Quest Pro - VirtualDesktopXR and Quadviews

[slughead]

2 minutes ago, gonvise said:

Unfortunately, at the moment I cannot achieve the quality and fluidity of the cable link with VD.

Hmm. I used to feel that too. At the moment it’s seeming good for me but… I’m not quite there with the sharpness of the mfds despite running at godlike. And I run everything else at max. So I may also find it not as good as link when I’m done. I also don’t use qvfr.

[gonvise]

19 minutes ago, slughead said:

Hmm. I used to feel that too. At the moment it’s seeming good for me but… I’m not quite there with the sharpness of the mfds despite running at godlike. And I run everything else at max. So I may also find it not as good as link when I’m done. I also don’t use qvfr.

Exactly, I have even put the DCS PD at 2, just like I have it by cable via OTT, I think it is because of the encoder bitrate, the scene is a bit blurry compared to the cable, no matter how much scaling we put on it, via VD "god like", DCS PD, etc.

[Qcumber]

58 minutes ago, gonvise said:

Unfortunately, at the moment I cannot achieve the quality and fluidity of the cable link with VD.

As I said above have you tried comparing VD and link cable like for like? If you match resolution, sharpening and optimise bitrate, the difference is very subtle. 

[slughead]

1 minute ago, Qcumber said:

As I said above have you tried comparing VD and link cable like for like? If you match resolution, sharpening and optimise bitrate, the difference is very subtle. 

That’s my plan. Just have a lot going on at the moment which is frustrating.

[gonvise]

1 hour ago, Qcumber said:

As I said above have you tried comparing VD and link cable like for like? If you match resolution, sharpening and optimise bitrate, the difference is very subtle. 

Sure! But the problem is I can't, max VD bitrate is only 400! I can't find any combination in VD that gives me the quality/fluidity that I get with the link cable. And the difference is not subtle, it's much more than that. If I could at least match the quality, then I would optimize the performance, but I can't. If you know how to do it, please tell me. I think the problem is that you are used to a scaling of at most 1.3 or 1.4, and you don't perceive almost any difference between VD "god like" and the link cable... also, the link cable comes by default with a fairly low bitrate. I think that if you haven't done it and you try these parameters with the link cable you would be surprised by the quality that the quest pro can get.

I bought a 300€ router among other things to try to make the VD work, so imagine how much I want it to work well.

[slughead]

16 minutes ago, gonvise said:

Sure! But the problem is I can't, max VD bitrate is only 400! I can't find any combination in VD that gives me the quality/fluidity that I get with the link cable. And the difference is not subtle, it's much more than that. If I could at least match the quality, then I would optimize the performance, but I can't. If you know how to do it, please tell me. I think the problem is that you are used to a scaling of at most 1.3 or 1.4, and you don't perceive almost any difference between VD "god like" and the link cable... also, the link cable comes by default with a fairly low bitrate. I think that if you haven't done it and you try these parameters with the link cable you would be surprised by the quality that the quest pro can get.

I bought a 300€ router among other things to try to make the VD work, so imagine how much I want it to work well.

Are you comparing the same encoder on VD and Link? Also, remember that different encoders can run at lower bitrates and generate the same quality. So, if the two use different encoders, trying to run at the same bitrate isn't a valid comparison.

[Qcumber]

1 hour ago, gonvise said:

Sure! But the problem is I can't, max VD bitrate is only 400! I can't find any combination in VD that gives me the quality/fluidity that I get with the link cable. And the difference is not subtle, it's much more than that. If I could at least match the quality, then I would optimize the performance, but I can't. If you know how to do it, please tell me. I think the problem is that you are used to a scaling of at most 1.3 or 1.4, and you don't perceive almost any difference between VD "god like" and the link cable... also, the link cable comes by default with a fairly low bitrate. I think that if you haven't done it and you try these parameters with the link cable you would be surprised by the quality that the quest pro can get.

I bought a 300€ router among other things to try to make the VD work, so imagine how much I want it to work well.

With your ODT settings you have a very high level of supersampling (as has been said earlier in this thread). What is the output from the meta app? Do you have this set to 1 or maxed out at 1.7. Base resolution of QP is 1800x1920 per eye. If this is set at x1 in the meta app then this would give you 3600x3840. If you are set to x1.7 then IDT x2 will give you 6120x6528. I suspect you are running meta at x1. If you compare this to VD at godlike (3072x3216), you need to add a multiplier of 1.2 to get you to the same resolution as with meta. I would suggest doing this in QVFR. 

You also have sharpening set to "normal". Try it set to "off" and see how that looks. 

As Slug says, make sure you are using compatible codecs. Try HEVC 10 bit at 150 mbps then check your latencies. If your decide latency is too high (above about 13-14) switch to h274+ at about 300 Mbps. 

Make sure you are connected to your wifi 6 dedicated router by cable (to your PC) and that your connection speed is at least 870mbps. My router cost me £45 and works really well. 

Edited July 28, 2024 by Qcumber

[gonvise]

1 hour ago, slughead said:

Are you comparing the same encoder on VD and Link? Also, remember that different encoders can run at lower bitrates and generate the same quality. So, if the two use different encoders, trying to run at the same bitrate isn't a valid comparison.

I'm not trying to compare VD and Cable Link at same parameters, what I want is to have the same quality and fluidity with VD as with Cable Link with the settings specified. If not, I have no reason to move on to VD which, on the other hand, is what I would like for the future.

37 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

With your ODT settings you have a very high level of supersampling (as has been said earlier in this thread). What is the output from the meta app? Do you have this set to 1 or maxed out at 1.7. Base resolution of QP is 1800x1920 per eye. If this is set at x1 in the meta app then this would give you 3600x3840. If you are set to x1.7 then IDT x2 will give you 6120x6528. I suspect you are running meta at x1. If you compare this to VD at godlike (3072x3216), you need to add a multiplier of 1.2 to get you to the same resolution as with meta. I would suggest doing this in QVFR. 

You also have sharpening set to "normal". Try it set to "off" and see how that looks. 

As Slug says, make sure you are using compatible codecs. Try HEVC 10 bit at 150 mbps then check your latencies. If your decide latency is too high (above about 13-14) switch to h274+ at about 300 Mbps. 

Make sure you are connected to your wifi 6 dedicated router by cable (to your PC) and that your connection speed is at least 870mbps. My router cost me £45 and works really well. 

 

Meta app x1, OTT x2. Sharpening set in DCS.

Latency doesn't matter to me at the moment, I would just like to achieve the same quality. Considering that with "godlike" and QVFR at 1.5 I don't achieve the same quality as with cable link, I can only think that it is a codec "bottleneck" and yes, I have tried both compatible ones.

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

New video, a rework of the original:

 

Edited July 28, 2024 by VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

[slughead]

Here's where I am with VD.... it just works. Godlike with PD of 1.0 in DCS is about the same visuals I was getting with Meta Link set to x1 and DCS PD at 1.4 ish.

These give me a reasonably locked 72fps with all settings maxed out.

@gonvise you must have many settings dialled down to be running with a PD of 1.8/2.0 or are you running with ASW always enabled? It would be interesting to see your DCS config.

One weird thing I noticed is that if I have QVFR enabled, the clouds look blocky or pixelated. Yuck! Despite what setting I chose in the config they were always pixelated. So I've turned it off again.

[Maddaawg]

@slughead What's are your PC specs again? Are you using the Quest Pro too?

With a i9-10900k I am CPU bound and if I try and run QVFR I get lots stuttering with my CPU tanked. I stopped trying to us OXRTK or for that matter any of the tools as DCS and Meta are in a competition to see who can break them the fastest and most. With HTCC being OXR reliant is also a little worrying too, so I hope that keeps working in VD. One quirk with HTCC and VD though is the Dev said to disable hand tracking in VD otherwise it might cause strange issues. But for me, it won't work at all unless I enable hand tracking.

[diego999]

10 hours ago, slughead said:

Under C:\Program Files\Oculus there is a Staging and sometimes a tmp folder.

1. Rename the Staging folder to Staging.bak
2. Rename the tmp folder to tmp.bak
3. Create a new file called Staging (you can create a new txt file called Staging.txt then rename it to Staging)
4. Create a new file called tmp.

By creating files to replace the folders, the Oculus updater can no longer copy the download file to the staging folder because it's now a file. Hence, this blocks your Oculus / Meta Link application from being updated.

Reverse the changes to allow updates again.

This only stops the app on the PC from being updated. It doesn't stop the headset OS update from happening (which "could" be incompatible with the PC app should the versions not match).

I also make a copy of a good working Oculus folder, e.g. Oculus to Oculus.v67 so I can quickly revert if I need to.

 

Thank you. I was searching for an old post explaining the procedure and couldn't find it.

 

 

[Maddaawg]

13 minutes ago, diego999 said:

 

Thank you. I was searching for an old post explaining the procedure and couldn't find it.

 

 

It should be pinned.

[sze5003]

11 hours ago, slughead said:

Under C:\Program Files\Oculus there is a Staging and sometimes a tmp folder.

1. Rename the Staging folder to Staging.bak
2. Rename the tmp folder to tmp.bak
3. Create a new file called Staging (you can create a new txt file called Staging.txt then rename it to Staging)
4. Create a new file called tmp.

By creating files to replace the folders, the Oculus updater can no longer copy the download file to the staging folder because it's now a file. Hence, this blocks your Oculus / Meta Link application from being updated.

Reverse the changes to allow updates again.

This only stops the app on the PC from being updated. It doesn't stop the headset OS update from happening (which "could" be incompatible with the PC app should the versions not match).

I also make a copy of a good working Oculus folder, e.g. Oculus to Oculus.v67 so I can quickly revert if I need to.

Oddly enough I went to do this today. This is what my Oculus folder looks like and i never made changes to it. Somehow my headset was able to update to v67 from 64 today. Should I delete the bak.tmp and bak.Staging?

[Phantom711]

vor 9 Stunden schrieb VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants:

New video, a rework of the original:

 

 

Uhmm…as far as I understand it, local dimming is something that is being „applied“ on the actual screens in the headset. Some LEDs are lit, while others are not.

So unless you actually physically take a video „through the lense“, I don’t see how you could capture that in your video. 

 

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Good point. I am not sure if VD and/or OBS have messed with the colour space, it is rather apparent that VD had more of a yellow hue, or less blue (see the HUD). Also, the contrast and saturation were more "pleasing" in VD, as if Reshade has been applied (cough). Thus, the details in the shadow area were also a bit more -- detailed.

I would admit that the scenario here was a bit too gloomy. I would try to use a flight in darkness to see if I can show any differences. And "through the lens" idea is great. I still has yet to manage to get the QPro running without it on my face.

[slughead]

8 hours ago, Maddaawg said:

@slughead What's are your PC specs again? Are you using the Quest Pro too?

With a i9-10900k I am CPU bound and if I try and run QVFR I get lots stuttering with my CPU tanked. I stopped trying to us OXRTK or for that matter any of the tools as DCS and Meta are in a competition to see who can break them the fastest and most. With HTCC being OXR reliant is also a little worrying too, so I hope that keeps working in VD. One quirk with HTCC and VD though is the Dev said to disable hand tracking in VD otherwise it might cause strange issues. But for me, it won't work at all unless I enable hand tracking.

i9-13900K, 4090, 64GB DDR5, Gigabyte Z790, NVMEs, SSD, Quest Pro. I was having fun and games yesterday. DCS was performing incredibly badly, even over Link. It turned out that, somehow, the Intel Defaults had been set in my BIOS. Something crazy must have happened to my machine. It took me a little while to work that out. Just a quick check in the task manager's performance tab to watch the CPU running at 2GHz instead of about 5GHz was the final giveaway.

I stopped using QVFR a while ago as it zaps performance over dense cities. So, with my rig, there isn't really anything to be gained as it is powerful enough to maintain 72fps most of the time. I mostly use OXRTK for stats, although I will probably disable that, too, as I'm not always going to be looking at stats, and it's just another thing eating CPU cycles.

I have hand tracking on in VD. It seems to work well in both VD and DCS. As you say, without it enabled, there is no hand tracking at all in DCS with HTCC.

VD has its own OpenXR implementation, VDxR, which is completely independent of Meta's OpenXR implementation. Thus, it is very unlikely that Meta will be able to break VDxR, which is why I am switching to VD. I also think it is unlikely that DCS could break HTCC either unless they completely rewrite how they use the mouse.

 

[Mr_sukebe]

Here's a slightly weird issue that I'm currently experiencing with my QP.

Starting around a month ago, I have a sporadic issue with the left eye view going a bit weird and suffering from lag.  To clarify:

• My QP is tethered using a USB cable to my PC.  GPU = 3080ti
• My assumption is that I'm starting to get my often CPU bottlenecked, with my 9700KF
• I do have and use both Oculus Tray Tool and Oculus Toolkit
• I've previously used Quad Views DFR, but don't seem to need to at the moment
• My Frame Rate bounces around.  On the ground, usually around 30 ish, at altitude, 72fps
• It seems to be triggered when I have lag spikes, which I'm guessing are caused by temporary low frame rates when accessing textures and similar.  So I don't always experience it
• It doesn't affect my right lens/view, only the left
• The only way to clear it is to exit DCS (which doesn't solve it) and reboot the Oculus Desktop Application

Anyone else experienced this?

The fact that it's NOT solved by exiting DCS suggests to me that it's NOT a DCS issue, which is why I've not raised a DCS ticket.

 

 

Edited July 29, 2024 by Mr_sukebe

[slughead]

10 minutes ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

Good point. I am not sure if VD and/or OBS have messed with the colour space, it is rather apparent that VD had more of a yellow hue, or less blue (see the HUD). Also, the contrast and saturation were more "pleasing" in VD, as if Reshade has been applied (cough). Thus, the details in the shadow area were also a bit more -- detailed.

I would admit that the scenario here was a bit too gloomy. I would try to use a flight in darkness to see if I can show any differences. And "through the lens" idea is great. I still has yet to manage to get the QPro running without it on my face.

Stick some tape over the sensor. That should allow you to run the headset without it on your head.

Phantom711 is correct regarding local dimming. This is only applicable to the headset display panels. It cannot be shown to work via a scene recording; the image on the physical display panel must be recorded to demonstrate local dimming.

Local dimming should be the same whether VD or Quest Link enables it. It should just turn on or off in the headset. Neither VD nor Quest Link will do any special processing on the image. Thus, there would be no difference in contrast, colours, etc., just light bleed around bright objects. Any difference in colour, contrast, etc., is due to something else.

Edited July 29, 2024 by slughead

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

47 minutes ago, slughead said:

Local dimming should be the same whether VD or Quest Link enables it.

Partly, but if I am informed correctly, Quest Link has no local dimming.

49 minutes ago, slughead said:

Stick some tape over the sensor.

The problem is, I tried to put on some blue tag thingy between the lenses and it did not work...

[slughead]

17 minutes ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

Partly, but if I am informed correctly, Quest Link has no local dimming.

18 minutes ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

The problem is, I tried to put on some blue tag thingy between the lenses and it did not work...

Maybe not enough. Try electrical insulation tape. You may need a few layers to block the infra-red.

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Thanks for pointing out.

Okay. I tried a bigger tag, and I also need to turn off the pesky pass-through mode. It seems to work but I am not sure it worth doing it now as first, the FoV is very small and the video tends to be shaky.

I tend to be a bit more argumentative here. I dunno a setting there means it actually worked. If it worked, great, but it would not be as good as what VD is doing. For example, when loading a mission, after pressing the start button, the screen goes black in VR (which has never been fixed since the introduction of MT!), there is usually a white dot at the bottom right. In OCXR, the dot is bright like Sirus, but in VD, it is not so, even if gamma in VD is set to 1.00

I think this is the time when I take TTL pictures instead.

[slughead]

1 hour ago, Mr_sukebe said:

Here's a slightly weird issue that I'm currently experiencing with my QP.

Starting around a month ago, I have a sporadic issue with the left eye view going a bit weird and suffering from lag.  To clarify:

• My QP is tethered using a USB cable to my PC.  GPU = 3080ti
• My assumption is that I'm starting to get my often CPU bottlenecked, with my 9700KF
• I do have and use both Oculus Tray Tool and Oculus Toolkit
• I've previously used Quad Views DFR, but don't seem to need to at the moment
• My Frame Rate bounces around.  On the ground, usually around 30 ish, at altitude, 72fps
• It seems to be triggered when I have lag spikes, which I'm guessing are caused by temporary low frame rates when accessing textures and similar.  So I don't always experience it
• It doesn't affect my right lens/view, only the left
• The only way to clear it is to exit DCS (which doesn't solve it) and reboot the Oculus Desktop Application

Anyone else experienced this?

The fact that it's NOT solved by exiting DCS suggests to me that it's NOT a DCS issue, which is why I've not raised a DCS ticket.

 

 

 

I haven't experienced this. I would try the following:

1. Play some headset-only games to eliminate a problem with the headset itself - this may not necessarily be enough to cause the problem.
2. Use the DCS VR preset to reduce the load on the system as much as possible. 
3. Reset the Oculus Link to default settings.
4. Try Virtual Desktop, but I'd not go as far as buying a dedicated router just to find the fault this.

3 minutes ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

Thanks for pointing out.

Okay. I tried a bigger tag, and I also need to turn off the pesky pass-through mode. It seems to work but I am not sure it worth doing it now as first, the FoV is very small and the video tends to be shaky.

I tend to be a bit more argumentative here. I dunno a setting there means it actually worked. If it worked, great, but it would not be as good as what VD is doing. For example, when loading a mission, after pressing the start button, the screen goes black in VR (which has never been fixed since the introduction of MT!), there is usually a white dot at the bottom right. In OCXR, the dot is bright like Sirus, but in VD, it is not so, even if gamma in VD is set to 1.00

I think this is the time when I take TTL pictures instead.

Night mission. Look at the moon. Can be replicated in both.

[gonvise]

13 hours ago, slughead said:

Here's where I am with VD.... it just works. Godlike with PD of 1.0 in DCS is about the same visuals I was getting with Meta Link set to x1 and DCS PD at 1.4 ish.

These give me a reasonably locked 72fps with all settings maxed out.

@gonvise you must have many settings dialled down to be running with a PD of 1.8/2.0 or are you running with ASW always enabled? It would be interesting to see your DCS config.

One weird thing I noticed is that if I have QVFR enabled, the clouds look blocky or pixelated. Yuck! Despite what setting I chose in the config they were always pixelated. So I've turned it off again.

ASW always enabled, It goes like silk as long as you have those 45 to spare. I used to use QVFR, but even though it worked fine and did its job, being CPU intensive in some situations with many objects it caused me stutters, and since the last DCS update I started using the eye tracking from the toolkit, which as mbucchia said is another FR implementation that gives less performance improvement but at the cost of GPU, and since I have plenty of GPU, it works much better for me. Right now DCS is a dream.

Here all my settings:

10 hours ago, diego999 said:

 

Thank you. I was searching for an old post explaining the procedure and couldn't find it.

 

 

Be careful, as @slughead said, this only disables updates to the windows quest app, to disable the quest pro firmware (SO) updates:

 

[slughead]

2 minutes ago, gonvise said:

ASW always enabled, It goes like silk as long as you have those 45 to spare. I used to use QVFR, but even though it worked fine and did its job, being CPU intensive in some situations with many objects it caused me stutters, and since the last DCS update I started using the eye tracking from the toolkit, which as mbucchia said is another FR implementation that gives less performance improvement but at the cost of GPU, and since I have plenty of GPU, it works much better for me. Right now DCS is a dream.

Here all my settings:

Thanks. You have many settings dialled down compared to me, but the main thing here is that ASW is always enabled. I prefer to stay out of ASW as much as possible, as the ghosting of jets is meh. So I run at 72fps compared to your 45fps, which gives you a large headroom to increase your PD.