifacting more than steamvr but until the code can (hopefully) be ironed out just take the rough with the (exceptionally) smooth

Edited September 9, 2022 by edmuss

[obious]

7 minutes ago, edmuss said:

The openxr performance overlays give you more granular information than fpsvr so you can read exactly where your bottlenecks are, have you not turned them on?
Why run openxr at 50% when you're running steamvr at 100%? (it's better to state resolutions as it gives a defined value rather than a potentially arbitrary one).

For reference I am currently running default recommended openxr resolution (calculated to around 3050 for 12GB I think)

As far I can work out, the information presented is just a bunch of numbers (ie GPU: XXXXX, CPU: YYYYY) and I have no idea how to interpret them. 

Regarding running OpenXR at 50%, if I run it at 100% my system isn’t able to support 90fps so I’ve always assumed that 50% OpenXR res is equivalent to 100% SteamVR (any idea how to get OpenXR to display actually resolution numbers instead of percentage? Also, how did you determine what’s the default res for your card/headset?

[Hammer1-1]

You shouldnt be usign SteamVR with OpenXR anyways, thats kind of the point...switching from steamvr saved me almost 6gb in vram and I can promise you it was very much noticeable on my computer.

Edited September 9, 2022 by Hammer1-1