You will be fine with that rig, the ideal FPS for VR is 90fps and the resolution is 2160x1200 if memory serves me right.
SteamVR Performance Test
- Thread starter Apache14
- Start date
You will be fine with that rig, the ideal FPS for VR is 90fps and the resolution is 2160x1200 if memory serves me right.
Yes played on Oculus as well.
good stuff
Which would you say so far from experience appeared better? From your experience ofc.good stuff
I felt both systems were excellent to be frank, I'd say HTC edged it on build quality, just feels better put together and that it won't break so easily with repeated use over years.
I also like the Valve/Steam connection with HTC, I can see some incredible titles coming in the future, cough Half Life 3, COUGH!
I felt both systems were excellent to be frank, I'd say HTC edged it on build quality, just feels better put together and that it won't break so easily with repeated use over years.
I also like the Valve/Steam connection with HTC, I can see some incredible titles coming in the future, cough Half Life 3, COUGH!
Cheers, thanks for that. I'm still unsure which i want to go for lol. But atm HTC Vive or RIFT VR headset i'm deciding on.
Can't wait to try it out on Elite
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,404
- Location
- Planet Earth
Its more surprising since Maxwell and cards from Hawaii introduced VR specific features.
Here is the GTX580:
http://forums.hexus.net/hexus-news/...t-assesses-pc-vr-readiness-2.html#post3611498
However,as noted they say their total frame count is quite low - much lower than all the other cards.
Looks like a bug with the bench software.
I think the frame count looks right but this should not translate to a score of 11.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,951
Not that VR is something on my horizon, but interesting test anyway.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,951
What I don't understand, my 780 running stock clocks gets a lower score (5.2) than the overclocked 570 in the above posts, yet he has 17 frames below 90FPS and I had none.
I think its a load of tosh, i would not worry about it till someone has tried it.
It is, but VR is a different ball game.
To play VR well, so it is what I consider a decent experience you need a 390 or 970 absolute minimum.
The whole idea is you need to be averaging 90fps or in an ideal world not dropping sub 90fps at 2160x1200 resolution, that requires a far more powerful card than a 7950.
Minimum ideal VR VGA card is 390/970 and an ideal card would be 980Ti to be frank.
But of course it depends what games you want to play in VR, Elite Dangerous is one of the most demanding and HTC to play it maxed out was running it on a pair of Titan X's, though I think a single 980Ti or Titan X would do it pretty much just as well.
16.1 downloaded last week
I see 16.2 out today, may be i'll try that, doubt make any difference.
so I got 3 system
x5650 + nano
q8400 + gtx 960
q8400 + 7950
I thought the 7950 was still a very capable card, apparently not.
Id like to see the 7950 score if you plugged it into your best system.
It does actually. And Crossfire should be fully working now.
My single card also went up to 10.1 from 10. Not much but there you go
Yup, I expect despite not needing highly clocked 4 core+ cpu, the dual core is not enough to deliver the required frame rate for his test.
If anyone was so inclined they could disable cores and HT and lower clockspeed if they wanted to check.
Not particularly inclined myself, too much running atm!
