Quest 2 Virtual Desktop Performance Thread

Two things here could be the issue (probably a combination of both).

Firstly the Quest 2 is massively higher resolution than a CV1, which makes a difference in performance.

Secondly, Virtual Desktop can't use Oculus's Asynchronous Timewarp reprojection system, but the CV1 can. So possibly on CV1 you're running at 45fps and it's being interpolated to 90.

In any case with the Quest 2 having higher resolution and not having access to the reprojection system if framerate gets too low, then in demanding games you can see performance issues.

Oculus Link can use Asynchronous Timewarp so for demanding games it can be the better solution if you're not concerned about being wired.
 
I don't have a wifi6 router, and I don't plan to upgrade by Orbi system any time soon. I gave Virtual Desktop a try last weekend. Easy enough to set up as one of our Orbi access points is already in the same room as the PC and the Quest 2, with the PC wired directly to it. It worked fine and I was playing Alyx and Saints wirelessly in no time. Looked pretty nice too. But the latency was too high. It wasn't obvious unless I waved my hand frantically around, but I could feel it. Went back to wired, and felt much better. Refunded it. Nice, but my wifi isn't up to it.
 
I did not have the auto adjust bitrate setting disabled so I will test that. Using H.264 as I understand that is more performant.

Streaming settings wise I have tried 100Mbps and also 80Mbps the lower setting did reduce latency by 2-3ms.

Quality: High
Framerate: 90FPS
Bitrate: Tried 80 and 100
Sliced: On
Buffering: Tried both settings no change
Increase Colour Vibrance: On
Everything else off
 
Capt Doufos said:
I did not have the auto adjust bitrate setting disabled so I will test that. Using H.264 as I understand that is more performant.
Click to expand...

Yes, disable that, because that overrides the settings in Virtual desktop itself. So, none of the changes you have done would have made any difference up to now :)

There is a setting in Virtual Desktop called "performance overlay" if you enable that, you will see where exactly the problems is when you go into a game. It shows the Framerate and the Latency, But also the Latency at each stage, Game, Network, Encoding, Decoding.
 
melmac said:
Yes, disable that, because that overrides the settings in Virtual desktop itself. So, none of the changes you have done would have made any difference up to now :)

There is a setting in Virtual Desktop called "performance overlay" if you enable that, you will see where exactly the problems is when you go into a game. It shows the Framerate and the Latency, But also the Latency at each stage, Game, Network, Encoding, Decoding.
Click to expand...

This helped thank you. For some reason AeroFly 2 won't pull more than 32FPS with a 60MS latency. Other games e.g. Project Cars 2 are much better pulling 90FPS with a 38MS latency. Something to do with the game settings.
 
Capt Doufos said:
This helped thank you. For some reason AeroFly 2 won't pull more than 32FPS with a 60MS latency. Other games e.g. Project Cars 2 are much better pulling 90FPS with a 38MS latency. Something to do with the game settings.
Click to expand...

Your welcome. Yeah, in game settings have an affect on latency and, obviously, framerate.
 
I guessing it's an overhead of the encoding. On the CV1 I could pull >90FPS even with everything max and 2x sampling. It's definatley improved though, just a slow framerate and not a juddery. I have a decent link cable as well to try now as a comparison.
 
Hi guys. Could use some advice on this.
The PC I've set VR up on I know is weak but I did the steam VR performance test and it came out in the middle saying it could play VR at maybe medium and to upgrade graphics card. It's an i3 dual core from 2015 era, 8gb ram and has a 1050ti GPU. I got everything setup with virtual desktop today and played the table tennic game "Eleven". I put the performance overlay to see stats and could see that everything was white and looked like good numbers even including the network latency (around only 6ms) but the main thing that showed as yellow was the game latency, which was up around 16-18ms. The game stuttered and lagged a lot even with settings down very low, and was mostly unplayable. Is this to be expected with this spec? Is the game latency the issue?

Also other question... I set the refresh to 60hz and the flicker was shockingly bad. Made me feel sick. I find it unplayable below 80hz. Do you find the same?
 
jaybee said:
Hi guys. Could use some advice on this.
The PC I've set VR up on I know is weak but I did the steam VR performance test and it came out in the middle saying it could play VR at maybe medium and to upgrade graphics card. It's an i3 dual core from 2015 era, 8gb ram and has a 1050ti GPU. I got everything setup with virtual desktop today and played the table tennic game "Eleven". I put the performance overlay to see stats and could see that everything was white and looked like good numbers even including the network latency (around only 6ms) but the main thing that showed as yellow was the game latency, which was up around 16-18ms. The game stuttered and lagged a lot even with settings down very low, and was mostly unplayable. Is this to be expected with this spec? Is the game latency the issue?

Also other question... I set the refresh to 60hz and the flicker was shockingly bad. Made me feel sick. I find it unplayable below 80hz. Do you find the same?
Click to expand...

Your computer is well below the minimum specs in both GPU and CPU. It just won't be able to play anything. The Steam VR test is useless. It's way out of date and was only kind of useful for the first headsets like the Vive and Original Rift Civ1.

Get games like Eleven Table tennis Natively for the Quest 2. You will have a much better experience that way.

People's tolerances for the various refresh rates differ. 72hz is the lowest I can go and still feel ok in VR.
 
melmac said:
Your computer is well below the minimum specs in both GPU and CPU. It just won't be able to play anything. The Steam VR test is useless. It's way out of date and was only kind of useful for the first headsets like the Vive and Original Rift Civ1.

Get games like Eleven Table tennis Natively for the Quest 2. You will have a much better experience that way.

People's tolerances for the various refresh rates differ. 72hz is the lowest I can go and still feel ok in VR.
Click to expand...

I bought the game on Steam so as to not lock all the purchases into quest store for the future. One day if we change the headset to something else steam be compatible, then we don't lose the game library was my idea.

What do you mean by games like the table tennis one? What type is it to warrant buying natively on the quest store? Do you meant to say it's only worth buying games on Steam that are not on the quest store at all?

Cheers
 
For games where every millisecond can count, like table tennis and beat sabre, it makes sense to get them on the headset to minimize latency.

With your pc, it's probably going to nearly always be a better experience with games being on the headset.
 
Unseul said:
For games where every millisecond can count, like table tennis and beat sabre, it makes sense to get them on the headset to minimize latency.

With your pc, it's probably going to nearly always be a better experience with games being on the headset.
Click to expand...

Lol. Brutal. True though. I read that beat sabre can be hacked more easily on the pc to allow custom songs? Is that the case?
Maybe I will just buy some games on quest store. Couple more questions though...

1. If I buy on quest store, is one advantage that we can take the headset anywhere and just play. I guess WiFi also needed for multiplayer but still. With them on Steam I have to be on my home network with decent network setup and gaming pc for virtual desktop.

2. Is it true that some games can look better running on Steam/pc than native? Is it noticeable?

3. What hardware is inside the quest that allows it to be so compact and yet play games better than older dedicated gaming pcs? Is it just because it is optimised for the hardware?
 
I've not tried hacking beat sabre, but I believe it is easier on PC than native.

1. Correct. Play anywhere, great for showing VR off to friends/family.

2. Yes, but you need the PC to drive it. You're trying to drive (at max resolution) something coming close to 2x 4k monitors, preferably at 90fps. Which is basically beyond graphics cards at the moment. Regardless, even with my 1070ti, some proper VR games on the PC (Asgrads Wrath) looked really good, with a few stutters.

3. It has the most advanced mobile chip, designed for VR. And native games are designed to run on it, so will often be toned down versions compared to PC versions.
 
Unseul said:
I've not tried hacking beat sabre, but I believe it is easier on PC than native.

1. Correct. Play anywhere, great for showing VR off to friends/family.

2. Yes, but you need the PC to drive it. You're trying to drive (at max resolution) something coming close to 2x 4k monitors, preferably at 90fps. Which is basically beyond graphics cards at the moment. Regardless, even with my 1070ti, some proper VR games on the PC (Asgrads Wrath) looked really good, with a few stutters.

3. It has the most advanced mobile chip, designed for VR. And native games are designed to run on it, so will often be toned down versions compared to PC versions.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your help guys appreciate it. Want the lad to be happy as it's his bday present.
 
New beta 1.20.2

https://github.com/guygodin/VirtualDesktop/releases/tag/v1.20.2

• Added DirectX 12 support in the PCVR runtime
• Fixed issue with Copy screenshots to desktop option getting unchecked
• Fixed windows error message when launching game from system tray
• Fixed game compatibility with: Echo VR, The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners, WW1 Fighters, Creed: Rise to Glory
Click to expand...
 
Is the honor 3 still the cheapest WiFi 6 router that's recommend?

Currently running unifi pro and USG so will only be using it to connect the quest to the pc
 
I bought a TP-Link Archer C6. Now got VD running at 125 bit rate and hovering just below 40ms of lag on Alyx.

It’s does look much better than before, but having went back to using Link(low battery) I can really see the difference, I use 300-350 bit rate.

However, I have to admit that not having a cable really does make the experience better and I maybe need to suck up the graphical difference.

Wonder if Air Link is doing something special that will allow a sustained 200 bit rate for Nvidia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom