Is a VR pixel pushed by Nvidia the same as a VR pixel pushed by AMD?

[Cavemanhead]

As you might guess per the title, I'm building a new rig.  For a video card, I'm going to nab a 4090 or a 7900 XTX.  Yes, I know the 4090 will be faster but the 7900XTX is appealing for its value, and is only slightly slower than the 4090 in rasterization.  That said, can I expect the 7900XTX to  "look as nice" and have competitive speed as the 4090 for VR.  If not, why not?

[TKu]

Nv has better VR support. AMD has noticable VR microstutter issues and reprojection looks worse. I had a 6900xt before and changed to a 4090 and can confirm it by my own experience.

 

PS: I don't like Nv, bought it anyway

Edited December 7, 2022 by TKu

[schmiefel]

I would say yes and no. I myself use a 6900XT for VR in DCS (in the version with a XTXH GPU chip that has rather the same performance like the 6950 but with slightly slower VRAM, so in rasterization its in the range of the 3090ti) and I can state that it can run a RiftS with almost highest settings (4x MSAA, SSLR, SSAO, default shadows set etc., see attached screenshot of my actual system settings in DCS with supersampling set to 1.4 via OTT for the Rift) and achieve stable 40 FPS with frametimes at about 25ms even in complex multiplayer scenarios. A friend of mine runs the same PC system and uses a Reverb G2 with rather the same settings (MSAA is set only at 2x because the Reverb has a much higher resolution and better displays compared to the RiftS).

For the new 7900 series I have no clue how this will and can handle VR at all, because the RDNA3 based GPUs use a quite different chip layout and technique.

In my opinion the main 'problems' AMD cards have with VR are slightly worse frametimes compared to NV cards of the same or even worse rasterization perfomance - and that's is in my opinion mainly caused by a bad drivers optimization and a lack of rendering the data for VR because the former AMD series 6000 cards had not enough VRAM bandwith compared to their NV pendents.

Until the new cards are really released and can be tested publicly it will be hard to assume how they really will perfom in VR.

If money was not the main reason I maybe would prefer the NV way just for VR in DCS. As the prices for the actual highend AMD cards like the 6800XT up to 6950XT went down a lot (at least in Germany) it could be a good choice if money matters and if one uses VR with resolutions up to what a Reverb G2 demands. For other VR systems like Varjo Aero or some Pimax ones or the highend professional systems from XTAL you have no choice but using a NV card because they seem to not support AMD at all.

[VirusAM]

6 thousand series are pretty fast GPU, but unfortunately they have issues with Reprojection technologies (ASW, Motion Smoothing etc). It seems to be due to their encoders and drivers support. I tried a 6900xt it was really fast but had to return it because of this. Only an older drivers from may 2021 was able to have good experience with reprojection....I made also tickets and reports on their forum and help system, but never received an answer.

Probably they are well aware of those issues and with the new 7 thousand series they will improve this aspect. In the mean time I am back using my 2080ti which is still a fairly good GPU.

[schmiefel]

1 minute ago, VirusAM said:

but unfortunately they have issues with Reprojection technologies (ASW, Motion Smoothing etc). It seems to be due to their encoders and drivers support. I tried a 6900xt it was really fast but had to return it because of this

Did you test the 6900 without reprojection? I don't use it at all and get a really good and stable performance without it - see my settings with a 6900XT(XH) series card above. Maybe there is a bigger difference depending what kind of custom or reference model is used and how high the particular card can be run stable and steady.

[TKu]

My observation: Nv's VR implemention works better. If it is the AMD driver or the hardware or if they can fix it with 7x series - I don't know, but I doubt it.

[Brzi_Joe]

It is not only gpu question, but hmd also. I.e. Pimax latest models officialy do not support amd cards, but really they mostly work except some features. Varjo Aero also, as I heard. Check it with guys which have your hmd.

[TKu]

Varjo is NV only due to usage of propriety stream compression features.

[5ephir0th]

How you know the rasterization comparison betwen 7900XTX and 4090 when theres no benchmark yet? The only thing is some doubtful geekbench one and tell me you are not using AMDs slideshow as reference.

I would tell you to wait, RDNA3 its almost here, wait for benchmarks in a couple of days.

[WipeUout]

Recently switched from a 6900XT to a 4080.  I had a 2080Ti before the AMD card and forgot how much better it is with the green team hardware.  Switching back to Nv with a 4080 was a revelation right at the start, I could not believe how better the image quality and contrast is with nvidia.  The 6900xt was a powerful GPU but unfortunately AMD does not have VR as a high priority.  Unless there is significant improvement in VR support from the red team, I will stick with nvidia even if it cost more.  And BTW, the 4080 is gving me 31% more FPS compared to my 6900XT OC'ed at 2825 Mhz.

Edited December 7, 2022 by WipeUout
Typo

[schmiefel]

1 hour ago, WipeUout said:

And BTW, the 4080 is gving me 31% more FPS compared to my 6900XT OC'ed at 2825 Mhz.

That's about what the 4080 has more power on average than the 3090 (+19%) plus what the 3090 already performs better in VR - 6900XT is rather equal to a 3090 besides RT and VR

[VirusAM]

Did you test the 6900 without reprojection? I don't use it at all and get a really good and stable performance without it - see my settings with a 6900XT(XH) series card above. Maybe there is a bigger difference depending what kind of custom or reference model is used and how high the particular card can be run stable and steady.

Yes I did...
Unfortunately I cannot fly VR without reprojection as anything below 90fps means bad things for me.
I really don't understand how many people prefer to fly without it. I respect those, but unfortunately it is a very bad experience for me. I also would like to be able to as it would solve many issues for me.

[nikoel]

6900XT here. If you do not care about reprojection and Fixed Foviated Rendering (AMD Supports DX12 and above only) then the value rendition is easily in AMD's favour. There are no performance metrics for RDNA3, so we would be nothing but guessing and stipulating 

Overall performance and arguably stability of driver updates go with Nvidea - 4080 is the worst card and there is a reason they are rotting away on shelves. 4090 is the way to go

Also I have to call absolute bull crap on anyone who has seen an improvement in contrast or colour rendition between any card that has been made in the last 10 years when using a cabled connection. There is no difference between any card, period. It's not physically possible. The display of your headset will render the colour it's told to render within the gamut it supports. The graphics card will ask the headset to render the colour that the computer it's telling it to. There is a reason your desktop, or a picture of a ginger cat looks exactly the same on your monitor, no matter what graphics card is being used

To answer your question. Apart from Reprojection and over the air encoding (which is horrible on AMD) all graphics cards push the same pixels, colour, shape and smell to the headset (as long as all the settings are the same)

Edited December 8, 2022 by nikoel

[WipeUout]

On 12/8/2022 at 5:53 PM, nikoel said:

Also I have to call absolute bull crap on anyone who has seen an improvement in contrast or colour rendition between any card that has been made in the last 10 years when using a cabled connection. There is no difference between any card, period. It's not physically possible. The display of your headset will render the colour it's told to render within the gamut it supports. The graphics card will ask the headset to render the colour that the computer it's telling it to. There is a reason your desktop, or a picture of a ginger cat looks exactly the same on your monitor, no matter what graphics card is being used

Well this is not what I experienced, the fact is that within SteamVR, the AMD card rendering was not as good as the Nvidia's.

And the 4080 might cost too much but paying 1000$ for 10-15% more performance with a 4090 is even worst.  I have made the switch and sad to say but AMD does not support VR as well as nvidia.

Even with OpenXR, I see better performance uplift that when I had a 6900xt.

[trevoC]

I've owned most top end cards from AMD and NVidia for the last 10 years or so. I don't care to start an AMD/NV thread war but the card that has been in my personal gaming (flight/racing) rig has always been an NVidia card. AMD is a giant hype machine pre-launch that rarely delivers. I'm not considering a value proposition here.

Where AMD has excelled is in their CPU's. I've had an AMD 3900x and now 5900x and will get a 7900x3D in the new year. They got slightly bumped by intel in the 3900x generation but I have not regretted that CPU purchase much. If I had to purchase a CPU right now it would be the Intel 13900 series, but that CPU was released sort of in the middle of my upgrade cycle which should land on the 7900x3D which I fully expect to beat out the Intel. (If not, I may switch back to intel). I digress.

The only time I've enjoyed the AMD cards was in their value per hash in crypto mining which was far superior (580 over 1070ti) when comparing price to performance. Gaming not so much.

If every dollar is important in your purchase than I understand the consideration for AMD, but if you are seeking bleeding edge performance to squeeze the most from your rig, AMD just doesn't have the edge.

[WipeUout]

15 hours ago, trevoC said:

AMD just doesn't have the edge.

I would just add : Unless pancake gaming is more important to you than VR, and ray tracing not much.

[nikoel]

20 hours ago, WipeUout said:

Well this is not what I experienced, the fact is that within SteamVR, the AMD card rendering was not as good as the Nvidia's.

And the 4080 might cost too much but paying 1000$ for 10-15% more performance with a 4090 is even worst.  I have made the switch and sad to say but AMD does not support VR as well as nvidia.

Even with OpenXR, I see better performance uplift that when I had a 6900xt.

Ooof. I know you’re trying to justify your purchase and I’m happy that you’re happy, but 4090 is almost 40% faster in some titles. compared to the 4080. It’s also $400 more, not $1000 ($1200 compared to $1600) This is why all the reviewers despised the card so much

There is no doubt that 4080 is a faster card compared to 6900XT. You got an uplift. No one is arguing with that. This means you can crank the settings and get a better picture and more frames for a more fluid experience. Nvidea’s driver package is also better than AMD’s

Forget 6900 for a second. If settings are equal and there are no shenanigans (upscaling/repro/encoding software) between the GPU and the headset - a still frame from every card made in the last decade would look the same. If what you were saying were true there would be comparisons between different GPU’s and the “picture and colour quality” that they were delivering on monitors and headsets. But there is no such thing. So either your perception is wrong or you have discovered something that no reviewer in the world has, and additionally NVIDEA marketing team has thought to never mention any of their promotional material

I washed my car yesterday and when I drove it, it felt faster. Human perception is weird like that. But I would be foolish to go to the track and advise all the drivers there to do the same for a performance uplift for their vehicles 

Edited December 13, 2022 by nikoel

[Slammin]

@nikoelA video card mfg can do things within the supporting driver to effect just about every aspect of the the cards capabilities, including producing a video output in whatever manner they feel is 'right'.  They typically also provide the end-user the ability to tweak some aspects of the video output, like contrast, saturation, hue, etc., to their liking.

[WipeUout]

Keep an open mind @nikoel, what @Slammin is mentioning is a very good point.  There are also electronic components on a graphic card that are not created equal.

I speak from experience, respect this.  Try it for yourself and then comment from experience.

The prices you mention are MSRP, if you can find 4090 at MSRP bravo!  Did not see any so far, the cheapest one on amazon today is 2100$.  Experience, not theory smoke or mirrors.

And a washed car is "faster" as it offer less resistance to air.

 

[5ephir0th]

"...slightly slower than 4090..."

https://babeltechreviews.com/hellhound-rx-7900-xtx-vs-rtx-4080-50-games-vr/5/

Doesnt look like a good option for VR, in many games it looks even slower than 3080ti

Edited December 14, 2022 by 5ephir0th

[dburne]

8 hours ago, nikoel said:

Ooof. I know you’re trying to justify your purchase and I’m happy that you’re happy, but 4090 is almost 40% faster in some titles. compared to the 4080. It’s also $400 more, not $1000 ($1200 compared to $1600) This is why all the reviewers despised the card so much

There is no doubt that 4080 is a faster card compared to 6900XT. You got an uplift. No one is arguing with that. This means you can crank the settings and get a better picture and more frames for a more fluid experience. Nvidea’s driver package is also better than AMD’s

Forget 6900 for a second. If settings are equal and there are no shenanigans (upscaling/repro/encoding software) between the GPU and the headset - a still frame from every card made in the last decade would look the same. If what you were saying were true there would be comparisons between different GPU’s and the “picture and colour quality” that they were delivering on monitors and headsets. But there is no such thing. So either your perception is wrong or you have discovered something that no reviewer in the world has, and additionally NVIDEA marketing team has thought to never mention any of their promotional material

I washed my car yesterday and when I drove it, it felt faster. Human perception is weird like that. But I would be foolish to go to the track and advise all the drivers there to do the same for a performance uplift for their vehicles 

 

 

Any good motor head worth his salt - and especially the ones that came from the 60's muscle cars, knows without a doubt a clean car will always drive faster and out perform a dirty car. 

[SharpeXB]

11 hours ago, nikoel said:

NVIDEA

NVIDIA

2 hours ago, dburne said:

 

Any good motor head worth his salt - and especially the ones that came from the 60's muscle cars, knows without a doubt a clean car will always drive faster and out perform a dirty car. 

Actually Mythbusters proved that dirty cars get better gas mileage due to the micro turbulence around them, like the effect of dimples on a golf ball

Edited December 14, 2022 by SharpeXB

[trevoC]

More AMD Hype as usual. Would love for them to prove me wrong but Its been too many years of the same hype/bust cycles from them.

They are behind in GPU hardware

They are behind in driver/software

They are behind in AI upscaling

They are behind in capture/encode

They have a lot of work to do to bridge the gap between the two. 

[RoboHackfeld]

Me as an 6900XT being always unhappy with the VR Performance. Will upgrade to 4080 or 4070 in near future.

 

Pancake with my 6900Xt is perfect. No problems, drivers are working and I can play ever game with good settings. No Problems but when it comes to VR, especially the MotionSmooting/SpaceWarp..... Reprojection does not work very good with AMD Cards.

In DCS, the Buildings, Trees and everything that is part of the Map, the reprojection works pretty fine but when it comes to other vehicals, aircrafts, CarrierCrew, ships it does not work very well. Even if they are dont moving. Its pretty confusing when I place a Tank besides a building and I fly by, the Building is top notch crispy. The tank is flickering and I see three Tanks.

When I think back to my 1070, I had other problems, but the Motionreprojection worked well.

With the new AMD Driver I really think it got a little bit better but it is still not good in DCS to use Motion Reprojection with an AMD Card.

 

looking forward to get a 40xx.

Edited December 14, 2022 by RoboHackfeld

[trevoC]

18 hours ago, RoboHackfeld said:

looking forward to get a 40xx.

looking forward to getting a 40xx < at MSRP  . Hopefully in the new year.