NVIDIA 5000 series and DLSS4 for VR

[Hippo]

Would this feature make it possible to get high enough frame rates in VR so as not to require reprojection?

Is this a feature that requires DCS native in-game support?  If so, does ED intend to support it?

Can such a feature be enabled at the same time as reprojection?

 

Edited January 10 by Hippo

[speed-of-heat]

if you think about it for a moment reprojection is a sort of frame generation, but without the AI... 

[nikoel]

No

Frame generation as trademarked by Nvidia does not work in VR 

Like speed of heat already said, our mum already has frame generation at home, it’s called Reprojection/Asynchronous Time Warp/ASW and whole bunch of other names 

Apart from that unfortunately it’s only real frames that matter  

Worse still, that bus width is looking rather toy’t on the new cards (5090 excepted)

[Hippo]

21 minutes ago, nikoel said:

Frame generation as trademarked by Nvidia does not work in VR

Thanks for replying.  Care to expand on that?

[Hippo]

52 minutes ago, nikoel said:

Like speed of heat already said, our mum already has frame generation at home, it’s called Reprojection/Asynchronous Time Warp/ASW and whole bunch of other names

Yes, I'm aware, although I can see why the way I phrased my 3rd question might have made it seem like I wasn't.  What I really meant was "what would happen if reprojection and MFG were enabled at the same time"?

With my 4090 I found that I didn't use frame generation for any "normal games" as I didn't need it.  In VR, no games that I'm aware of seem to use it.  I guess what I'm getting at is, supposing we ignore reprojection, shouldn't this tech enable games to be rendered to a VR headset at many multiples of traditional rendering fps?  What it would look like wrt artifacting, etc, is another question, but shouldn't it at least work?  Are there any VR games out there that support it?

52 minutes ago, nikoel said:

Apart from that unfortunately it’s only real frames that matter  

Again, care to expand?

From a quick Google found this:

Quote

The new RTX 50 series now enables up to three intermediate frames, effectively quadrupling frame rate. However, DLSS frame generation isn't supported in any VR game that we're aware of, and results in increased latency compared to VR-specific frame extrapolation techniques.

Is it only because of latency?

Edited January 8 by Hippo

[nikoel]

Latency is one yes; and is a major issue within Virtual Reality as it can really make you feel sick within a few seconds if it's off

Frame time precision is another. OpenXR has a way of rendering the frametimes so that frames are held back to enable a better, more consistent experience. Some titles work better than others. This is partially why Turbo Mode was introduced by Mbucchia—it ignores this and gives us BRRRT, which can have its own drawbacks too.

Stereoscopic vision is another challenge. Synchronizing synthetic frames across both images is very difficult because each eye has its own scene.

ASW is not strictly frame generation because it reuses the last known good frames and blends them smoothly with head-tracking data to maintain a consistent experience. The key difference is that ASW doesn’t use AI generation, whereas Nvidia Frame Generation does. It essentially creates an in-between frame but still assumes that both the base frame and the generated frame are valid and align perfectly. If in some parallel universe humans could hold their head perfectly still and had better sea-legs and didn't want a VR experience where they moved, it might have been possible to utilise. However, it simply isn't developed for VR; otherwise, Nvidia would have used it straight out of the gate

Edited January 8 by nikoel

[warmachine79]

Frame Generation not working is a major problem with VR. Rasterizer power is the thing you need to create "native" frames which apparently are the only option for VR. But rasterizer power will not increase in the future as it did in the past which is indicated by NVidia marketing AI heavily and is also indicated by the 5090 only (likely) providing a slight increase in rasterizing power (maybe 30-40%). So that is a bottleneck for further increasing headset resolution. A 4090 can be brought to its limit with a Crystal Light, a Crystal Super thus will totally abuse a 5090. Headset manufacturers will have to get their head around that and ditch their proprietary space-warp-and-whatsoever technologies and instead implement DLSS frame generation properly. 

Edited January 9 by warmachine79

[SharpeXB]

6 hours ago, warmachine79 said:

also indicated by the 5090 only (likely) providing a slight increase in rasterizing power (maybe 30-40%)

30-40% is just a slight increase? Seems pretty normal for a new model.

[warmachine79]

@SharpeXB: maybe I have been spoiled by the 3090 over 2080TI and 4090 over 3090TI releases. Plus, 30-40% is optimistic. It has 33% more CUDA cores, but at a lower clock. As that is unlikely to scale in rasterizer performance 1:1, the "IPC" (do not know if that term is appropriate with regard to CUDA cores) has to increase about which there is no information. Sure, the bandwidth massively increased (memory interface increased and GDDR7 presumably at higher clocks used), but I do not think that the bandwidth was a bottleneck before for rasterizing power. 

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, warmachine79 said:

@SharpeXB: maybe I have been spoiled by the 3090 over 2080TI and 4090 over 3090TI releases. Plus, 30-40% is optimistic. It has 33% more CUDA cores, but at a lower clock. As that is unlikely to scale in rasterizer performance 1:1, the "IPC" (do not know if that term is appropriate with regard to CUDA cores) has to increase about which there is no information. Sure, the bandwidth massively increased (memory interface increased and GDDR7 presumably at higher clocks used), but I do not think that the bandwidth was a bottleneck before for rasterizing power. 

True, those were like 50-70% faster than their predecessors. 

[Qcumber]

Does anyone know if the new "AI texture compression" will work with DCS or is this more marketing bull? 

"Still worried RTX 5000 GPUs don’t have enough VRAM? Nvidia’s secret weapon is powerful AI texture compression, and it’s calmed some of my fears | TechRadar https://search.app/uXGFMf9XbA2H3psn6"

 

[speed-of-heat]

27 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

Does anyone know if the new "AI texture compression" will work with DCS or is this more marketing bull? 

 

 

it might not work with DCS, that doesn't make it bull, that just makes it not relevant for DCS... but i don't know the answer....

[EightyDuce]

4 hours ago, Qcumber said:

Does anyone know if the new "AI texture compression" will work with DCS or is this more marketing bull? 

"Still worried RTX 5000 GPUs don’t have enough VRAM? Nvidia’s secret weapon is powerful AI texture compression, and it’s calmed some of my fears | TechRadar https://search.app/uXGFMf9XbA2H3psn6"

 

Nvidia attempt at a software solution to a hardware (cost-saving) problem. With likely 5060 8gb backlash in mind.

Will it work, yes. Will it work in DCS, no way to know until released. Will there be a downside (texture quality/artifacting)? Probably. 

 

[Mr_sukebe]

4 hours ago, Qcumber said:

Does anyone know if the new "AI texture compression" will work with DCS or is this more marketing bull? 

"Still worried RTX 5000 GPUs don’t have enough VRAM? Nvidia’s secret weapon is powerful AI texture compression, and it’s calmed some of my fears | TechRadar https://search.app/uXGFMf9XbA2H3psn6"

 

 

Does look interesting.  As per usual, a few thoughts:

• That article links to the 75 games and apps supporting DLSS4 MFG.  DCS is not among them.  DCS is in the DLSS supporting list
• I wonder whether the texture compression will be conducted in software, or via the GPU.  It "might" be something built into the drivers and available to older cards, though I'm personally doubtful
• The 50 series will have faster VRAM and PCIE5, which I'd expect to enable faster data being pushed from the CPU and also NVME storage.   Again, that "might" help

So sure enough, we're still in the lands of "too early to tell, but fingers crossed".

 

[Qcumber]

@Hippo Is it worth renaming this topic to "NVIDIA 5000 series and DLSS4 for VR" or similar for a wider discussion? 

[Nightdare]

On 1/8/2025 at 1:59 PM, nikoel said:

Worse still, that bus width is looking rather toy’t on the new cards (5090 excepted)

 

That it's not really an upgrade 'compared to previous'

 

But the Current 4080 super is doing fine in benchmarks compared to the 1/3rd Wider Bus, 1/3rd Bigger Memory XTX7900 (even keeping its superior RT out of the picture)

From above example, the 6X, seems to measure itself fine with wide/more regular GDDR6

GDDR7 being about twice the speed, a 'limited' bus/mem size might not be such an obstacle as may be perceived

 

21 hours ago, warmachine79 said:

It has 33% more CUDA cores, but at a lower clock

 

Same here, that lower clock may not be such an impediment as perceived without a good comparison between the tech and machine code used for the newer card

[avgyst]

Hey, everybody. I'm facing a choice, what is better to take, 9800x3d, or 5090 for VR. What do you think is more relevant for DCS? Current system 5800x3d 4090

[speed-of-heat]

I would upgrade your processor

[Qcumber]

23 minutes ago, avgyst said:

Hey, everybody. I'm facing a choice, what is better to take, 9800x3d, or 5090 for VR. What do you think is more relevant for DCS? Current system 5800x3d 4090

Yes. CPU. A 4090 is going to remain great for a long while yet. The 5800x3d is a good CPU but is outmatched by the 4090. Go for the 9800x3d, especially if you use QVFR or plan to. 

[Panzerlang]

3 hours ago, avgyst said:

Hey, everybody. I'm facing a choice, what is better to take, 9800x3d, or 5090 for VR. What do you think is more relevant for DCS? Current system 5800x3d 4090

CPU. Even with a 13900k and 4090, I'm CPU bound.

[The_Nephilim]

two things here, I see some say the VRam is not enough what are you guys doing to use more then 16/24gb vram?? I only have 12gb and use about 8/9GB?

 

Also some say they are cpu bound even tho they have a hefty CPU, Maybe some ED Guys can chime on this one but I could of swore somebody said that just because it states CPU bound that is not really the case depending on what else is going on..

 

I mean if the DCS Frame counter says CPU Bound and you are getting 100FPS or more I dont think this is the case. I did notice with it it turns different colors the CPU Bound and I thought if it was RED when saying CPU Bound then you probally are if it is just the normal color.

Edited January 11 by The_Nephilim

[diego999]

19 hours ago, avgyst said:

Hey, everybody. I'm facing a choice, what is better to take, 9800x3d, or 5090 for VR. What do you think is more relevant for DCS? Current system 5800x3d 4090

 

Better ask again when the 5090 is eventually released and benchmarks appear. It can be fantastic, a failure or just meh. Nobody knows for now.

[Aapje]

Given that people's 4090 are already being held back by 'slower' CPU's like a 5800X3D, we can already predict with pretty high certainty that his CPU would hold his 5090 back massively. There is no way that the 5090 will be weaker than a 4090.

[Hippo]

11 hours ago, Aapje said:

Given that people's 4090 are already being held back by 'slower' CPU's like a 5800X3D.

I see that this appears to be the general consensus on here, but how are people coming to this conclusion?  I would say the opposite: I find that it is the GPU that maxes out when I try (tried - I sold my PC a few months ago) to hold 72 fps with my Quest Pro / 4090 / 13900k, high VR rendering resolution and in-game graphical complexity.  I would have chosen to upgrade the GPU rather than the CPU, and going 3080Ti -> 4090 was a substantial improvement.  I do tend to run single player missions with not much going on, and test that way, so maybe that's it?

Unfortunately it doesn't seem that the 4090 -> 5090 uplift in rasterisation performance is going to be particularly substantial.  I did manage to sell my 4090 for around 80% of what I paid for it.  If a reasonable price can be obtained for the 4090 then the (supposed) improvements in upscaling quality and performance could make it worthwhile.  I'm looking forward to seeing the results of real world DCS VR testing.

Edited January 12 by Hippo

[Hippo]