So the sampling 1-1.7 is just about resolution essentially and the bit rate is just about the rate of video compression. You need a balance between the two as at the end of the day no matter what your setup is you can only get si much data through that cable at any one time. Oculus engineers have stated that there is negligible difference over 300 bitrate and it becomes detrimental to data transfer rates over 350mbs. Personally I go for 1.7 @90hz & 250bit rate where possible and where my computer struggles il drop to 1.6 @ 80hz but then bump the bit rate up to 300mb to make it as clear as I can.
*** Oculus Quest 2 Owners Thread ***
- Thread starter Zefan
- Start date
Your WiFi likely uses 2G and 5G on the same SSID. You want to change this, and set up separate networks for both, and then keep the 5G network for devices that really need the speed (mainly Quest for VD). Check your router's settings, and there will likely be an option in there somewhere. It was fairly easy to find in my VM Superhub 3.
As a tip, try to give the 2G network the current SSID and password, and then set a custom one for the 5G network. This way, you avoid having to log back in on every WiFi device in the house, and can keep the 5G derails to yourself.
Ah, thanks - that makes perfect sense...will have a play
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,153
- Location
- Birmingham
What gpu are you on?
1.7 is a huge resolution, Id be very surprised if youre getting 90 fps - have you checked using the overlay?
2080ti on OC. 1.7 is not 1.7 times the quest resolution it’s actually 1:1 quest resolution so somewhere around 3k due to lens curvature. For comparison on most triple A games on my 4K monitor I’m averaging 79fps which is considerably more pixels than the Quest 2. Those with mid range cards would probably be best with 1.3-1.5 at a guess. If you use occulus debug tool and an overlay with virtual desktop you can see your FPS in the headset whilst playing.
There is a help article written by VR download somewhere, il try and dig it out but it is all about the new V.23 update render resolution settings and bit rate settings to when using VD. Pretty good article and explains how them 5000 x 2600 render setting or whatever it is is not actually that actual render at all due to lens distortion. It gets a bit geeky but could explain in far better than I ever could.
exert from occulus developer blog on Reddit below:
PSA: With Link v23, to achieve true 1:1 app-to-display pixel ratio, you need to set 5408x2736 for the rendering resolution.
As /u/volgaksoy says in this series of [tweets](https://twitter.com/volgaksoy/status/1328145529042137088):
>In v23 of Oculus Link, the new app-resolution slider maxes out @ 5408x2736 (combined-eyes). This isn't a random number we picked for Quest 2. It is \*the\* number that achieves 1:1 app-to-display pixel ratio at the center of the displays assuming the encode & display is 3664x1920.
>
>So while the slider achieves similar results as the "pixel density" override in ODT, it doesn't go into the "super-sampling" range as many folks think it does. The higher you can push the slider, the crisper the app visuals will get, assuming your GPU can keep up w/ the perf hit.
In other words, you need to max out the rendering resolution slider to 5408x2736 inside the Oculus desktop app to achieve true 1:1 app-to-display pixel ratio. The rendering resolution slider is not a supersampling slider: unless you max it out, you are *undersampling* at the center and not achieving true, 1:1 native resolution for the Quest 2.
Counter-intuitively, the default rendering value of 3616x1920, despite that number matching the native resolution, will **NOT** result in native resolution as one would think. Unlike rendering directly to a flat-screen, apps in VR need to be rendered at \~50% higher resolution because of barrel distortion curvature. That higher resolution is then unwarped to the correct, native resolution. ([Source](https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/com.../?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3))
**TL;DR To achieve true 1:1 native resolution, you need to max out the rendering resolution slider to x1.7 in the desktop app (5408x2736). Below x1.7, you are undersampling at the center.**
exert from occulus developer blog on Reddit below:
PSA: With Link v23, to achieve true 1:1 app-to-display pixel ratio, you need to set 5408x2736 for the rendering resolution.
As /u/volgaksoy says in this series of [tweets](https://twitter.com/volgaksoy/status/1328145529042137088):
>In v23 of Oculus Link, the new app-resolution slider maxes out @ 5408x2736 (combined-eyes). This isn't a random number we picked for Quest 2. It is \*the\* number that achieves 1:1 app-to-display pixel ratio at the center of the displays assuming the encode & display is 3664x1920.
>
>So while the slider achieves similar results as the "pixel density" override in ODT, it doesn't go into the "super-sampling" range as many folks think it does. The higher you can push the slider, the crisper the app visuals will get, assuming your GPU can keep up w/ the perf hit.
In other words, you need to max out the rendering resolution slider to 5408x2736 inside the Oculus desktop app to achieve true 1:1 app-to-display pixel ratio. The rendering resolution slider is not a supersampling slider: unless you max it out, you are *undersampling* at the center and not achieving true, 1:1 native resolution for the Quest 2.
Counter-intuitively, the default rendering value of 3616x1920, despite that number matching the native resolution, will **NOT** result in native resolution as one would think. Unlike rendering directly to a flat-screen, apps in VR need to be rendered at \~50% higher resolution because of barrel distortion curvature. That higher resolution is then unwarped to the correct, native resolution. ([Source](https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/com.../?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3))
**TL;DR To achieve true 1:1 native resolution, you need to max out the rendering resolution slider to x1.7 in the desktop app (5408x2736). Below x1.7, you are undersampling at the center.**
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,153
- Location
- Birmingham
Hi. I was aware that you needed to max out the slider to get the native resolution on the headset. As you say, that means the desktop will be rendering at 5408x2736 to display on the headset at the right resolution to take account of the barrel distortion. That is 14.8 million pixels being rendered on the PC.
I have tried this setting and its pin sharp, absolutely brilliant. However it tanks my framerate and I'm on a 3070 which is about the same level as your 2080 Ti.
So I don't know how you are getting 90 fps. Are you sure you're getting those framerates at 1.7x?
I have tried this setting and its pin sharp, absolutely brilliant. However it tanks my framerate and I'm on a 3070 which is about the same level as your 2080 Ti.
So I don't know how you are getting 90 fps. Are you sure you're getting those framerates at 1.7x?
yup 100% positive. It’s in the overlay sitting at 89fps. Don’t forget it’s the amount of pixels that are being rendered even at 1.7 is still far less that a 28” 4K monitor that’s why those resolution numbers are pretty much less worthless in my view. Anything under 70fps in VR and you’ll know it as you’ll feel like puking in your headset. This is why oculus will not let anything in their native store that runs at anything sub 72.
just realised that you are talking about desktop res. The desktop resolution stays at whatever you set it at in windows, it’s totally separate from VR. Obviously my pc could not run at a 5000 native desktop resolution @ even 30hz let alone 90hz.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,153
- Location
- Birmingham
What game are you getting those framerates on at 1.7x?
Sorry to say this but I 50/50 don't believe you can be getting that framerate on that setting.
A 4K monitor is 3840x2160 which is 8.3 million pixels. At 1.7x the oculus software is rendering way more than that.
Sorry to say this but I 50/50 don't believe you can be getting that framerate on that setting.
A 4K monitor is 3840x2160 which is 8.3 million pixels. At 1.7x the oculus software is rendering way more than that.
that’s fine maybe YouTube can help you out and be your friend if you search half life Altx 2080ti performance. It’s NOT the desktop resolution your actually rendering 2 things the size of an Apple Watch screen. I’m not sure how else to explain it. Your quest NATIVELY is running at 90hz and 3k with a mobile snapdragon processor and all the oculus store games. I’m not sure why so many people are struggling with this concept . Il leave this here for now as answering some questions in this thread is like flogging a dead horse.https://youtu.be/8RxtjKR7fkU For the fake news brigade!
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,153
- Location
- Birmingham
Do you have elite dangerous? Could you try the same settings in that game?
I have HL alyx, but I haven't measured my framerate in that game, I'll go and try it later and see if I get close to what you're getting.
@Adamof81 are you playing HL Alyx wired using the USB cable or wireless over virtual desktop?
I have HL alyx, but I haven't measured my framerate in that game, I'll go and try it later and see if I get close to what you're getting.
@Adamof81 are you playing HL Alyx wired using the USB cable or wireless over virtual desktop?
Last edited:
both VD and using official link cable, latency wise the link cable is obviously better but virtual desktop is fine but I generally set it to 80hz and 250 bit rate anything more and I get some stutter in heavy scenes. I play with Ultra settings and turning them down seems to do nothing for frame rate. Can’t speak for elite dangerous but Asgard’s wrath is smooth at 90hz on same settings and medal of honour sometime slips to 79fps in heavy scenes. Not tried that since the recent update though.
flights sim 2020 on default settings I get 35fps which is pretty much unplayable for me as it’s a spew fest!
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,153
- Location
- Birmingham
Are you aware that the settings in Oculus link (the 1.7x slider) don't have any effect in virtual desktop over wireless?
Are you also getting 90 fps in Alyx over wired link, at 1.7x?
Are you also getting 90 fps in Alyx over wired link, at 1.7x?
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2015
- Posts
- 1,276
- Location
- Portslade area
whats this talk of 1.7x sorry ? is the resulution 1.7x what it would be on a screen to provide the peripheral vision ? or is it some kind of upscaling so it looks crisper or ?
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,153
- Location
- Birmingham
In the Oculus link software, when you go to devices and click on your Quest headset, you can alter some resolution and refresh rate settings. It is the resolution the PC renders at before compressing and sending the data over USB to your headset.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2015
- Posts
- 1,276
- Location
- Portslade area
oh ok so is it a latency thing ?
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,153
- Location
- Birmingham
It's a resolution/quality thing, but it affects latency too. Latency is a by product of resolution (data rate) and network speed.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2015
- Posts
- 1,276
- Location
- Portslade area
got it 
Yup and no. Alyx I have to run at 80hz in virtual desktop to make it smooth. 80hz, 80mbs bitbrate and high graphic settings in VD app. Wired I can max it out at 1.7.
interestingly st wars squadrons really works the rig and I set it at 80hz @ 1.6 but sometimes end up with frame rate dips into the high 50’s.