2016 : A Pivotal Year For AMD, Nvidia, PC Gaming And VR

[Simon Belmont]

I don't think VR is going to go well for NVidia if they can not even get SLI right with G-Sync without people reporting microstutter.

VR will need shed loads of GPU grunt and that means SLI working properly.

This^

No interest in VR also

Nvidia & AMD need to bring something very powerful. Re-branded Pascal 970 and 980 like they did with the 700 and 900 series will be a laughing stock. We need in all seriousness over 50% (Higher would be better) Pascal cards If they want VR to work. Like Greg said Nvidia can't even get SLI working with G-Sync correctly

 

[Howling]

I don't know

I have avoided both G-Sync and Freesync until the tech works properly in MGPU setups and you can use both AMD and NVidia cards on the same monitor.

The point is if a vendor has a problem with MGPU setups VR will be dead in the water until they get it right.

Crossfire works in FreeSync at the very least; until Oculus release the headset I can't say on VR - though I won't have crossfire to test it on by that time

 

[Gregster]

I don't know

I have avoided both G-Sync and Freesync until the tech works properly in MGPU setups and you can use both AMD and NVidia cards on the same monitor.

The point is if a vendor has a problem with MGPU setups VR will be dead in the water until they get it right.

Well GameWorksVR and LiquidVR change the way SLI and Crossfire work and GameWorks VR allows each eye to be rendered separately per GPU which will lower latency and keep frames high, so a real plus there. I also assume AMD will be doing the same thing as well but not looked int it.

In my experience with a single GPU, it has been exceptional and very impressed thus far. Of course with the resolution upping to 2160x1200. it will require some decent grunt still but latency is the biggest VR killer and from all accounts, it is pretty good on both sides from my reading.

For those who are interested, a guy here has done a review of his time with the CV1.

https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3ynsim/i_got_to_try_the_consumer_beta_ecv7_and_here_is/

Well worth a read.

 

[Gregster]

GameWorks VR

LiquidVR

 

[Final8y]

On the subject of HDR, im all for better screens but to claim that images are not life like on what we have now is bull, TV and film look life like just fine and the image examples they have given dont look life like and are overly dull.

 

[jupiter_man]

wonder how GPU demanding is it for VR

 

[Kaapstad]

wonder how GPU demanding is it for VR

Very

 

[andybird123]

wonder how GPU demanding is it for VR

Very

but it doesn't have to be, its only been very demanding because they have to over-render to then hack out the bits they want, there are plenty of solutions that reduce the need to render too many pixels and concentrate on the bit you are really looking at

 

[Gregster]

but it doesn't have to be, its only been very demanding because they have to over-render to then hack out the bits they want, there are plenty of solutions that reduce the need to render too many pixels and concentrate on the bit you are really looking at

This.

 

[Simon Belmont]

but it doesn't have to be, its only been very demanding because they have to over-render to then hack out the bits they want, there are plenty of solutions that reduce the need to render too many pixels and concentrate on the bit you are really looking at

True, but a 980Ti can't handle it. This is why pascal needs to step up this coming gen and stop milking.

 

[D3K]

but it doesn't have to be, its only been very demanding because they have to over-render to then hack out the bits they want, there are plenty of solutions that reduce the need to render too many pixels and concentrate on the bit you are really looking at

And drive it at 90fps. Needs decent horsepower.

 

[D3K]

https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3ynsim/i_got_to_try_the_consumer_beta_ecv7_and_here_is/

Well worth a read.

The claims of a much diminished screen door effect are pleasing.
Though not sure about the FOV. Yes the increase is great if you've been using the previous models but that's still quite a blinkered view (if his diagrams are accurate)

 

[Gregster]

The claims of a much diminished screen door effect are pleasing.
Though not sure about the FOV. Yes the increase is great if you've been using the previous models but that's still quite a blinkered view (if his diagrams are accurate)

For me it is the pixel reduction that I am liking. That is my caveat and glad to hear it is very much reduced.

 

[AlamoX]

AMD seem to be pushing Gemini for VR, they have an edge with asynchronous computing, they probably dont wanna spoil that, so my guess AMD will focus a lot on Multi-GPU driver side, one can only hopes.

 

[thebennyboy]

Am holding onto my old 290X Lightning, looking forward to what the new year brings.

 

[FoxEye]

Couldn't be less interested in VR or AR. Just give me power and lots of it.

I just hope that whatever advancements they make will benefit non-VR applications. Like yourself, I'm not even slightly interested in VR.

 

[Drollic]

I just hope that whatever advancements they make will benefit non-VR applications. Like yourself, I'm not even slightly interested in VR.

+1, for now at least.

 

[D3K]

For me it is the pixel reduction that I am liking. That is my caveat and glad to hear it is very much reduced.

I've only tried cardboard, which I felt was equally marred by low resolution, low FPS, poor FOV, and poor graphics.

I assumed desktop VR kits would overcome all of those, with only res and fov being potential issues. Very happy to hear that the final res could be of high enough quality. The FOV is still of concern, but 1 out of 2 aint bad

AMD seem to be pushing Gemini for VR, they have an edge with asynchronous computing, they probably dont wanna spoil that, so my guess AMD will focus a lot on Multi-GPU driver side, one can only hopes.

Have they shown async to be better in real terms, and not just on paper yet? (serious question, I'm out of the loop on async)

 

[adolf hamster]

I've only tried cardboard, which I felt was equally marred by low resolution, low FPS, poor FOV, and poor graphics.

I assumed desktop VR kits would overcome all of those, with only res and fov being potential issues. Very happy to hear that the final res could be of high enough quality. The FOV is still of concern, but 1 out of 2 aint bad

Must confess, after trying cardboard on a z2 (441ppi) i'm wondering what it'd be like on a z5 premium (806ppi) might help the screen dooring a tad

Considering the z2 was ok (for a 2 year old phone in a £3 cardboard box) it might well be if oculus are nice to sony, or even if sony just get in the game, we might finally start seeing the display tech getting there .

Just need the horsies to push it, which is where amd/nvidia come in

 

[TheMorningStar]

Well, I'm spending around £3k in my 2016 upgrade and none of this is going towards VR and I'll be surprised if anything I buy in this upgrade will really be worth doing VR with, not the X99 setup, not the ATI HBM2 high end card/s etc. In less than 4 years I'll be 40 and that is when I expect VR to be worth evaluating, just in time for my mid life crisis

Realistically we are going to need something around 8k displays for each eye at ultra low latency to really feel the immersion and it will still need a hell of a lot of work from that point on, but we have 4k phone screens now so maybe it really isn't that far off. I'm not saying it won't be mind blowing mind, just not quite there for a few years yet from what I want out of the technology.

I'm actually dreading the cost of the VR upgrade, thank god I have no intention of having children