VR specs for Horizons

[FireStream]

Okay, guys. Here we are:

We are delighted to be able to announce the minimum VR specs for Elite Dangerous. If you have access to the Elite Dangerous: Horizons beta, you can play it with VR now.

Minimum Spec for VR:
• OS: Windows 7/8/10 64 bit
• Processor: Intel Core i7-3770K Quad Core CPU or better / AMD FX 4350 Quad Core CPU or better
• Memory: 16 GB RAM
• Graphics: Nvidia GTX 980 with 4GB or better
• Network: Broadband Internet Connection
• Hard Drive: 8 GB available space

Is it serious? I just bought a new 970 to reduce judder and now it's for nothing? Please, tell me I'm wrong. It's just ridiculous.

 

[simphe]

Given that people on the forums have been saying the Horizons beta works fine for them with a 970 this surprises me! Also, I've heard there isn't much difference between the 970 and 980. I've only got 8Gb RAM on my system and it works fine (although that was before the beta 3 judder issue) so I'd take it with a pinch of salt. This looks like 'recommended' system requirements rather than a minimum to me in terms of the spec!

 

[Avago Earo]

Okay, guys. Here we are:



Is it serious? I just bought a new 970 to reduce judder and now it's for nothing? Please, tell me I'm wrong. It's just ridiculous.

Same here. Upgraded to a 970 a few months back and now I read the specs for VR. I can't afford a 980 even if I do manage to save for a VR Head Set. My PC with the 970 now meets Oculus' CV 1 requirements but not for ED.

 

[Scrat]

Given that people on the forums have been saying the Horizons beta works fine for them with a 970 this surprises me! Also, I've heard there isn't much difference between the 970 and 980. I've only got 8Gb RAM on my system and it works fine (although that was before the beta 3 judder issue) so I'd take it with a pinch of salt. This looks like 'recommended' system requirements rather than a minimum to me in terms of the spec!

With Vive and consumer Rift you need to get 90 FPS with a higher resolution than for the DK2.

 

[simphe]

See this thread (stickied):

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=207248

Looks like they're talking about the release versions rather than the DK2 which could explain the high requirements.

Edit -
(thanks Scrat - ninja'd)

 

[callezetter]

It really sucks that they go over the Oculus spec like that. But i think the margin for performance drops is just too small, to make every 970 system work good enough.

Even with DK2 970 was right above "good enough" but with the added 90fps and larger res screens I can see how they really had problems keeping it that way.

The added 10-15% above with a 980 puts them in a much better place. And in 6 months no one will ever buy a new 980/980/980ti again anyway, so I think they
aim for the next generations of cards already. In Q2/summer 2016 you will get 980 perf for half the price, its that simple.

 

[FireStream]

So, it's still be possible to play with DK2 and gtx 970? I'm don't care about consumer version, DK2 is absolutely fine for me.

 

[Wolfox]

is possible to have a great experience in 75hz then I think is possible to run the CV ad 75hz and gain some performance.
Who is complaining about the 970s are they not playing the game now? you can see by yourself. Normally now the game should be requiring more, but with further updates the should make the game lighter.
I'm sure that with your 970 you can run it very well with medium graphics. I was having a 770 and set with medium was ok.

PS: Nice it doesn't say which SDK is required!

 

[Xene]

I am so glad I decided to get the more expensive pc near me, it just meets those requirements

 

[FireStream]

is possible to have a great experience in 75hz then I think is possible to run the CV ad 75hz and gain some performance.
Who is complaining about the 970s are they not playing the game now? you can see by yourself. Normally now the game should be requiring more, but with further updates the should make the game lighter.
I'm sure that with your 970 you can run it very well with medium graphics. I was having a 770 and set with medium was ok.

PS: Nice it doesn't say which SDK is required!

Well, currently it's ok with 970 and shadows on low, except a little judder in the the starports. I hope it will be the same in the horizons release with some tweaking.

 

[AndreyATGB]

I'm guessing an OC'd 970 will do just fine since it reaches stock 980 performance at ~1400MHz. Though you absolutely must have 90 FPS for both Vive and CV1. The requirements seem on the safe side for sure, far exceeding the game's current demands, especially in CPU and RAM usage.

 

[KRONFROMGALVATRON]

I suspect a 970 will be workable with the CV1 on ED, just not locked at 90 fps for those who want/need that. I'm running the DK2 and performance with graphics on medium seems perfectly smooth on planet surfaces, where GPU utilization is at its highest (~85%). My CPU is below spec too, I have an i5 3550P, 8GB sytem RAM, win7 pro x64. The gtx 970 is the 4GB VRAM version. I haven't clocked framerates but I don't detect judder on the surface. Horizons beta 3 seems to have improved performance over the first two beta releases by a noticeable margin.

 

[FireStream]

I suspect a 970 will be workable with the CV1 on ED, just not locked at 90 fps for those who want/need that. I'm running the DK2 and performance with graphics on medium seems perfectly smooth on planet surfaces, where GPU utilization is at its highest (~85%). My CPU is below spec too, I have an i5 3550P, 8GB sytem RAM, win7 pro x64. The gtx 970 is the 4GB VRAM version. I haven't clocked framerates but I don't detect judder on the surface. Horizons beta 3 seems to have improved performance over the first two beta releases by a noticeable margin.

Sweet. Thats all I need to hear. So, these huge specs just for future VR releases, not because Frontiers switching to dx11 or something.

 

[Masta Squidge]

With Vive and consumer Rift you need to get 90 FPS with a higher resolution than for the DK2.

This.

Just because it works fine for you at 75 fps doesn't mean you can handle 90 fps with significantly higher resolution. The minimum requirements for the CV1 is stated to be a 970, I suspect that a 970 will be technically capable of handling the CV1 with horizons... BUT, you WILL have to reduce the quality settings. CV1 is a different beast. This is why I am waiting for CV1 launch and, hopefully Pascal next year before purchasing.

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

I suspect a 970 will be workable with the CV1 on ED, just not locked at 90 fps for those who want/need that. I'm running the DK2 and performance with graphics on medium seems perfectly smooth on planet surfaces, where GPU utilization is at its highest (~85%). My CPU is below spec too, I have an i5 3550P, 8GB sytem RAM, win7 pro x64. The gtx 970 is the 4GB VRAM version. I haven't clocked framerates but I don't detect judder on the surface. Horizons beta 3 seems to have improved performance over the first two beta releases by a noticeable margin.

Running at less than 90 fps is not an option man.

VR is not a computer monitor, where lower FPS is playable. You will HAVE TO have 90 fps or the tracking judder might cause problems, and be unplayable. If it's not locked at 90 fps, you are not going to have an enjoyable experience. I say might, because it seems to be up in the air with certain games.

Some games I have noticed the DK2 can drop below 75 fps and it still is ok, as long as it doesnt stay that way, but other games at anything less than 75 the tracking gets all out of whack.

 

[Star Lion]

Okay, guys. Here we are:



Is it serious? I just bought a new 970 to reduce judder and now it's for nothing? Please, tell me I'm wrong. It's just ridiculous.

Gtx 970 is the recomended card for games made for vr only. ED supports vr. I think the best course of action FD should take for many of us that already bought a 970 for vr is to work with Nvidia and Amd to implement VR Sli technologies, VR sli uses every card to render each display independently and that way incresing performance. That way we can buy another one and have much better performance than a single 980 and not lose so much money selling the 970 at loss to buy a 980 which is buy the way the minimum not the recomended as they said.

 

[BoggiBlanko]

This is hopefully only for the Vive and it's resolution... but minimum, that worries me... the judder right now.... :-(

 

[KRONFROMGALVATRON]

Running at less than 90 fps is not an option man.

VR is not a computer monitor, where lower FPS is playable. You will HAVE TO have 90 fps or the tracking judder might cause problems, and be unplayable. If it's not locked at 90 fps, you are not going to have an enjoyable experience. I say might, because it seems to be up in the air with certain games.

Some games I have noticed the DK2 can drop below 75 fps and it still is ok, as long as it doesnt stay that way, but other games at anything less than 75 the tracking gets all out of whack.

Sorry but not sure I agree here. For some folks, running at less than 90 fps will be not only an option but mandatory since a gtx 980 is probably about the only card that's going to hit this with most games cranked up to high or ultra (until next gen cards arrive). Everyone is different in terms of what they are comfortable with for minimum HMD frame rates, clearly they need to be higher than a standard monitor, I'm fine at 45 fps on a standard display, but as someone who's done a fair amount of gaming with the DK2 and vorpx (running skyrim and fallout 3) I personally don't feel the need to achieve 90 fps locked. 65 fps and above is comfortable for me in most games that don't have tons of really fast motion and constant fast head turning, and 75 fps seems smooth as glass and makes me very happy.

 

[BoggiBlanko]

Hey, I'm still awake and I have one thought to share: Maybe they waited that long because of the specs of the Oculus Rift CV1, if so, it must be a awesome 4K Headset and then I would surely buy a complete new System for it!

 

[KRONFROMGALVATRON]

Hey, I'm still awake and I have one thought to share: Maybe they waited that long because of the specs of the Oculus Rift CV1, if so, it must be a awesome 4K Headset and then I would surely buy a complete new System for it!

Nah, it's not 4k, more pixels than DK2 though, see here.

CV2 and beyond may have more pixels yet, but current GPU hardware likely can't handle much more than what CV1 will have.

Edit - that article is a bit old but I'm pretty sure I've seen that CV1 has the same resolution, but I think a different actual display, than crescent bay they're discussing there.

 

[Beavis Tingleball]

I'm sorry to hear that the 970 is not performing up to par with horizons, which prompts me to ask if you guys are trying to rework driver settings/configuration or are you all just simply installing them and trying to play. one of the things that works for me is to set my CPU to handle physix..actually, thats the only thing i change. after reading all the problems with new hardware and this game it also make me wonder if the older hardware is better suited for the task i.e, the nv 6xx series. I play on an X79 (msi bb2) board with with 16g of crappy Patriot memory, an i7 3820 and 2 6xx series keplar GPU's. while the game is not perfectly smooth on said hardware, it's awfully close. I get the occasional frame pops and such but "judder" is nearly non-existent. I also have never experienced the DK2 issues I've seen posted on this forum. while my PC is overclocked, it is a very stable and modest overclock. I'm certainly not pushing the numbers that the 970 and up are advertising. I really hope there is a fix as I'd like to upgrade but I think I'll wait until we get better performance reports