Why is it that they over spec VR Games ?

[Umpa_PC]

So like The Walking Dead: Saints and sinners, massive specced game, i7 GTX1070 16GB - bla bla bla.  With specs like that you would not think it would even start let alone run OK on my system, but it does - it runs very well in fact.  Now sure everything is on low, but the graphics are stunning still. Game play is smooth as silk, no stuttering at all.  Made the hairs on my neck and arms stand up when I was playing it - lol.

Now I realise, they want you to have the best experience and I am sure many people want that - I am happy with an OK experience running on my 'its OK' computer.  I nearly did not bother because of the posted specs, and did not want the hassle of getting a refund - but boy I am glad I took the risk.

Every VR game I have downloaded from the O store has worked great for me.  If your on a low spec machine like me, how do you find performance ?

[Sneakygloworm]

It's probably recommended specs. Pc's are pretty weird in that a lesser cpu and decent ram and GPU will still keep up with a cutting edge PC (more or less) in VR. What i've found with VR is that if you can play Elite dangerous and DCS with acceptable frame rates (with Medium or High settings) you can play anything. Those two really do push a mid to high tier system and will bring lesser systems right to their knees. Also, the Oculus tray tool can save a lot of heartache if you can stand 45fps with AWS working. VR is still very much cutting edge so devs probably have to play it safe to minimise complaints. 

[RuneSR2]

Umpa_PC said:

So like The Walking Dead: Saints and sinners, massive specced game, i7 GTX1070 16GB - bla bla bla.  With specs like that you would not think it would even start let alone run OK on my system, but it does - it runs very well in fact.  Now sure everything is on low, but the graphics are stunning still. Game play is smooth as silk, no stuttering at all.  Made the hairs on my neck and arms stand up when I was playing it - lol.

Now I realise, they want you to have the best experience and I am sure many people want that - I am happy with an OK experience running on my 'its OK' computer.  I nearly did not bother because of the posted specs, and did not want the hassle of getting a refund - but boy I am glad I took the risk.

Every VR game I have downloaded from the O store has worked great for me.  If your on a low spec machine like me, how do you find performance ?

Devs also normally target 90 fps. Using asw 2.0 you can play just fine using 45 fps in games with native Oculus driver support - like Saints and Sinners. This basically means you can get an awesome experience using hardware that provides 50% of the speed provided by the recommended hardware. Awesome right? But that's thanks to Oculus - using non-Oculus hmds you need those 90 fps. 

[SkScotchegg]

RuneSR2 said:

Umpa_PC said:

So like The Walking Dead: Saints and sinners, massive specced game, i7 GTX1070 16GB - bla bla bla.  With specs like that you would not think it would even start let alone run OK on my system, but it does - it runs very well in fact.  Now sure everything is on low, but the graphics are stunning still. Game play is smooth as silk, no stuttering at all.  Made the hairs on my neck and arms stand up when I was playing it - lol.

Now I realise, they want you to have the best experience and I am sure many people want that - I am happy with an OK experience running on my 'its OK' computer.  I nearly did not bother because of the posted specs, and did not want the hassle of getting a refund - but boy I am glad I took the risk.

Every VR game I have downloaded from the O store has worked great for me.  If your on a low spec machine like me, how do you find performance ?

Devs also normally target 90 fps. Using asw 2.0 you can play just fine using 45 fps in games with native Oculus driver support - like Saints and Sinners. This basically means you can get an awesome experience using hardware that provides 50% of the speed provided by the recommended hardware. Awesome right? But that's thanks to Oculus - using non-Oculus hmds you need those 90 fps. 

I thought other HMD's have their own version of ASW? Or is that not the case?

Or do they have it, but it doesn't work as well for some reason?

[RuneSR2]

SkScotchegg said:

RuneSR2 said:

Umpa_PC said:

So like The Walking Dead: Saints and sinners, massive specced game, i7 GTX1070 16GB - bla bla bla.  With specs like that you would not think it would even start let alone run OK on my system, but it does - it runs very well in fact.  Now sure everything is on low, but the graphics are stunning still. Game play is smooth as silk, no stuttering at all.  Made the hairs on my neck and arms stand up when I was playing it - lol.

Now I realise, they want you to have the best experience and I am sure many people want that - I am happy with an OK experience running on my 'its OK' computer.  I nearly did not bother because of the posted specs, and did not want the hassle of getting a refund - but boy I am glad I took the risk.

Every VR game I have downloaded from the O store has worked great for me.  If your on a low spec machine like me, how do you find performance ?

Devs also normally target 90 fps. Using asw 2.0 you can play just fine using 45 fps in games with native Oculus driver support - like Saints and Sinners. This basically means you can get an awesome experience using hardware that provides 50% of the speed provided by the recommended hardware. Awesome right? But that's thanks to Oculus - using non-Oculus hmds you need those 90 fps. 

I thought other HMD's have their own version of ASW? Or is that not the case?

Or do they have it, but it doesn't work as well for some reason?

Other hmds do have something similar, but it works really bad. Index has motion smoothing and I believe also another kind, but both work horribly. Tried everything in Stormland, but the lagging and reprojections are extremely easy to notice - and ruin the experience. 

Some other dude also complained that Valve had nothing close to asw yet. Asw 2.0 isn't perfect, but it's very close - strafing along a wall I get like perfect 90 fps, because I don't see any imperfections - now try to do the same with the Index when you're below 90 fps in 90 Hz  :#

Using Index I simply need solid 90 fps - or the experience is ruined. Using CV1 45 fps is just fine. So using CV1 I only need to render like 50% of the Index pixels, and I can do just fine with 45 fps. That's close to a 3-4x difference in performance requirements. And that's why - I think - I can play Stormland CV1 ss 2.0 Ultra - while that's a complete no-go using the Index. Maybe when I get a video card 4x the performance of my GTX 1080, but 3080 Ti might only be 2x (and 2080 Ti is 1.7x at best)... That's why I need the CV1 for the extremely demanding games and just got a spare one  B) o:)

[SkScotchegg]

RuneSR2 said:

SkScotchegg said:

RuneSR2 said:

Umpa_PC said:

So like The Walking Dead: Saints and sinners, massive specced game, i7 GTX1070 16GB - bla bla bla.  With specs like that you would not think it would even start let alone run OK on my system, but it does - it runs very well in fact.  Now sure everything is on low, but the graphics are stunning still. Game play is smooth as silk, no stuttering at all.  Made the hairs on my neck and arms stand up when I was playing it - lol.

Now I realise, they want you to have the best experience and I am sure many people want that - I am happy with an OK experience running on my 'its OK' computer.  I nearly did not bother because of the posted specs, and did not want the hassle of getting a refund - but boy I am glad I took the risk.

Every VR game I have downloaded from the O store has worked great for me.  If your on a low spec machine like me, how do you find performance ?

Devs also normally target 90 fps. Using asw 2.0 you can play just fine using 45 fps in games with native Oculus driver support - like Saints and Sinners. This basically means you can get an awesome experience using hardware that provides 50% of the speed provided by the recommended hardware. Awesome right? But that's thanks to Oculus - using non-Oculus hmds you need those 90 fps. 

I thought other HMD's have their own version of ASW? Or is that not the case?

Or do they have it, but it doesn't work as well for some reason?

Other hmds do have something similar, but it works really bad. Index has motion smoothing and I believe also another kind, but both work horribly. Tried everything in Stormland, but the lagging and reprojections are extremely easy to notice - and ruin the experience. 

Some other dude also complained that Valve had nothing close to asw yet. Asw 2.0 isn't perfect, but it's very close - strafing along a wall I get like perfect 90 fps, because I don't see any imperfections - now try to do the same with the Index when you're below 90 fps in 90 Hz  :#

Using Index I simply need solid 90 fps - or the experience is ruined. Using CV1 45 fps is just fine. So using CV1 I only need to render like 50% of the Index pixels, and I can do just fine with 45 fps. That's close to a 3-4x difference in performance requirements. And that's why - I think - I can play Stormland CV1 ss 2.0 Ultra - while that's a complete no-go using the Index. Maybe when I get a video card 4x the performance of my GTX 1080, but 3080 Ti might only be 2x (and 2080 Ti is 1.7x at best)... That's why I need the CV1 for the extremely demanding games and just got a spare one  B) o:)

Oh I see, I did not know this. Very interesting indeed!

I guess if Oculus was owned by Elon Musk he would have given his ASW software away for free to all his competitors! lol

I guess Carmack was the genius behind ASW then? Hopefully the other HMD manufacturers will catch up eventually.

[Ray_Sover]

The difference ASW makes on the Rift S can be enormous with some games.

I'm a huge Dirt Rally fan and have to drop the graphics to Low (which looks absolutely awful) without ASW to maintain close to a constant 80FPS even with an overclocked AMD RX Vega 56 graphics card. Forcing ASW to always on with Oculus Tray Tool gives a rock solid 80FPS on Ultra with 4xMSAA even with night lighting in the pouring rain.

There are some visual artifacts, most notably occasional flickering on passing treetops, but I tend to be looking where I'm going rather than bird spotting, so it's a small price I'm happy to pay.

[Anonymous]

SkScotchegg said:

I guess if Oculus was owned by Elon Musk he would have given his ASW software away for free to all his competitors! lol

I guess Carmack was the genius behind ASW then? Hopefully the other HMD manufacturers will catch up eventually.

In fact John Carmack is famous for his approach to free and open source software. He has released many, many free source codes over the years and also spent time assisting other open source groups with their work. Unfortunately he is now paid by Facebook and they own him and his software.

[RuneSR2]

SkScotchegg said:

RuneSR2 said:

SkScotchegg said:

RuneSR2 said:

Umpa_PC said:

So like The Walking Dead: Saints and sinners, massive specced game, i7 GTX1070 16GB - bla bla bla.  With specs like that you would not think it would even start let alone run OK on my system, but it does - it runs very well in fact.  Now sure everything is on low, but the graphics are stunning still. Game play is smooth as silk, no stuttering at all.  Made the hairs on my neck and arms stand up when I was playing it - lol.

Now I realise, they want you to have the best experience and I am sure many people want that - I am happy with an OK experience running on my 'its OK' computer.  I nearly did not bother because of the posted specs, and did not want the hassle of getting a refund - but boy I am glad I took the risk.

Every VR game I have downloaded from the O store has worked great for me.  If your on a low spec machine like me, how do you find performance ?

Devs also normally target 90 fps. Using asw 2.0 you can play just fine using 45 fps in games with native Oculus driver support - like Saints and Sinners. This basically means you can get an awesome experience using hardware that provides 50% of the speed provided by the recommended hardware. Awesome right? But that's thanks to Oculus - using non-Oculus hmds you need those 90 fps. 

I thought other HMD's have their own version of ASW? Or is that not the case?

Or do they have it, but it doesn't work as well for some reason?

Other hmds do have something similar, but it works really bad. Index has motion smoothing and I believe also another kind, but both work horribly. Tried everything in Stormland, but the lagging and reprojections are extremely easy to notice - and ruin the experience. 

Some other dude also complained that Valve had nothing close to asw yet. Asw 2.0 isn't perfect, but it's very close - strafing along a wall I get like perfect 90 fps, because I don't see any imperfections - now try to do the same with the Index when you're below 90 fps in 90 Hz  :#

Using Index I simply need solid 90 fps - or the experience is ruined. Using CV1 45 fps is just fine. So using CV1 I only need to render like 50% of the Index pixels, and I can do just fine with 45 fps. That's close to a 3-4x difference in performance requirements. And that's why - I think - I can play Stormland CV1 ss 2.0 Ultra - while that's a complete no-go using the Index. Maybe when I get a video card 4x the performance of my GTX 1080, but 3080 Ti might only be 2x (and 2080 Ti is 1.7x at best)... That's why I need the CV1 for the extremely demanding games and just got a spare one  B) o:)

Oh I see, I did not know this. Very interesting indeed!

I guess if Oculus was owned by Elon Musk he would have given his ASW software away for free to all his competitors! lol

I guess Carmack was the genius behind ASW then? Hopefully the other HMD manufacturers will catch up eventually.

Actually the ASW heroes don't include Carmack - it's Volga Aksoy and Dean Beeler 😉


Dean Beeler


Volga Aksoy

https://www.oculus.com/blog/introducing-asw-2-point-0-better-accuracy-lower-latency/

https://developer.oculus.com/blog/developer-guide-to-asw-20/

I think ASW 2.0 may be considered one of the most important inventions made by Oculus - sure they are not going to give it away for free - Index with asw 2.0 would be close to the death of my CV1 😉

[Eradicator99]

FWIW, my rig gets much warmer playing games on my screen then it ever has in VR.  

Admittedly, it's a pretty heavy machine but I was under the false impression that VR required power....it does not appear to require anything inordinate but to process all that detail in an immersive environment must be using the 2080 pretty hard, but it doesn't get as warm as a screen game produces...why is that?


erad

i7@8700
rtx2080-8gb
32 Corsair
Aorus wifipro
evo pro 1tb
adata 1tb
corsair cooler & case
Gold std ps
9 sec boot with drives half full