Not sure about the mental status of this dude, lol - he does trigger many alarms and red flags, but as long as he's not going to spend time alone with my kids or pilot my plane 🙂 He does however test his RTX 5090 with a Quest 3 and delivers quite a lot of VR benchmark results. Now, measuring fps in VR games is difficult and requires special equipment which I do not think this dude has - so take the measurements with a grain of salt and some pepper. Also remember that with vsync on, the RTX 4090 will be cut down to 45 fps, if the performance is in the range of 45 - 89 fps in 90 Hz, while the RTX 5090 will show 90 fps if performing at 90+ fps. So - in theory and just as an example - RTX 4090 at 89 fps will show 45 fps, while 5090 at 91 fps will show 90 fps. Babeltech used FCAT VR benchmark tool from Nvidia to get reliable measurements in VR, more here:
https://babeltechreviews.com/oculus-rift-vr-benching-amd-vs-nvidia-part-2/
Just be aware in the vid below that some big differences between 4090 and 5090 that can be exaggerated and might depend on the game and the rig. That said, for now I have not come across better VR results comparing 4090 vs 5090:
- and remember, other PCVR users do not look and talk like this dude! 😅
The results from Red Matter 2 did seem strange to me - I played through the entire game in solid 80 fps using Index res 400% res, and he can't get more than 46 fps with the RTX 4090 and Quest 3 res 400%. Sure the Quest 3 has higher panel res than Index, but the RTX 4090 is about 70% faster than my RTX 3090. In Red Matter 2 res 400%, the RTX 5090 was close to 3 times faster than the RTX 4090, which did seem odd to me - of course it could be true, which would be amazing, but these results need to be reproduced by others - note the red circles I've added to the image below:
PS. Seems the scalpers are having great times in Europe - no one does the limbo here 🤣
 
Hi Rune,
Red Matter 2 dev here. For the record, I’m fairly certain you tested RM2 back in the day when it still hadn’t received the latest graphical update with the most recent bells and whistles. That probably account for the difference.
Thanks, and of course you could be right - but usually the 5090 is not 2.5 times (=150%) faster than the RTX 4090, and that difference seems very odd to me.
I was more wondering if the RTX 4090 could hit some ram limit with Quest 3 res 400% - where the 5090 could benefit from the 32GB. Running low on ram could explain the sudden massive slowdown of the RTX 4090. For the RM2 testing, the following config was used:
GPUS: RTX 5090/4090
CPU: 7950X3D
RAM: 64GB 6000Mhz/CL30 DDR5 RAM
Quest 3 with Virtual Desktop, Godlike: 6144x6432(400%) Per Eye
That res translates into 79 million pixels per frame combining both eyes - so quite an insane res, more than 2 x 8k res. Also the Quest 3 was using 120 Hz.
Also results from Metro could indicate that the 4090 hits a wall even with 24GB vram:
Here the 5090 is more than 3 times faster than the 4090 - extremely unusual results. But a lot of other variable could interfere. I'd love to see same test made with Index and other hmds not using streaming or VD. And I'd love to see other Quest 3 users verify these results made by one YouTuber, who does not seem to have much experience testing hardware.
Of course if the 32GB should make the above possible that would be a valid reason to get the 5090 - for those wanting to use such extreme resolutions, and that might be a very small minority. 2c.
(Btw, if some thinks I'm joking about any game needing 32GB of vram, see how easily Alyx used nearly 20GB vram here with a Reverb G2 and RTX 3090 with 24GB vram as res increased - jump to 9:36 to see the 18.5GB vram use:
Thus it's very likely that RTX 4090 may have hit a vram wall when extreme Quest 3 resolutions were used. )
