Gsync/ freesync in VR headset displays?

[wunkley]

Total VR noob with a really basic question - do the current crop of VR headets support gsync/ freesync or the equivalent technology?

If not, as most seem to be 90Hz displays - is it the case that if you can't hit 90fps constantly in a game then you get hitching/ judder if the frame rate drops under that, the same as you do on a normal monitor without gsync/ freesync?

I've been gaming on a Gsync monitor for the last 4 years, and can never, ever go back to any sort of hitching/ judder/ stutter that you get in games, if the frame rate can't match the Hz of the display. I would guess stutters would be even more noticeable and horrific in a VR display too?

 

[Zeeflyboy]

None use variable refresh rate in that way no.

One problem is that if the refresh rate is too low the pose age is too great and your head movement doesn’t feel smooth. That is a recipe for inducing sickness very rapidly.

All current VR headsets use reprojection, in oculus terminology this would be ATW or asynchronous time warp, but all are doing much the same thing. That isn’t to be confused with motion smoothing/asynchronous space warp (ASW) which is what you can choose to enable or disable.

Basically the runtime will make last millisecond adjustments to the image to accommodate where your head has moved since the frame itself was rendered. You can actually notice this happening if you are playing something with very low frame rates like MSFS and move your head really rapidly - you’ll see a black border appear as the runtime runs out of buffer image to reproject.

That has the effect of reducing perceived latency and smoothing out head movement itself even if the game isn’t reaching 90fps (and is actually usually still active even then, again to reduce perceived latency).

If you started dropping refresh rate of the display to accommodate lower framerates such as you would with VRR, you would also reduce the frequency reprojection was running at... which would lead to most likely a puddle of vomit on the floor.

To combat the issue of dropping below 90fps, they also now have the aforementioned Motion smoothing or ASW... this actually uses the motion (and in the case of ASW2.0 also depth) information in the image to calculate an artificial frame to make up for the fact that your computer can't keep up. So when you can't consistently maintain 90fps it will drop down to 45fps and give you one real frame to one interpolated frame which gives the impression of 90fps in the headset, albeit with some light artefacting when it doesn't get it quite right. It works better in some games than others, and in my opinion ASW2.0 is far ahead of the rest when it comes to how much artefacting it can cause.

 

[wunkley]

Thanks for the good answer bud, much appreciated.
My main use for a VR headset would be for sims like flight sim 2020, DCS world etc. I'm just worried what the VR experience will be like for a smoothness Gsync junkie like myself.

As mentioned stutter / hitching is just the worst thing for me now and I can't play games without Gsync unless they can lock to at least 60fps (eg on my 60Hz OLED).

Flightsim 2020 at best can hit 60fps for me sometimes, but mostly is in the 40-50fps range. On a gsync monitor this is ok, but what is the experience like in a VR headset? Will there be judder/ stutter?

 

[Unseul]

Thanks for the good answer bud, much appreciated.
My main use for a VR headset would be for sims like flight sim 2020, DCS world etc. I'm just worried what the VR experience will be like for a smoothness Gsync junkie like myself.

As mentioned stutter / hitching is just the worst thing for me now and I can't play games without Gsync unless they can lock to at least 60fps (eg on my 60Hz OLED).

Flightsim 2020 at best can hit 60fps for me sometimes, but mostly is in the 40-50fps range. On a gsync monitor this is ok, but what is the experience like in a VR headset? Will there be judder/ stutter?

A VR headset, like the G2 or Quest 2, is basically 2x 4k monitors. And generally it's felt that 72fps is the minimum you want to be hitting, with 90 being preferred, to avoid sickness. As above, 45 can be reprojected as 90, but if your machine is struggling on a single monitor, it may not be able to manage a headset.

 

[wunkley]

A VR headset, like the G2 or Quest 2, is basically 2x 4k monitors. And generally it's felt that 72fps is the minimum you want to be hitting, with 90 being preferred, to avoid sickness. As above, 45 can be reprojected as 90, but if your machine is struggling on a single monitor, it may not be able to manage a headset.

I've got a 3090 so pretty well covered on the GPU front This is currently still paired with my, getting on a bit, 5930k (at 4.5Ghz) x99 rig. I'm waiting to upgrade CPU, etc when I feel I really need to. Not found the need yet.

I naively didn't realise the specs for VR were per eye, so almost getting on for driving x2 4k monitors with the latest headsets like you say. That's insane. What games can run at that high a res - at 90FPS!? Even on a 3090?

P.S. The newish Reverb G2 is the one I'm looking at. I'd try the Quest 2 in a shot given the price and the fact that I've never used a VR headset before, but, the fact it's totally tied in to Facebook means I won't use it. I loathe Facebook.

 

[Zeeflyboy]

MSFS performance in VR is very poor currently. You'd be looking at 30fps on a G2 and 3090... by dialling down settings and resolution as low as one could bear, I can get to 45-50fps and my 5800X starts to become limiting but the performance is so variable (and IQ so comparatively low) you can't really stick it to 45fps so need to drop down to 30 as the next direct division of 90. I find it ok personally, but if you are particularly sensitive to judder or low framerates you will struggle. There is the option in OpenXR to reproject from 30fps (so two interpolated frames to one real one) which makes things smooth but also introduces some blurriness and artefacting that I don't enjoy. My personal preference is motion smoothing off, 30fps and locked in the Nvidia control panel to that.

The Reverb G2 is 2160x2160 per eye, but due to the way VR rendering works you ideally would render at a little over 3000x3000 per eye (the 100% setting in steam and OpenXR) so really you are pushing two 3000x3000 monitors (~9 million pixels per eye vs ~8.3 million for a single 4k screen) at 90hz. I can run a lot of my VR games at 90FPS and 100%, some more demanding games like the modern sims I have to dial back to 70-80% resolution, and for some like DCS I can stay at 100% but have to accept 45fps with reprojection but it works very well in that game imo and DCS + Reverb G2 + 3090 is an awesome experience.

 

[wunkley]

MSFS performance in VR is very poor currently. You'd be looking at 30fps on a G2 and 3090... by dialling down settings and resolution as low as one could bear, I can get to 45-50fps and my 5800X starts to become limiting but the performance is so variable (and IQ so comparatively low) you can't really stick it to 45fps so need to drop down to 30 as the next direct division of 90. I find it ok personally, but if you are particularly sensitive to judder or low framerates you will struggle. There is the option in OpenXR to reproject from 30fps (so two interpolated frames to one real one) which makes things smooth but also introduces some blurriness and artefacting that I don't enjoy. My personal preference is motion smoothing off, 30fps and locked in the Nvidia control panel to that.

The Reverb G2 is 2160x2160 per eye, but due to the way VR rendering works you ideally would render at a little over 3000x3000 per eye (the 100% setting in steam and OpenXR) so really you are pushing two 3000x3000 monitors (~9 million pixels per eye vs ~8.3 million for a single 4k screen) at 90hz. I can run a lot of my VR games at 90FPS and 100%, some more demanding games like the modern sims I have to dial back to 70-80% resolution, and for some like DCS I can stay at 100% but have to accept 45fps with reprojection but it works very well in that game imo and DCS + Reverb G2 + 3090 is an awesome experience.

Thanks flyboy, lots to ponder. Do you have the G2 and a 3090 then?

Just wondering as it's my first foray into VR if I should suck up the Facebook requirement (just make a fake account?) and get the Quest 2. It seems cheap as chips relatively for the specs you get.

Looks like the G2 is in stock direct from the HP site for £658. Quest 2 in stock many places for only £299 (£324 with a cable to tether to PC).

What would you recommend for a VR virgin?

 

[Zeeflyboy]

Yup. G2, 5800X and 3090.

Ignoring the Facebook issue as that’s a personal choice, the Q2 is a better all rounder headset... especially after a few upgrades/mods. Don’t set up a fake account btw as they may ban you and you could lose anything you’ve purchased in the store. Just set it up correctly, lock down all the privacy options and don’t bother using it for anything.

If all that really interests you about VR is seated gaming, then the G2 is superior in most ways. It’s more comfortable as standard, much better audio, higher sharpness (in the centre at least) and better picture quality, better IPD adjustability too.

For pretty much everything else the Q2 is arguably better IMO. The ability to play standing/room scale wire free both with standalone VR games and using wifi tethering to the PC with Virtual Desktop really can’t be overstated. Tracking is better, controllers in general are better, oculus software is better and far more actively developed with new features than WMR. It is also infinitely more popular so more options regarding accessories and of course you get access to games exclusive to the oculus PC and mobile platform while also getting access to all the rest anyway through steam and OpenXR.

 

[wunkley]

Yup. G2, 5800X and 3090.

Ignoring the Facebook issue as that’s personal, the Q2 is a better all rounder headset, especially after a few upgrades/mods. Don’t set up a fake account btw as they may ban you and you could lose anything you’ve purchased in the store. Just set it up correctly, lock down all the privacy options and don’t bother using it for anything.

If all that really interests you about VR is seated gaming, then the G2 is superior in most ways. It’s more comfortable as standard, much better audio, higher sharpness (in the centre at least) and better picture quality, better IPD adjustability too.

For pretty much everything else the Q2 is arguably better IMO. The ability to play standing/room scale wire free both with standalone VR games and using wifi tethering with Virtual Desktop really can’t be overstated. Tracking is better, controllers in general are better, oculus software is better and far more actively developed with new features than WMR. It is also infinitely more popular so more options regarding accessories and of course you get access to games exclusive to the oculus PC and mobile platform while also getting access to all the rest anyway through steam and OpenXR.

Thanks bud. Gaaah this is getting confusing. I'm only really interested in 'sat at the PC' type gaming, I think anyway. That could have course change.

I'm also looking at the older Rift S now. Can get that for even cheaper and although it's resolution is much lower then the Quest 2 it's a direct display port connection and doesn't need occulus link - some think the compression of this makes the image a bit soft.
What would you buy VR wise if you had nothing yet and were buying something today? Still the G2?

 

[Unseul]

Fairly sure the law in the UK is an item ordered online in the UK, has a 14 day return period. Return for any reason. That includes click and collect. Might be worth grabbing a quest 2 + cable. Setup a real facebook (fake one gets banned and you lose anything you've purchased), you don't have to share any great amount of detail, and if you've got any friends/family on facebook/whatsapp etc that use it regularly, they probably know about you anyway.

That'll give you ~12 days to try it out, and download a few standalone demos etc as well, and decide how you feel about it.

 

[Zeeflyboy]

RiftS is a dead end, the unloved red headed step child of Oculus. I would only get one if it was going very cheap. Recent updates have improved link massively and I’d actually take slight image quality loss and go wireless with Virtual Desktop anyway. Certainly for anything involving movement at least.

I’m happy with the G2... I used to have a Quest 1, and having used a friend’s Q2 I’m sorely tempted to also pick one up to replace it but I’m trying to resist. I’ve had one in and out of my Rainforest basket multiple times now lol. With recent updates making the Q2 even more compelling as a PCVR headset I’m honestly not entirely sure which I would go for if I had the choice again... I think a Quest 2 with some aftermarket over ear speakers and a better head strap gets you a lot of the way towards a G2-esque experience while still coming in substantially cheaper (assuming you don’t ascribe much value to your personal data lol).

Oculus really are the current leaders in pushing the software stack side of VR. Nearly 20% of facebook’s employees are working on AR/VR which should tell you just how much resource they are pouring into this stuff. Their creature comforts like passthrough+, the new VR couch feature, surprisingly good controller less hand tracking, and features like ASW2.0 are unmatched by anyone else. It’s much more of a pick up and play headset which will work around you - you don’t need to worry too much about your environment or lighting, nor where you place your hands, what kind of batteries you use in the controllers etc. The G2 by comparison is like a demanding trophy wife that is certainly beautiful, but high maintenance and really demanding...

I think I’d prooooobably still get both rather than give up my G2, as like you I’m mostly about the seated experience, but it’s a tough call. If I could definitely only ever have one the Quest 2 might nudge it out.

 

[Unseul]

Working towards 120hz update on the quest 2 as well (potentially only an experimental feature, and for supported apps, but still...).

 

[wunkley]

Hmmm. Looking at some comparison 'through the lens' videos on youtube. The G2 does look much better. Not just the resolution and clarity but black levels, contrast and colour quality is much better and the Quest 2 can have colour banding due to the compression. I'm a graphics whore. And that ******* facebook requirement, never mind VR making you feel sick, have you seen Mark Zuck the Borg's face? I don't think I can stomach having to be part of bookface.

 

[Unseul]

I'd suggest asking people who have both rather then relying on videos.

 

[melmac]

Hmmm. Looking at some comparison 'through the lens' videos on youtube. The G2 does look much better. Not just the resolution and clarity but black levels, contrast and colour quality is much better and the Quest 2 can have colour banding due to the compression. I'm a graphics whore. And that ******* facebook requirement, never mind VR making you feel sick, have you seen Mark Zuck the Borg's face? I don't think I can stomach having to be part of bookface.

You have to be very careful looking at through the lens videos of the Quest 2. Any that were done before November the 13th 2020 are basically useless. The update to Version 23 of the Oculus software made a massive difference to the link Quality.

Not saying that the Quest 2 has better clarity than the Reverb G2, but, black levels and colour quality between the two will be about the same.

Also, You don't have to be part of Facebook, make the account, link your Oculus account and you never have to go near it again. You can keep both completely separate.

 

[wunkley]

I've ordered a G2 The overall resolution/ clarity + superior black levels (this a biggie for me!), contrast and colour have swung it. I'm a graphics whore. The Quest 2 seems amazing value but I'm of the mindset buy 'big' or you just end up buying twice - which ultimately costs more. And i know I keep saying it, but **** Facebook. Seriously, I'm a principled SOB and I can't justify giving them a penny, or any 'data'.

Sounds like the G2 has been hard to get (not as bad as GPUs!) but was available to order on the HP website today showing "48 hours delivery" - It didn't say in stock explicitly but I assume 48 hours delivery means it is in stock???

Also, I've realised/ worked out that the overall resolution of the G2 is nothing like running "x2 4k monitors" like someone earlier posted. The overall resolution that the GPU will have to drive is:

2160 x 2160 x 2 = 9,331,200 pixels

UHD/"4k" (not really 4k as we know) is 3840x2160 = 8,294,400 pixels

So, unless I'm missing something (which is possible as I'm a VR virgin) the G2 is not significantly harder to drive than standard UHD/4k, and a 3090 should easily do the job, no?

 

[Ravenger]

So, unless I'm missing something (which is possible as I'm a VR virgin) the G2 is not significantly harder to drive than standard UHD/4k, and a 3090 should easily do the job, no?

The main difference is 4K 2D games don't run at 90hz, wheras VR games normally do, and if there are any major frame drops in 4K 2D games they don't make you physically ill, unlike in VR where it can cause a form of motion sickness.

But a 3090 is the best card right now for running the G2. Just don't expect to max every game, as some games are either demanding or poorly optimised for VR, and the G2's resolution is very demanding in VR.

 

[Unseul]

So, unless I'm missing something (which is possible as I'm a VR virgin) the G2 is not significantly harder to drive than standard UHD/4k, and a 3090 should easily do the job, no?

Zeeflyboy explains above, basically you need to render at an even higher resolution to get the most out of the screens.

 

[wunkley]

The main difference is 4K 2D games don't run at 90hz, wheras VR games normally do, and if there are any major frame drops in 4K 2D games they don't make you physically ill, unlike in VR where it can cause a form of motion sickness.

But a 3090 is the best card right now for running the G2. Just don't expect to max every game, as some games are either demanding or poorly optimised for VR, and the G2's resolution is very demanding in VR.

thanks bud. Yeah, I get that 4K beyond 60fps is a tough call at max settings even for the 3090. I have no problem turning down a few settings to get a balanced optimized frame rate.

Anyone know how VR feels at half refresh rate? Is that not a thing? Is a locked 45 FPS ok in VR or is it just vomit inducing? 45 FPS on my gsync ultra wide in flight sim 2020 is perfectly playable to me. Is anything under 90hz 90fps just a no no for vr?

 

[Ravenger]

thanks bud. Yeah, I get that 4K beyond 60fps is a tough call at max settings even for the 3090. I have no problem turning down a few settings to get a balanced optimized frame rate.

Anyone know how VR feels at half refresh rate? Is that not a thing? Is a locked 45 FPS ok in VR or is it just vomit inducing? 45 FPS on my gsync ultra wide in flight sim 2020 is perfectly playable to me. Is anything under 90hz 90fps just a no no for vr?

G2 has WMR motion smoothing & reprojection which works pretty well at 45fps. Of course some games (FS2020) have difficulty maintaining even 45fps!