community advice Dynamic Foveated Rendering - Everything in one page

[slughead]

3 hours ago, Spartan111sqn said:

Why?

Overloaded with help/support requests taking up too much of his life balance. He now focuses on VxDR (?) that’s part of virtual desktop. To be fair, he left his tools in a good state that shouldn’t need further work and so people should be able to “self-help” themselves with all the information and wiki notes that are available.

[WipeUout]

21 hours ago, slughead said:

Sile is correct. You don’t notice any degradation of quality because the resolution is massively lowered in your peripheral vision where you can’t see sharply. The massive drop in resolution means less work for the game and less for the GPU which results in large fps gains. In the focus region, you increase the render resolution to boost clarity. The focus region is quite small and so does not have a huge impact on fps.

I find the conjecture from people who haven’t tried this laughable. If you’ve not tried it, how can anyone give any credence to your “opinion”.

Do not mix QVFR settings and pixel density, or ''render quality'' in Pimax client, these are two different things.  Go back to the video and read the bottom comment, you will see that with the 2060, they lower render quality to 0.5 which means 25% of the native resolution.  QVFR default settings will keep the focus area to 100% of the set resolution and the peripheral area at 50% of the resolution, that resolution is defined by other settings such as render quality in pimax client and/or pixel density in DCS.

There is not doubt that QVFR does a superb job at incresing FPS but reducing the rendering resolution with a 2060 is probably the only way to reach 60 FPS!

[HoBGoBLiNzx3]

On 12/26/2023 at 10:32 PM, Sile said:

You don‘t see a reduced quality, because it‘s reduced where you don‘t look. You can even improve the clarity by supersampling only the eyetracked focus region a bit. Only on videos the reduced resolution of the downsampled aeras is visible.

 

For Aero I would recommend Varjo-Foveated (VFR) instead of Quad-Views-Foveated (QVF). Different settings and no OXR Toolkit possible with VFR, though.

 

So I went back to VFR (I was using prior to QVF) but the one issue I'm having with both is the focus. It goes in and out of focus sometimes looking straight, but a lot of the time it's almost as the DFR box takes some time to render the image. I have a 19-13900KF and 4090 (64gb of DDR5 too) and get around 80-90 FPS depending on DLSS on or off and some various other settings.. My cfg for VFR is

peripheral_multiplier=1
focus_multiplier=1.3
turbo_mode=1
no_eye_tracking=0

If I could fix damn focusing issue I'd be a happy man. Any ideas?

Edited December 28, 2023 by HoBGoBLiNzx3

[slughead]

18 hours ago, WipeUout said:

Do not mix QVFR settings and pixel density, or ''render quality'' in Pimax client, these are two different things.  Go back to the video and read the bottom comment, you will see that with the 2060, they lower render quality to 0.5 which means 25% of the native resolution.  QVFR default settings will keep the focus area to 100% of the set resolution and the peripheral area at 50% of the resolution, that resolution is defined by other settings such as render quality in pimax client and/or pixel density in DCS.

There is not doubt that QVFR does a superb job at incresing FPS but reducing the rendering resolution with a 2060 is probably the only way to reach 60 FPS!

I don't use PIMAX although I'm sure what you have said will be helpful to someone that does. 

[YoYo]

(Quest Pro user opinion)

I finally tested this miracle. Yesterday I spent the whole day installing, configuring and testing various advanced settings, in different test forms and different environments at DCS. Overall, the tool has potential and it is actually an interesting solution, especially for owners of older cards where the GPU is the bottleneck. Interestingly, my fears about peripheral vision of artifacts were not confirmed. Yes, we can see some shimmering out of the corner of our eye, but it's not overly overwhelming. The same applies to the moving square with better resolution. It's nice that there are many configuration options. For IL-2, for example, I turned it off completely and it works, I also tested the tool's disables for DCS MT and it also works without a problem, so it is easy to turn it on and off using the configuration files. Im convinced that DFR can be a salvation for people who actually have GPU problems.

How it looks (direct picture from goggles with full resolution):

center is on the map on the screen 

center is on buildings and horizon

However, unfortunately it is not an ideal tool when it comes to DCS. 

What I noticed was a significant FPS degradation over urbanized areas. The FPS here is worse than without DFR and unfortunately the problem increases as you fly over buildings/objects. Example Gaza, Sinai map (but the surrounding areas, they are the most demanding). Without DFR, I basically have constant FPS at 72 (ASW off, 72 Hz) and sometimes they drop to 68 for a while, the image is smooth. With DFR, the frames start to drop after a while to reach a level of about 64, and over time there are fewer and fewer of them, I even had a result of 54, which means that you can no longer fly and the image impression is not smooth. I turned Quad-Views-Foveated on and off several times and the effect was always the same, regardless of the settings in the advanced configuration file. Ultimately, without active Quad-Views-Foveated, I obtain a more stable image, holding 72 frames over such terrain. My tests show that yes, DFR and active Quad-Views-Foveated are a great tool, but perhaps only if you have an older card and GPU times are a problem for you. Otherwise (I have 4090) it makes no sense and causes FPS drops.

However, the knowledge that @mbucchia himself confirmed this, that in the case of DCS it may be a problem and you may get a worse FPS result:

Quote

The CPU performance issues can only be solved by ED in their game engine, for example through the use of quad instanced rendering (submit geometry for all 4 views at once). This isn't an easy undertaking, so I doubt it will happen any time soon, or ever.

I have QVFR disabled at the moment because, at least in DCS with my GPU, it causes more problems than it brings benefits. But I definitely recommend checking it out for yourself, I am convinced that thanks to advanced configuration, you can gain a lot of FPS in some situations.

[Qcumber]

2 hours ago, YoYo said:

I have QVFR disabled at the moment because, at least in DCS with my GPU, it causes more problems than it brings benefits.

QVFR works best for setups like mine when I am always GPU limited. If you are CPU limited QVFR can make things worse. I guess that is what you are seeing. I am currently experimenting with QVFR using VD compared with oculus link. My initial impressions are that it works a lot better with VD. 

[YoYo]

10 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

QVFR works best for setups like mine when I am always GPU limited. If you are CPU limited QVFR can make things worse. I guess that is what you are seeing. I am currently experimenting with QVFR using VD compared with oculus link. My initial impressions are that it works a lot better with VD. 

Btw. CPU isnt battleneck for me (13900K), as mbucchia said its a DCS problem for everyone. I fly low and slow, mostly helicopters (LinkCable), if you fly a jet only perhaps you never noticed this issue of QVFR in DCS.

Edited December 31, 2023 by YoYo

[Qcumber]

27 minutes ago, YoYo said:

Btw. CPU isnt battleneck for me (13900K), as mbucchia said its a DCS problem for everyone. I fly low and slow, mostly helicopters (LinkCable), if you fly a jet only perhaps you never noticed this issue of QVFR in DCS.

 

Sorry. I misread your details. Your CPU is definitely not a bottleneck! 

I am in the process of comparing QVFR with VD vs quest link-cable. I'll share my findings. 

I like flying warbird ground attack. Not quite helicopter speed but still slow relative to jets and low to the ground. 

3 hours ago, YoYo said:

I am convinced that thanks to advanced configuration, you can gain a lot of FPS in some situations

Could you please share your settings for oculus link and QVFR? I am interested to see how much upscaling you are using. I've been pushing the centre resolution very high with some interesting results. 

[slughead]

1 hour ago, Qcumber said:

Could you please share your settings for oculus link and QVFR? I am interested to see how much upscaling you are using. I've been pushing the centre resolution very high with some interesting results. 

Indeed. I am not able to maintain 72fps over Cairo with my settings which are fairly maxed out. Anyone can achieve it... if you turn down settings. So whilst I appreciate YoYo's in-depth testing... it's still somewhat meaningless if he doesn't include all of his settings. What might be acceptable to him, may not be to others.

[YoYo]

4 hours ago, Qcumber said:

Could you please share your settings for oculus link and QVFR? I am interested to see how much upscaling you are using. I've been pushing the centre resolution very high with some interesting results. 

No problem.

Quote

QVFR:

2023-12-31 20:58:06 +0100:   Found option 'turbo_mode=1'
2023-12-31 20:58:06 +0100:   Found option 'smoothen_focus_view_edges=0.4'
2023-12-31 20:58:06 +0100:   Found option 'sharpen_focus_view=1.0'
2023-12-31 20:58:06 +0100:   Found option 'peripheral_multiplier=0.4'
2023-12-31 20:58:06 +0100:   Found option 'focus_multiplier=1.0'
2023-12-31 20:58:06 +0100:   Found option 'horizontal_focus_section=0.5'
2023-12-31 20:58:06 +0100:   Found option 'vertical_focus_section=0.5'
2023-12-31 20:58:06 +0100: Eye tracking is supported

Oculus:

OTT:

DCS Pixel Density 1.0, OXR Tool kit sharpness CAS 70%.

It gives me about 3200 pxt per eye, however I use FOV on 0,85 what gives me about 2900 pxt per eye.

 

Edited December 31, 2023 by YoYo

[Qcumber]

17 minutes ago, YoYo said:

It gives me about 3200 pxt per eye, however I use FOV on 0,85 what gives me about 2900 pxt per eye.

Interesting. How much does this crop your actual FOV? Can you notice it? 

[YoYo]

24 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

Interesting. How much does this crop your actual FOV? Can you notice it? 

15% for me (0,85 for me its ok, I dont see any black like on the top or by side), if you haven't tried it, I advise you to try it, it's a great saving of rendering space (and more FPS). There is a separate topic about this here.

In ODT it looks like this:

[Qcumber]

13 minutes ago, YoYo said:

15% for me (0,85 for me its ok, I dont see any black like on the top or by side), if you haven't tried it, I advise you to try it, it's a great saving of rendering space (and more FPS). There is a separate topic about this here.

In ODT it looks like this:

Cheers. With my old rift s 0.85 showed a noticable black edge. I'm working at 0.92 at the moment. I'll try 0.85. 

[slughead]

And your in game settings @YoYo?

[dureiken]

Hi,

 

happy new year

 

could someone share his Quad views settings for Varjo Aero (4090 here)

 

thanks a lot !

[YoYo]

On 1/1/2024 at 11:23 AM, slughead said:

And your in game settings @YoYo?

Quote

 

Nothing special.

 

Edited January 2, 2024 by YoYo

[Qcumber]

2 hours ago, YoYo said:

 

 

Just checking that you are aware, but you need to turn off "lens effects" and "bloom effects" when using quad views. 

[YoYo]

13 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

Just checking that you are aware, but you need to turn off "lens effects" and "bloom effects" when using quad views. 

I have it turn off but in the file (mod) by JSGME. Changed for VR, no longer displays double. Besides, it's cosmetic and has nothing to do with performance.

[slughead]

@YoYo thanks. Your settings have a few things turned down to help you achieve 72fps as I expected compared to mine. Such as visibility range High vs Extreme, Civilian traffic medium vs high, clouds high vs ultra, clutter/grass 300 vs 1500 (all my sliders are maxed out). And other than you are running MSAAx2 and I am running DLSS at balanced we are the same. Although I fly F-16 mainly.

I don't think I could drop the visibility range... I prefer that maxed out. Same with the clouds as I am often up there amongst them.

I will say though that it would seem, thanks to your input, that I don't need to run QVFR anymore. I guess that many of us just left that on as it did help at one stage. Perhaps the introduction of DLSS has negated the need for QVFR. I certainly prefer not to use it if I can. That also means I can disable eye tracking which saves some battery drain.

I'll have a play around with the settings to see if I can maintain 72fps over Cairo as it isn't pleasant having it drop into ASW.

[YoYo]

1 hour ago, slughead said:

@YoYo thanks. Your settings have a few things turned down to help you achieve 72fps as I expected compared to mine. Such as visibility range High vs Extreme, Civilian traffic medium vs high, clouds high vs ultra, clutter/grass 300 vs 1500 (all my sliders are maxed out). And other than you are running MSAAx2 and I am running DLSS at balanced we are the same. Although I fly F-16 mainly.

I don't think I could drop the visibility range... I prefer that maxed out. Same with the clouds as I am often up there amongst them.

I will say though that it would seem, thanks to your input, that I don't need to run QVFR anymore. I guess that many of us just left that on as it did help at one stage. Perhaps the introduction of DLSS has negated the need for QVFR. I certainly prefer not to use it if I can. That also means I can disable eye tracking which saves some battery drain.

I'll have a play around with the settings to see if I can maintain 72fps over Cairo as it isn't pleasant having it drop into ASW.

DLSS + DLAA is a very good performance solution and it is easier to achieve decent FPS here. For me, however, the problem is that the image is blurry. The image is not as sharp as with MSAA x2. I tested possibly increasing the pixel density and turning on DLSS (Quality). Using 1.3/72Hz in Oculus and 1.35 in ODT, it started to look quite ok (stable 72 FPS), although it's still not as sharp as with MSAA, and there's this "Phoenix ashes" trailing behind the object ;). Especially for helicopters and flying quite low, its not a bad choice, but only if the pixels are even more dense.

In my opinion, however, 4090 owners have quite a low benefit (in the case of Quest Pro) from QFVR, and as you can see, FPS drops quite dynamically over urban areas. Perhaps for owners of Pimax Crystal this has a better use because there is a larger FOV, so more rendered space. I didnt test it in MSFS.

[slughead]

MSAAx2 has too much shimmer. I switched to MSAAx4 before DLSS came out. I now use DLSS with Oculus render resolution set to 1.0x (as that affects everything) and PD in DCS set to 1.3. It looks ok to me.

I matched your settings apart from the sliders which I max out down to smoke density. I cannot hold 72fps whilst turning at corner speed over Cairo. Maybe this isn't a problem for you helo guys.

I also don't like buildings popping up like mushrooms. Also clouds lower than ultra shimmer. So I am glad that you are happy with your settings and performance. It's not for me though. I'll stick with ASW kicking in.

[sopebird]

Hi folks,

Anyone noticed the gray box moving around when DFR on in DCS? I think it is the rendering area. Pretty much noticeable when looking at high contrast scenes or looking toward sunlight direction. Not found in MSFS2020.

I’m using Pimax Crystal with gama set to 2.0. Not sure whether this is my setting problem or a common problem.

Thanks to any one who know the reason or solution!

[slughead]

12 hours ago, sopebird said:

Hi folks,

Anyone noticed the gray box moving around when DFR on in DCS? I think it is the rendering area. Pretty much noticeable when looking at high contrast scenes or looking toward sunlight direction. Not found in MSFS2020.

I’m using Pimax Crystal with gama set to 2.0. Not sure whether this is my setting problem or a common problem.

Thanks to any one who know the reason or solution!

There are two options in DCS that cause this that you need to disable. It's in the wiki for QVFR.

[sopebird]

2024/1/4 AM1点38分，slughead说：

There are two options in DCS that cause this that you need to disable. It's in the wiki for QVFR.

Thank you very much for the clue. I found this from wiki of QVFR: 

• In the DCS World settings, you must disable 'VR' -> 'Bloom effect' and 'System' -> 'Lens Effects' as they produced poor visuals when using foveated rendering.

After testing, I found it is the Lens Effects that caused this "gray box" of rendering area. 

Best Regards!

[Qcumber]

I have been using QVFR for a few months in fixed mode with Pico 4. The last 3 weeks I have been using a Quest Pro with DFR. I am noticing that there is a delay in the processing as you move your eyes so that you can see the centre image red drawing into high Res. It's only a fraction of a second but does spoil the immersion. 

QVFR settings

Hor 0.25

Ver 0.25

Centre 1.0

Edge 0.5

Centre sharpening 1.0

Oculus using cable

Max output

OTT 1.25

DCS

Max settings in most areas

I can get 72 FPS+ in higher altitude missions

45 FPS+ lower to the ground

I have tried reducing contrast using OXRTK and this improves things. There is less noticeable transition between high and low res areas. 

When I use VD the eye tracking and delay in redrawing is much less noticeable but the image is not as clear as with oculus-cable. 

Any advice would be appreciated.

Edited January 18, 2024 by Qcumber