2080TI - getting 30fps inside station in VR

[drkaii]

Hi guys, reporting in. Dipped into our savings (yes I am feeling some buyer's remorse, but my wife is encouraging me) and got a 2080 Ti + i9 9900K, both moderately overclocked.

I have to say I too am disappointed in Elite, not my rig. I tried the two in Space Engine (I am a beta tester), and the difference was night and day. Before I could barely pull 20fps on planets at 200% steam SS, now I can get well over 45fps at 250%. Same with Fallout 4 - before I was pushing it to 180% and it was ok, now I just did a quick test at 250% and it was smooth as butter.

But with Elite, the difference is barely noticeable! I mean it! I am actually not 100% convinced there IS any difference.

Big shame because I spent this huge sum of money mainly for Elite!

I would like to say I tried psefergr's settings, but they are HIGHER than mine. Mind you, I am running a Vive Pro, so fair enough, but let's compare it to my previous settings.

It feels all I can achieve turning shadows from low to ultra and get what I was getting before. Or maybe, I used to bomb about on planets at HMD Image Quality 1.25x, now I can do it at 1.5x and get roughly the same performance (without touching shadows). Don't get me wrong, this is kinda nice (so long as I am not imagining it...), but it is NOT the type of change I am seeing elsewhere.

Elite is pathetically optimised for VR. I think this proves it. I think it might be worth making a thread of warning to all those wanting to upgrade their rig purely for VR - very bad idea if you expect a lot performance bang for your buck.

I would certainly appreciate any tips. I never touched volumetric effects quality and I am seeing in this thread people mentioning it is a performance hog. I've always had AO off. AA off. Shadows low (off and I don't get the nice darkness in my cockpit). I tend to dial down the HMD Image Qual a notch when on planets and stations, up a notch in space. You know, the usual.

I saw a tip about setting some cores to Elite, others to SteamVR, going to try that. Plus the threaded optimisation. Any other tips very welcome.

 

[A D]

@drkaii

What a lovely wife you have. Mine would encourage me to sell the 'puter. Apparently it's the only thing I'm allowed to keep for my man cave if we get divorced.

 

[matemaster]

Hi guys, reporting in. Dipped into our savings (yes I am feeling some buyer's remorse, but my wife is encouraging me) and got a 2080 Ti + i9 9900K, both moderately overclocked.

I have to say I too am disappointed in Elite, not my rig. I tried the two in Space Engine (I am a beta tester), and the difference was night and day. Before I could barely pull 20fps on planets at 200% steam SS, now I can get well over 45fps at 250%. Same with Fallout 4 - before I was pushing it to 180% and it was ok, now I just did a quick test at 250% and it was smooth as butter.

But with Elite, the difference is barely noticeable! I mean it! I am actually not 100% convinced there IS any difference.

Big shame because I spent this huge sum of money mainly for Elite!

I would like to say I tried psefergr's settings, but they are HIGHER than mine. Mind you, I am running a Vive Pro, so fair enough, but let's compare it to my previous settings.

It feels all I can achieve turning shadows from low to ultra and get what I was getting before. Or maybe, I used to bomb about on planets at HMD Image Quality 1.25x, now I can do it at 1.5x and get roughly the same performance (without touching shadows). Don't get me wrong, this is kinda nice (so long as I am not imagining it...), but it is NOT the type of change I am seeing elsewhere.

Elite is pathetically optimised for VR. I think this proves it. I think it might be worth making a thread of warning to all those wanting to upgrade their rig purely for VR - very bad idea if you expect a lot performance bang for your buck.

I would certainly appreciate any tips. I never touched volumetric effects quality and I am seeing in this thread people mentioning it is a performance hog. I've always had AO off. AA off. Shadows low (off and I don't get the nice darkness in my cockpit). I tend to dial down the HMD Image Qual a notch when on planets and stations, up a notch in space. You know, the usual.

I saw a tip about setting some cores to Elite, others to SteamVR, going to try that. Plus the threaded optimisation. Any other tips very welcome.

Its not very clear for me if the biggest issue for you is the FPS or image quality. If its image quality, you need VR with higher native resolution. Pimax 8K would be the best for your high performance rig.
I use pimax 4K which is native 1280x1440 per eye, set to max render quality, steam VR SS to 20% and the result is around 2160x2640 per eye (4320x2640 for both eyes).
SS in game 1, HMD image quality also 1. When I change HMD image quality to 1.25 my FPS goes down by 15 (from 60 to 45) and I can barely notice any improvement in image quality.

So I would say that your problem is not your PC hardware nor ED optimization but you hit limits of your VR where any negligible improvement in image quality comes at the huge cost of lost FPS.

EDIT:
The resolution is around 2160x2640 per eye

 

[drkaii]

Its not very clear for me if the biggest issue for you is the FPS or image quality. If its image quality, you need VR with higher native resolution. Pimax 8K would be the best for your high performance rig.
I use pimax 4K which is native 1280x1440 per eye, set to max render quality, steam VR SS to 20% and the result is around 2160x2840 per eye (4320x2840 for both eyes).
SS in game 1, HMD image quality also 1. When I change HMD image quality to 1.25 my FPS goes down by 15 (from 60 to 45) and I can barely notice any improvement in image quality.

So I would say that your problem is not your PC hardware nor ED optimization but you hit limits of your VR where any negligible improvement in image quality comes at the huge cost of lost FPS.

That may be in part true, but my main issue, to cut to the chase is this:

Space Engine improvement ~ 2.5x
Fallout 4 improvement ~ 2x
Elite improvement ~ 1.3x

 

[zarrazee]

That may be in part true, but my main issue, to cut to the chase is this:

Space Engine improvement ~ 2.5x
Fallout 4 improvement ~ 2x
Elite improvement ~ 1.3x

Sorry to hear this. It sucks.
Hopefully newer nvidia drivers may improve things for you. I was on the fence re. 2080 Ti. Your news, for now, has pushed me off and I'm sticking with my GTX 1070 for a bit.

 

[dape]

With these settings on a GTX 1080ti it's almost perfect



Remember to use ctrl+f to see framerate and crtl+numpad1 to disable the stupid asw option (in game)

i am stuck to 45FPS running those settings on a 1080TI

 

[psefergr]

i am stuck to 45FPS running those settings on a 1080TI

My rig has 32gb of ram.Maybe it's essential in VR i don't know for sure

 

[drkaii]

Hi guys, reporting in. Dipped into our savings (yes I am feeling some buyer's remorse, but my wife is encouraging me) and got a 2080 Ti + i9 9900K, both moderately overclocked.

I have to say I too am disappointed in Elite, not my rig. I tried the two in Space Engine (I am a beta tester), and the difference was night and day. Before I could barely pull 20fps on planets at 200% steam SS, now I can get well over 45fps at 250%. Same with Fallout 4 - before I was pushing it to 180% and it was ok, now I just did a quick test at 250% and it was smooth as butter.

But with Elite, the difference is barely noticeable! I mean it! I am actually not 100% convinced there IS any difference.

Big shame because I spent this huge sum of money mainly for Elite!

I would like to say I tried psefergr's settings, but they are HIGHER than mine. Mind you, I am running a Vive Pro, so fair enough, but let's compare it to my previous settings.

It feels all I can achieve turning shadows from low to ultra and get what I was getting before. Or maybe, I used to bomb about on planets at HMD Image Quality 1.25x, now I can do it at 1.5x and get roughly the same performance (without touching shadows). Don't get me wrong, this is kinda nice (so long as I am not imagining it...), but it is NOT the type of change I am seeing elsewhere.

Elite is pathetically optimised for VR. I think this proves it. I think it might be worth making a thread of warning to all those wanting to upgrade their rig purely for VR - very bad idea if you expect a lot performance bang for your buck.

I would certainly appreciate any tips. I never touched volumetric effects quality and I am seeing in this thread people mentioning it is a performance hog. I've always had AO off. AA off. Shadows low (off and I don't get the nice darkness in my cockpit). I tend to dial down the HMD Image Qual a notch when on planets and stations, up a notch in space. You know, the usual.

I saw a tip about setting some cores to Elite, others to SteamVR, going to try that. Plus the threaded optimisation. Any other tips very welcome.

Problem FIXED: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...mance-Improvment-for-ED?p=7213717#post7213717

 

[rhiz]

I’ve recently upgraded to an RTX 2080 on an i7 7700k with 16gb, and it’s performing well with these kind of settings. Maybe the bottleneck is elsewhere on your system.

 

[rhiz]

With regard to the 20xx series card - yeah, they're a little lackluster, but my Gigabyte RTX 2080 was around the same price or actually cheaper than most of the new 1080tis that I was looking at (in the UK at least). It varies between games/apps, but its more or less equivalent to a 1080ti, sometimes a little faster, sometimes a little slower. The 20xx series tends to pull ahead at 4k resolution from what I've read, and I've also read reports that suggest better VR performance. Certainly not worth the upgrade if your coming from a high-end 10xx series card, but possibly the best option if you're upgrading from a much lesser gpu.

 

[Gortron]

With regard to the 20xx series card - yeah, they're a little lackluster, but my Gigabyte RTX 2080 was around the same price or actually cheaper than most of the new 1080tis that I was looking at (in the UK at least). It varies between games/apps, but its more or less equivalent to a 1080ti, sometimes a little faster, sometimes a little slower. The 20xx series tends to pull ahead at 4k resolution from what I've read, and I've also read reports that suggest better VR performance. Certainly not worth the upgrade if your coming from a high-end 10xx series card, but possibly the best option if you're upgrading from a much lesser gpu.

Nvidia effectively nudged there entire GPU line up across one to hide that all they had really done is spent loads of R&D on new technology that may or may not catch on. The current users that want loads of power are us VR lot and the prices of the 10XX vs 20XX were deliberately manipulated to sell old stock (since there was no real difference). I'm hoping AMD do a comeback like they did with RYZEN and we all get to watch as Nvidia lurch about aimlessly with overpriced products that make no sense

 

[rhiz]

Nvidia effectively nudged there entire GPU line up across one to hide that all they had really done is spent loads of R&D on new technology that may or may not catch on. The current users that want loads of power are us VR lot and the prices of the 10XX vs 20XX were deliberately manipulated to sell old stock (since there was no real difference). I'm hoping AMD do a comeback like they did with RYZEN and we all get to watch as Nvidia lurch about aimlessly with overpriced products that make no sense

Yes, I don’t disagree. I was in the market for a 1080 ti anyway but it was late in the day, so I waited to see what the new cards brought. As I said, the EVGA 1080ti that I was looking at was moderately more expensive than my RTX at the time, so it made sense. I’m very pleased with it overall. Yeah, the new Ryzen cpus are great value and I'm a bit peeved that there's no real upgrade path for my 7700K socket. Always the way with computing though - you either build or wait forever for the next best thing, which is constantly being superseded.

@ OP – I’ve be monitoring my FPS with the RTX 2080 and I’m getting a solid 90fps inside stations and on planets at Ultra/High settings and a HMD quality value of 2.0, so you shouldn’t be having issues with a Ti. My games run from a mechanical drive as well, not an SSD (I reserve that for my productivity apps). The thing with VR is that it makes demands of virtually every aspect of your PC. I’ve even had third-party background services cause major issues with my Rift before now. It might be worth running some benchmark/stress testing and DPC latency apps – see if you can isolate the issue. Unless you have a dud, it’s not going to be the GPU.

 

[Putok]

Hi guys, reporting in. Dipped into our savings (yes I am feeling some buyer's remorse, but my wife is encouraging me) and got a 2080 Ti + i9 9900K, both moderately overclocked.

I have to say I too am disappointed in Elite, not my rig. I tried the two in Space Engine (I am a beta tester), and the difference was night and day. Before I could barely pull 20fps on planets at 200% steam SS, now I can get well over 45fps at 250%. Same with Fallout 4 - before I was pushing it to 180% and it was ok, now I just did a quick test at 250% and it was smooth as butter.

But with Elite, the difference is barely noticeable! I mean it! I am actually not 100% convinced there IS any difference.

Big shame because I spent this huge sum of money mainly for Elite!

I would like to say I tried psefergr's settings, but they are HIGHER than mine. Mind you, I am running a Vive Pro, so fair enough, but let's compare it to my previous settings.

It feels all I can achieve turning shadows from low to ultra and get what I was getting before. Or maybe, I used to bomb about on planets at HMD Image Quality 1.25x, now I can do it at 1.5x and get roughly the same performance (without touching shadows). Don't get me wrong, this is kinda nice (so long as I am not imagining it...), but it is NOT the type of change I am seeing elsewhere.

Elite is pathetically optimised for VR. I think this proves it. I think it might be worth making a thread of warning to all those wanting to upgrade their rig purely for VR - very bad idea if you expect a lot performance bang for your buck.

I would certainly appreciate any tips. I never touched volumetric effects quality and I am seeing in this thread people mentioning it is a performance hog. I've always had AO off. AA off. Shadows low (off and I don't get the nice darkness in my cockpit). I tend to dial down the HMD Image Qual a notch when on planets and stations, up a notch in space. You know, the usual.

I saw a tip about setting some cores to Elite, others to SteamVR, going to try that. Plus the threaded optimisation. Any other tips very welcome.

Similar experience. Just picked up a Vive Pro and a 2080ti as an XMas present for myself. I'm shocked by how badly ED performs relative to everything else I've tried. Even OCed to 2k+, I cannot get 90FPS without turning a lot of settings pretty far down. ED isn't the only reason for the upgrade, but it's part of it.

So far I've been able to easily hit 90FPS in every other VR game I've tried, and I can run every flat game I've tried (including ED, the SRV is far too nauseating for VR, haha) with max settings and 120FPS @3440x1440 (nearly double what I was getting with an OCed 1080 in many cases), so I'm still overall very pleased with the purchase, but I'm a bit disappointed with FDev.

 

[dunno]

I have great Clarity with my CV1, also butter smooth : 1080Ti and 7700k stock and OCl'd @4.8

In Elite;
HMD = 2
SS = 0.5
SMAA
Shadows off, jet cones min, Blur off, Ambient occlusion Med.
All other settings ultra/Max
Terrain Work slider > max to the Left.

THEN with Oculus Debug tool, which must be opened before Oculus main application and remain open for session;
Set Pixel Per Display Override to 1.9 (max is 2.0)
ASW = Auto

And bingo, perfect clarity smooth as butter. If you want to see FPS and GPU performance in game set Oculus HUD overlay in Oculus debug tool.

 

[He$$eeTant]

It seems to me that for every, “buttery smooth”, there is a “disappointment” post. Equally there seems no commonality between specs, just as likely to see disappointment for high end rig and “buttery smooth” for something far older. Makes it hard to commit. Like most for me Elite is really the only game of interest and space is intriguing so I would like to see it in its fullest glory - ultra settings @ 90fps everywhere. I love VR it’s amazing, flat screen seems so limiting and old school but VR also has a long way to go. Samsung Plus, Pixmax 5k, Vive Pro all seem great ideas but it seems from those with far more knowledge than I do not think the program - Elite Dangerous - is anywhere near optimised for these platforms. Cudos to those who spent their hard earned on arriving at this point and sharing it with us. My journey is just starting, I can see the potential - no one with an HMD can miss it - with my old oculus rift but it does not seem worth chasing 5-10 frames per second more with high end kit vs older equipment until the platform is written to fully utilise the available systems. Fully understand the supply and demand market forces but hope that the team behind ED step up.

 

[dape]

I’ve recently upgraded to an RTX 2080 on an i7 7700k with 16gb, and it’s performing well with these kind of settings. Maybe the bottleneck is elsewhere on your system.

SS 1.5 plus HMD 2.0. It is impossible to get 90 FPS. Make sure those values are set in game and try again

 

[rhiz]

SS 1.5 plus HMD 2.0. It is impossible to get 90 FPS. Make sure those values are set in game and try again

Where/how would I check that? All of the other changes that I made via EDProfiler took effect - unless steam is overriding those particular settings. I've only just picked up the RTX and was on a 1060 6gb previously at stock settings. It certainly looks better than before.

 

[rhiz]

SS 1.5 plus HMD 2.0. It is impossible to get 90 FPS. Make sure those values are set in game and try again

Yes, my bad. I snapped the wrong profile - I'm using the same as above but with SS @ 1.25. Frame-rate oscillates between 87.2 and 90 fps in stations.