Frontier, would YOU please publish optimum settings for VR capable cards?

[FatzDomingo]

I think it would not be presumptuous to assume that FD have tested ED on available VR ready cards. Since we’re talking about Not a lot of cards, would FD publish settings?

im on an ASUS GTX 1070 - I would love to know what FD tested this card at and how to get the best out of it.

They could eventually work their way through cards for VR and even give “approved” status for decent running cards.

i feel like I’m chasing the Dragon, and the Dragon is FD Tech bods who test the systems.

 

[TorTorden_VR]

They have,

Ïn the graphics options you have settings for "VR ULTRA, VR HIGH, VR MEDIUM, VR LOW".

Pick one, tweak if needed.

A 1070, I would perhaps start at VR Medium.

 

[Heater]

I think it would not be presumptuous to assume that FD have tested ED on available VR ready cards. Since we’re talking about Not a lot of cards, would FD publish settings?

im on an ASUS GTX 1070 - I would love to know what FD tested this card at and how to get the best out of it.

They could eventually work their way through cards for VR and even give “approved” status for decent running cards.

i feel like I’m chasing the Dragon, and the Dragon is FD Tech bods who test the systems.

Problem with this is that everyone has a different opinion of what is "optimum" and as stated they are already listed in the game. plus it will depend on a lot of things on your end, i.e. system config, drivers, task running (this list goes on and on) My suggestion is to pick one of the base settings and work from there, and i would review this thread.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...t-DK2-CV1-Vive-VR-Experience-Guide-Compendium

 

[Pville_Piper]

Problem with this is that everyone has a different opinion of what is "optimum"

Exactly... For instance: I don't mind when the ASW kicks in as long as it stays in and doesn't keep switching back and forth. So with that in mind, I "optimized" my settings so that I can maintain a steady 45 FPS when on the surface of planets and in stations. I run everything as high as it will go except for Shadows (OFF), AA (none), SS (1.0), AO (OFF), HMD Quality (1.0) Galaxy map (LOW) and Terrain Sampler Quality (Medium).

For some this would be a vomit fest but for me, I have no issues and the graphics are decent.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

They have,

Ïn the graphics options you have settings for "VR ULTRA, VR HIGH, VR MEDIUM, VR LOW".

Pick one, tweak if needed.

A 1070, I would perhaps start at VR Medium.

i have a gtx 980 and am halfway between vr medium and high, i reckon a 1070 should be ok for high so long as he is not doing super sampling elsewhere.

 

[TorTorden_VR]

i have a gtx 980 and am halfway between vr medium and high, i reckon a 1070 should be ok for high so long as he is not doing super sampling elsewhere.

Personal preferences of course, but when I was on the 980ti, which is mostly comparable to a 1070(ti) I landed on settings just around VR medium for focus of still maintaining 90fps as much as possible.

 

[dmulligan]

The main problem is there is no way to reliably and deterministically gauge performance differences between settings. If we only could replay a saved sequence or some other way to run a benchmark.

 

[Heater]

Here are my "optimal" settings on my system running a 1080ti, and it's very smooth across the board.

 

[Herbrand]

Graphical settings are a tradeoff between which effects you like the most and how much reprojection tolerance you have. There is no such thing as "optimum".

 

[Karl Agathon]

Here are my "optimal" settings on my system running a 1080ti, and it's very smooth across the board.
https://i.imgur.com/etKiiAw.jpg

Can you consistently keep up 90fps on planets, engineer bases and stations?

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Personal preferences of course, but when I was on the 980ti, which is mostly comparable to a 1070(ti) I landed on settings just around VR medium for focus of still maintaining 90fps as much as possible.

I'm surprised. My AMD fury is mainly on medium and some high settings with a few on low. I would have thought the 980ti and the 1070 would be better then my AMD Fury card.

 

[Darkfyre99]

I'm surprised. My AMD fury is mainly on medium and some high settings with a few on low. I would have thought the 980ti and the 1070 would be better then my AMD Fury card.

It really depends upon your VR tolerance. I’ve got a 980 (no TI), and my VR tolerance is high enough that my settings are between VR medium and High.

 

[Heater]

Can you consistently keep up 90fps on planets, engineer bases and stations?

For the most part, yes looking at the frame rates (in the logs) there are time when it drops to 50-60 But to be honest i do not notice it.

 

[R0land]

I tend to agree with you. Rather than telling you why they can't (because they obviously can) I'll suggest how they might do it. Whether it is viable to do so vs what else they could be doing is a question I can't answer.

First thing people raised is "what is optimum". Great point. However, it is entirely possible to set a more specific target. For example, many individuals mentioned ASW. A reasonable testable value would be % time in ASW. I would suggest you could give settings for minimal ASW (0 - 25%?), some ASW (25 - 75%?), and frequent ASW (75 - 100%). The actual values are irrelevant but the fact that they can be chosen, tested, and published are what is important.

Second, there is a great amount of variance in PC's from drivers, config, etc. However, this hasn't stopped anyone from publishing minimum requirements, recommended requirements, and from thousands of sites running tests on hardware and games and publishing them to the internet over the years. They would simply need to state the system components they are using to give people an idea of what their system is like in relation to it. (Swapping out graphics cards obviously.)

Third, could you just pick a setting and tweak it from there? Sure you could but you are asking if they could do it as they have already done testing. So this statement is irrelevant to what you asked.

Finally, while they certainly COULD test graphics cards and tell us their recommended settings or give us some parameters, do they have the time and money to do it? I can't answer that one. I know you have stated that they have already done testing. That makes is seem like publishing the information would be free. However, we don't know if they were testing and recording the type of information that would be relevant to this discussion. It's quite possible that they would have to a completely different set of tests all over again to get what we need.

It might be better to let them keep coding and instead pick a setting and tweak it ourselves. Or perhaps we as a community could collect and publish the results on our systems to help each other out which I have seen in this thread.

Lots of possibilities here and I think your question is a reasonable one.

 

[dogbite]

It's not like a well worded Google search wouldn't give you a starting point, but much is personal taste even on similar hardware. I run similar setting to Heater with a couple of things lower or off and an HMD of 1.75. As an explorer I have less demands on fps when compared to those who find themselves in heated online conflicts. How you play has a lot to do with settings. The best thing to do is what we all do and compare notes with similar rigs and use that as a staring point and tweak to your personal likes and uses.

 

[Karl Agathon]

For the most part, yes looking at the frame rates (in the logs) there are time when it drops to 50-60 But to be honest i do not notice it.

Thanks! I have somewhat similar settings I have come up with that most of the time keep 90fps or close enough. Only diff is HMD is 1.5, AA is FXAA, Shaddows medium, Bloom medium, DOF medium, all else on ultra. I've turned off ASW since it somehow bothers me more than the actual skipping I get when stuff gets below 90.

Also, although I haven't taken the time to OC, I noticed I was getting frequent, regular fps drops of about 3-5 fps every 10-20 seconds which I tracked down to thermal throttling (for a long time I thought I had high DPC latency, because that's what it felt like). I now set the fan speed to 75% manually when I play, no more drops, card stays at 75C (where previously it would vary between 78-81C).

Still tweaking it. Some engineering bases do seem to tax the 1080ti more than others though.