DK2 frame rates...

SlackR

Banned
SlackR
A lot of people are saying that the full DK2 experience requires a frame rate of no less than 75 fps. Elite dangerous is pretty much the the only game I am interested in and I want it to be right... My DK1 runs fine on high settings on a gtx 780m (except for the ringed planets) but there is no way I'm gonna get 75 fps as standard when I pair it with a DK2. So how extreme will we need to go to get this beta running smoothly with the new rift?

Id love to hear your thoughts and especially the devs as they have already been running the beta build on a DK2...

My guess is a 780ti desktop should do it, but obviously putting that kind of gaming rig together wont be cheap...

Thanks

slackR
 

VR Mr Teatime

VR Mr Teatime
Been wondering this myself - Rift is a must for me and I'm not sure my GTX680 will cut it any more, so will also likely go for a 780Ti even though the wallet will be shaking afterwards.
 

Adam Lusardi

A
I'm hoping FD and forum members will help us to get the best from the DK2, but yes some upgrade may be need (in my case) lets see what happens in optimisation.
 

SlackR

Banned
SlackR
As I only have the gaming laptop at the moment I am looking at shelling out at least 1600£ to get hold of a desktop system running a 780 ti, so need to be sure before going ahead...
 

Obsidian Ant

Obsidian Ant
Give me a bit of time, and I will post some fps results from my DK1 with the resolution set to 1080p, and everything set to max.

This is one my GTX 780 - so it will give you an idea of what you need.
 

SlackR

Banned
SlackR
That's my fear...
If I need to I will, but a say so from the devs at this point would be really helpful as we know they have been using the Dk2 for a while now.
 

Amadeus

A
It will be.
I'm not buying another card until they're tailored for VR.
Just like when they were first aimed at 3d graphics.

Until then, just going to turn down the fluff to keep a good frame rate.
Can lose a bit of AA or lens flares.
 

JimmyC

J
I get the impression that graphics cards aren't getting better they're just getting more expensive. £200 cards today are just slight tweaks of the £200 cards from 2 years ago with a different name. The new stuff is just coming in at higher price points instead of replacing the traditional £3-400 top end stuff.

I'm hoping 4k and VR will shake the market up a bit.
 

Obsidian Ant

Obsidian Ant
SlackR said:
Thanks for this, but wont the DK2 be more demanding?
Click to expand...

The DK2 shouldn't be any more demanding, because I set my resolution to 1080p and turn V-Sync off. So it will maximise the performance of my card. It's just that the DK1 won't actually be able to display this resolution, nor show anything higher than 60fps.

However it will still show what my PC is capable of, and therefore show what you might need to run a DK2.
 

KING5TON

KING5TON
If you wanted to test how your PC might perform you could try running the game at 1080p with side by side 3D on and Vsync off.

I've tried it and with a few setting tweaked get a frame rate that hovers at 81 but occasionally drops to 70.

No doubt FD will improve the performance of E: D as we progress.

I don't believe the Rift overhead is that much for it to be able to do the image warping and stuff.

I believe the optimum requirements for the best experience in the Rift is a high frame rate up to the maximum refresh rate of the DK2 which is 75hz (it also supports 72 and 60hz). At a higher refresh rate/FPS the motion in game will be smoother and a smoother VR experience will look good and reduce nausea. There is a new technique on the DK2 called low persistence which reduces/removes smearing that also reduces nausea which is also dependent on a high frame rate. Both these things combine to increase what's called a sense of presence which is basically tricking the brain to make you feel like you are actually there.

This video pretty much covers it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlXrjTh7vHc#t=117

You will be able to run a rift at lower settings and still have a good experience, just not the best.
Turning down game settings will hopefully allow those without an top end cards to run the rift at it's best.

You can pickup a 280x which is the same as my 7970 for £190 so not that expensive to upgrade if you want to. One thing I will say is that the CV1 is suggested to have a higher resolution than DK2 (maybe 1440p) and higher framerate!
I personally would put off upgrading till it's out and newer GPUs are out with hopefully enough graphical Umph to power it.
 
Last edited:

Obsidian Ant

Obsidian Ant
Here's some results. My spec is as follows:

i5 2500k
GTX 780
8gb RAM

Elite: Dangerous settings:

Resolution - 1080p
Oculus Rift - Enabled
Graphic Settings - High Defaults


Performance:

Rings / Asteroids - 32fps
Supercruise (near planets) - 26 - 30fps
Station Approach - 38fps
Inside Station - 24fps



So very demanding over all - far more demanding than any other game that I have played on.

Whilst the game is currently unoptimized, and I hope it improves a lot later, with things the way they are right now - the game is unplayable on max settings on the Rift with these frame rates (due to the reasons Kingston mentions above).

I will post back my fps performance with my usual graphical settings.
 

KING5TON

KING5TON
Granite said:
Here's some results. My spec is as follows:

i5 2500k
GTX 780
8gb RAM

Elite: Dangerous settings:

Resolution - 1080p
Oculus Rift - Enabled
Graphic Settings - High Defaults


Performance:

Rings / Asteroids - 32fps
Supercruise (near planets) - 26 - 30fps
Station Approach - 38fps
Inside Station - 24fps



So very demanding over all - far more demanding than any other game that I have played on.

Whilst the game is currently unoptimized, and I hope it improves a lot later, with things the way they are right now - the game is unplayable on max settings on the Rift with these frame rates.

I will post back my fps performance with my usual graphical settings.
Click to expand...

I think the most intestive GPU settings will be Shadows, AA and AO.
Try lowering the all settings to Low, try the game and check the FPS. Raise one option and retest. Repeat this process for different options.
You'll see that some things hardly decrease the FPS while some decrease it a lot more.
Also some things don't make that much of a difference visually IMO. I've got pictures of the game in High and Low and there's not a massive amount of difference (shadow difference is most noticeable to me)
 

Obsidian Ant

Obsidian Ant
KING5TON said:
I think the most intestive GPU settings will be Shadows, AA and AO.
Try lowering the all settings to Low, try the game and check the FPS. Raise one option and retest. Repeat this process for different options.
You'll see that some things hardly decrease the FPS while some decrease it a lot more.
Also some things don't make that much of a difference visually IMO. I've got pictures of the game in High and Low and there's not a massive amount of difference (shadow difference is most noticeable to me)
Click to expand...

Yeah - with the settings reduced you really don't notice it on the DK1 due to the low resolution. This maybe different on the DK2 and CV1 I don't know.

But at the end of the day, VR can be so immersive that even plain coloured blocks can give a huge sense of presence so long as the fps is high and the latency is low.
 

KING5TON

KING5TON
I run the game at 1440p and can't tell that much of a difference between low and high so it's not really a low res thing.

As with pretty much everything on the PC it's a bit of a balancing act with new games and new hardware. Unless you're playing old or really simple games that run easily you always have to tweak settings to get the best picture at the best performance.
 

KING5TON

KING5TON
Adam Lusardi said:
Its reading the text I'm worried about......difficult enough in HD on a TV.
Click to expand...

Distance comes into play on a TV though, It's much easier to read text on a smaller 1080p monitor relatively close than it is to on a TV from further away in my experience.
The rift is also not quite 1080p in the same way as a TV or monitor is.
It's 960x1080 pixels per eye rather that 1920x1080 for both eyes so it does have a lower resolution. Screen door effect (SDE) will also come into play with text.

Here's an OR simulator to see the ability to read text at the different resolutions with SDE http://vr.mkeblx.net/oculus-sim/

Also shows the difference between low persistence on and off.
There will be a difference between what you see there and the DK2 as the DK2 has pentile sub pixel arrangement which will mean the SDE is diamond shaped rather than square (as with the DK1)
 

Adam Lusardi

A
yes looked at that demo before. I know what you mean re HD TV and my old eyes. I'm hope FD will be taking this into account. I just remember 800x600 and knew modern game standard was HD one reason I didn't KS rift other reason all cash going to KS ED. So looking forward to DK2
 

KING5TON

KING5TON
This is a good video about the new features that are in the DK2.
They do mention high frames rates being needed for low persistence as lower frame rates will mean you see flicker (9:10).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpNQHNkJY1g

The Tested Rift videos are always good.
They're balanced and informative as they know what they're talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom