VR SLI / Liquid VR may never be supported in ED

simphe · Jan 20, 2016

From the Answers for the Devs thread 5 days ago:

"Will ED support Nvidia VR SLI where each GPU renders each display and/or AMD Liquid VR for AMD users?

This hasn’t been decided yet."

Here's the link:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=224307

I don't know if this has been mentioned before in the VR subforum but is anyone else worried about this? I (apparently wrongly) assumed that when FD implement 1.0 support for the OR that the cool 'one card per eye' stuff will be be ready to go. I don't see a single card at present as being quite good enough to run even the DK2 at 75 fps (I have 2x 980 except running on single as my stomach can't cope with the latency) and I have most things on medium settings.

When everything's running at 90fps I don't think today's hardware will be able to cope on high graphics settings without SLI unless the graphics settings are cranked down. If FD decide not to implement VR SLI or the AMD equivalent then I think many VR players, who are more likely to have already invested in SLI, will be seriously disappointed...

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Any clarification from the devs would be much appreciated - please tell me I got the wrong end of the stick!

prasak · Jan 20, 2016

I think the problem is, that ED was released before the VR guys really knew, how they are going to handle their stuff. For this reason, I can imagine the support from FD may be very difficult thing to do. My solution will be buying just a single new card, when pascal comes out and hoping it will be enought to push ED.

simphe · Jan 20, 2016

Yes that's the only choice we've got I guess. Every time I've ever had an SLI system I've always thought 'this is just too much trouble, I'm not going to bother in the future'. I should've learned from my previous mistakes. Those new Pascal cards had better be pretty beefy.... still there's a chance that FDev might still implement VR SLI. It doesn't seem like anyone's all that bothered about it here though so if they don't it's no surprise.

Oheck · Jan 20, 2016

I think they would be incredibly foolish not to make an effort to support VR SLI.

ghcannon · Jan 20, 2016

You guys need to understand that they're just taking a safe route when it comes to answering questions like these.
FD will certainly make the effort to support it and eventually will.

I doubt it will be at VR launch date but I'm hoping to be surprised.

Beavis Tingleball · Jan 21, 2016

ghcannon said:
You guys need to understand that they're just taking a safe route when it comes to answering questions like these.
FD will certainly make the effort to support it and eventually will.

I doubt it will be at VR launch date but I'm hoping to be surprised.

I'm leaning towards that conclusion myself..I really really really really really really hope FD pulls through for us.

RiftFlyer · Jan 21, 2016

simphe said:
I don't know if this has been mentioned before in the VR subforum but is anyone else worried about this? I (apparently wrongly) assumed that when FD implement 1.0 support for the OR that the cool 'one card per eye' stuff will be be ready to go.

Oculus have stated many times the rift doesn't support sli. 1.0 runtime does offer other benefits which will greatly aid performance such as asynchronous timewarp.

VRsli (Part of gameworksVR) is an Nvidia API which needs to be implemented by individual developers for their own engines. It has nothing to do with the Oculus runtime. In my view priority has to be to get direct mode working for both Vive and Rift before steamVR drops support for extended mode.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

ghcannon said:
You guys need to understand that they're just taking a safe route when it comes to answering questions like these.
FD will certainly make the effort to support it and eventually will.

I doubt it will be at VR launch date but I'm hoping to be surprised.

I hope so. Braben appeared to have not even heard of VRsli when I listened to him before Christmas on a live stream.

Kevris · Jan 22, 2016

Yeah it probably won't, it's a vendor-specific API that would clearly put the software people into one hardware camp AKA: not a good idea. Kinda like PhysX was.

It's probably not going to matter, either. By the time April rolls around, Pascal and it's purported speed increases will be available. Something tells me the majority of people who are willing to shell out the money for a VR headset are the kinds of people who are willing to shell out the same (and more) money for the hardware to drive said headset.

Mazhurg · Jan 22, 2016

Kevris said:
Yeah it probably won't, it's a vendor-specific API that would clearly put the software people into one hardware camp AKA: not a good idea. Kinda like PhysX was.

It's probably not going to matter, either. By the time April rolls around, Pascal and it's purported speed increases will be available. Something tells me the majority of people who are willing to shell out the money for a VR headset are the kinds of people who are willing to shell out the same (and more) money for the hardware to drive said headset.

You do know that both Nvidia and AMD have their multi-gpu VR APIs

Yes, it's the developers responsibility to use the APIs, but like DX12 the sheer requirements and demand for performance for mid (e.g. common) hardware will mean that they will be required to access a broader market.

Whether Fdev want that market when it move en masse to VR is up to them however.

Jaeger · Jan 22, 2016

Oheck said:
I think they would be incredibly foolish not to make an effort to support VR SLI.

I wholeheartedly agree, but FDevs track record is in making a cash cow for profit. Not so much Bleeding edge development / game by gamers for gamers.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Mazhurg said:
You do know that both Nvidia and AMD have their multi-gpu VR APIs

Yes, it's the developers responsibility to use the APIs, but like DX12 the sheer requirements and demand for performance for mid (e.g. common) hardware will mean that they will be required to access a broader market.

Whether Fdev want that market when it move en masse to VR is up to them however.

The only significant extra demand DX12 makes more than DX11 is Win10. It artificial built in obsolescence.

Mazhurg · Jan 22, 2016

Look at the forest, not the trees.

simphe · Jan 22, 2016

RiftFlyer said:
Oculus have stated many times the rift doesn't support sli. 1.0 runtime does offer other benefits which will greatly aid performance such as asynchronous timewarp.

VRsli (Part of gameworksVR) is an Nvidia API which needs to be implemented by individual developers for their own engines. It has nothing to do with the Oculus runtime. In my view priority has to be to get direct mode working for both Vive and Rift before steamVR drops support for extended mode.

Thanks for the info. Yes I agree that the priority should be direct mode. The extra effort for the VR SLI stuff on top of the much needed Oculus 1.0 driver work is the deciding factor in this from the sounds of things then. I hope FD give us some kind of update soon...

If anyone wants to buy a GTX 980 (MSI factory overclocked) which has languished unused in my PC for a 14 months, PM me (I'm in Cardiff, UK btw).

ranix · Jan 22, 2016

nothing supports VR SLI because it doesn't exist. If I worked for Frontier I would give the same answer. You shouldn't be making promises about other companies' software. Frontier has little control over VR SLI.

CMDR Evolution · Mar 11, 2016

Quote from newsletter 115 (11/03)
"Frontier and Elite Dangerous are at the forefront of VR"
.
This was in a section talking about their support for oculus. I'm interested in vr sli support for the vive as I've got it on pre-order solely to play ED. Either way, if Frontier are at the forefront of VR, this means we will have support for Vr sli, ready for when the headsets arrive. I eagerly look forward to official news. What are other people's views please?

simphe · Mar 12, 2016

I wouldn't assume that means that VR SLI will be supported from that. I've just removed my second 980 and it's now listed on eBay. The reason being that the safer option in my view is to wait for Pascal cards for frame rate boosts rather than take the SLI route. There are less complications and increased game compatibility for the extra performance.

Sanderson · Mar 12, 2016

It's going to take a year or two (at least) for developers to get a handle on the VR market not to mention GPU companies. We are at the commercial side forefront, so I just glad ED is supporting VR at all. My SLI 770's would sure like SLI ED but, I'm not holding my breath.

ranix · Mar 12, 2016

Does Nvidia even have VR SLI yet? I haven't heard anything new about it yet this year.

Sanderson · Mar 12, 2016

ranix said:
Does Nvidia even have VR SLI yet? I haven't heard anything new about it yet this year.

Not really. They realized they wouldn't sell as many new GPUs this summer if they released it for the current generation of GPUs.

Adamfox84 · Mar 12, 2016

They do support it already through nvidia game works vr SLI. But the game devs would have to support it. I'd really like to get some sort of response on if frontier will support SLI for VR now or in the future as my rig would run VR nicely if they do, if not I'll need to shell out for Pascal

rich_hard1 · Mar 12, 2016

I remember when MultiGPU actually worked early in dk2 development. I had to have 4x1080p instances of the VR output for a steady rate of FPS, only worked in extended mode too. The market for SLI and XFire is so niche they won't turn it back on due to GPU innefficency.