Will a 4090 Max Out a Crystal Light? If not why get a Crystal Super?

[CrackerJack]

If the 4090 can't max out the Light at 90 FPS why bother with a Super even with a 5090?  It seems that the Super is a stretch for GPU hardware for the foreseeable future.  

[Phantom711]

Well, you are not entirely wrong I would say...

But some thoughts though:

The SUPER apparently has a better form factor than the Crystal/Crystal Light.

It also has eye-tracking which the CL has not, so you will benefit even more from (Dynamic) Foveated Rendering and can probably run more aggressive settings than on a CL.

You could probably undersample, hence not max out the native res, but it would still look very good.

[Hippo]

What people are willing to accept in terms of fps in VR varies hugely.  For example, I'm not prepared to accept running continually with reprojection, so want to hold a true 72 fps at optimal render resolution on my Quest Pro, and I have to turn down DCS settings to achieve this with a 4090 / 13900k with quad views foveated rendering (strictly speaking had, I'm currently running a lower spec rig).  So, for me, the answer to your question would be a no for the Light, and no *!*! way for the Super.

Other people appear to be prepared to accept frame rates of 30 fps (with reprojection) for the sake of the visuals, so they might be ok with the Super.

For me a lot of the load comes from having to run AA as I can't bear the jaggies and shimmering without it.  The Pimax chap suggested (on YT, iirc) that with the Super's very high resolution AA won't be necessary;  I am Super-sceptical regarding this assertion, however, were it to be valid it would help enormously with performance.

 

 

Edited December 18, 2024 by Hippo

[gonvise]

2 hours ago, Hippo said:

What people are willing to accept in terms of fps in VR varies hugely.  For example, I'm not prepared to accept running continually with reprojection, so want to hold a true 72 fps at optimal render resolution on my Quest Pro, and I have to turn down DCS settings to achieve this with a 4090 / 13900k with quad views foveated rendering (strictly speaking had, I'm currently running a lower spec rig).  So, for me, the answer to your question would be a no for the Light, and no *!*! way for the Super.

Other people appear to be prepared to accept frame rates of 30 fps (with reprojection) for the sake of the visuals, so they might be ok with the Super.

For me a lot of the load comes from having to run AA as I can't bear the jaggies and shimmering without it.  The Pimax chap suggested (on YT, iirc) that with the Super's very high resolution AA won't be necessary;  I am Super-sceptical regarding this assertion, however, were it to be valid it would help enormously with performance.

 

 

Also Quest Pro and 4090... Have you tested 45 ASW (90 refresh) and 2.0 supersampling via OTT? (And quad views of course). 

What I can't stand is 72Hz, I notice the flickering, while with stable 45 ASW and DLAA, ghosting it is minimal today, at least I can stand this last one much more.

[Qcumber]

21 hours ago, Hippo said:

What people are willing to accept in terms of fps in VR varies hugely.  For example, I'm not prepared to accept running continually with reprojection, so want to hold a true 72 fps at optimal render resolution on my Quest Pro, and I have to turn down DCS settings to achieve this with a 4090 / 13900k with quad views foveated rendering (strictly speaking had, I'm currently running a lower spec rig).  So, for me, the answer to your question would be a no for the Light, and no *!*! way for the Super.

Other people appear to be prepared to accept frame rates of 30 fps (with reprojection) for the sake of the visuals, so they might be ok with the Super.

For me a lot of the load comes from having to run AA as I can't bear the jaggies and shimmering without it.  The Pimax chap suggested (on YT, iirc) that with the Super's very high resolution AA won't be necessary;  I am Super-sceptical regarding this assertion, however, were it to be valid it would help enormously with performance.

 

 

Do you not use QVFR? It's the main reason I got the QP. I can run 72 pretty much all the time and 90 FPS in some situations. No reprojection. 

[gonvise]

For my eyes with QP, speaking strictly about visual quality and not performance, 90Hz 45 ASW > 75Hz NO ASW... But everyone has a different perception of course.