We received an Intel Arc A770 from JPR and were eager to put it through its paces. The drivers installed easily and we set up our Valve Index hoping that we could play VR games and also test performance against competing AMD and Nvidia video cards.

Unfortunately, we were greeted by the above image. Resetting the headset, cables, and moving to different USB ports, as well as trying SteamVR Beta and non-Beta plus installing Intel WHQL and Beta drivers made no difference.

Our next step was to contact Intel customer support. After a very brief waiting time on chat, we got connected with a Support agent who asked for a PC log file which we uploaded.

“Please know that Intel Arc graphics support for VR headsets continues to evolve as we ramp our products and add updates to our software stack”.

Contacting Intel’s representatives in charge of Arc gave us the same canned response with no ETA for VR support:

Intel Arc graphics support for VR headsets continues to evolve as we ramp our products and add updates to our software stack.

Although the A770 launched more than two months ago, there is still no proper SteamVR support from Intel. So if you are doing your last minute holiday shopping and want an Intel Arc video card to play your VR games using a native SteamVR headset like the Valve Index, you are probably out of luck.

However, BTR also tried the Reverb G2 which is a Windows Mixed Reality (WMR) headset, and it set up and works to get into VR, including into several SteamVR games we launched. BTR will test performance and give our experiences with the A770 and the G2 after the New Year.

Happy Holidays and Happy VR gaming!!

BTR received a $1199 RTX 4080 Founders Edition (FE) from Nvidia but are late because we got a bad case of COVID-19 after the AMD Event in Las Vegas over two weeks ago. This Part 1 RTX 4080 review is a 10-VR game performance analysis versus the RTX 3080 Ti, the RTX 4090, and the RX 6900 XT using the Valve Index. Although the RTX 4080 is not a workstation card, we have included workstation SPEC benches and selected popular creative and synthetic apps. Next week, Part 2 will feature the performance of more than 40 games and we will include DLSS 3.0 results.

We will focus on raw VR performance to consider whether the new RTX 4080 Founders Edition at $1199 delivers a good value as a compelling upgrade from the last generation Ampere RTX 3080 Ti which also launched at $1199. We will also compare performance with Nvidia’s current flagship, the $1599 RTX 4090, and the former AMD flagship, the RX 6900 XT, which launched at $999. In addition to gaming, VR, and SPECworkstation3 GPU results, we have added creative results using Geekbench, the Blender 3.3.0 benchmark, and complete Sandra 2020 and AIDA64 GPGPU benchmark results plus some pro applications including Blender rendering and OTOY OctaneRender.

We benchmark using FCAT VR and Windows 11 Pro Edition 2H22 with Intel’s Core i9-13900K that we just upgraded from i9-12900K, and 32GB of T-FORCE DELTA RGB 6400MHz CL40 DDR5 2x16GB memory on an ASUS Prime-A Wi-Fi Z790 motherboard. All games and benchmarks are patched to their latest versions, and we use GeForce Game Ready 526.98 drivers for GeForce cards and Adrenalin 22.11.1 for the RX 6900 XT.

Let’s first take a quick look at the RTX 4080 Founders Edition before we go to the test configuration

The RTX 4080 FE

The RTX 4080 and RTX 4090 are externally physically identical twin cards. Refer to the RTX 4090 unboxing as the features and sizes are the same.

The primary differences lie inside in the RTX 4080’s cut down GPU chip capabilities with about 40% fewer CUDA cores and its lesser power draw requirements. Nvidia recommends a 850W minimum PSU for the 450W TDP RTX 4090 and includes a 4X Molex cable adapter while the 320W TDP RTX 4080 only needs a 750W minimum PSU and a 3X Molex cable adapter is included in that box.

Newer PSUs may offer the new PCIe Gen5 single cable connector instead of using a bulky quad or tri cable adapter. Nvidia advises that the adapter should be firmly inserted into the card before installing it in the PC as an improperly seated connection may cause overheating and melting of the connector.

Both the RTX 4090 and RTX 4080 Founders Edition cards are beautifully designed using a very unique industrial style, and they are each much larger than the RTX 3080 Ti which is itself an imposing card. However, these new 40×0 FE cards tend not to heat up like the smaller last gen cards and they are also much quieter under full load. Either card looks great installed inside a case.

Disassembly appears to be difficult and should give pause to any enthusiast who may have custom watercooling in mind. In fact, we think that watercooling is a waste for the RTX 4080 Founders Edition as it doesn’t have any thermal issues.

Let’s check out our test configuration.

Test Configuration

Test Configuration – Hardware

• Intel Core i9-13900KF (HyperThreading and Turbo boost at stock settings)
• ASUS Prime-A Z790 LGA1700 motherboard (Intel Z790 chipset, latest BIOS, PCIe 5.0, DDR5)
• T-Force Delta RGB PC5-51200 6400MHz DDR5 CL40 2x16GB kit, supplied by TeamGroup
• Valve Index, 90Hz / 100% SteamVR Render Resolution
• RTX 4080 16GB Founders Edition, stock clocks, supplied by Nvidia
• Gigabyte RX 6900 XT GAMING OC, GV-R69XTGAMING OC-16GD 16GB, factory clocks
• RTX 3090 24GB Founders Edition, factory clocks, supplied by Nvidia
• RTX 4090 24GB Founders Edition, stock clocks, supplied by Nvidia
• 2 x T-Force Cardea Ceramic C440; 2TB PCIe Gen 4 x4 NVMe SSDs (one for AMD/one for Nvidia)
• T-Force M200 4TB USB 3.2 Gen2x2 Type-C external SSD, supplied by TeamGroup
• Super Flower LedEx, 1200W Platinum 80+ power supply unit
• MSI MAG Series CORELIQUID 360R (AIO) 360mm liquid CPU cooler
• Corsair 5000D ATX mid-tower (plus 1 x 140mm fan & 2 x 120mm Noctua fans)
• BenQ EW3270U 32? 4K HDR 60Hz
• LG C1 48″ 4K OLED HDR 120Hz display

Test Configuration – Software

• GeForce 526.98 drivers for Nvidia cards, and Adrenalin 22.11.1 for the RX 6900 XT.
• High Quality, prefer maximum performance, single display, set in the Nvidia control panel.
• High Quality textures, all optimizations off in the Adrenalin control panel
• VSync is off in the control panel and disabled for each game
• AA enabled as noted in games; all in-game settings are Ultra Preset or highest with 16xAF always applied – no upscaling is used except for five DLSS games tested using the Quality preset.
• Highest quality sound (stereo) used in all games
• All games have been patched to their latest versions
• VR charts use frametimes in ms where lower is better, but we also compare “unconstrained framerates” which shows what a video card could deliver (headroom; higher is better)
• Windows 11 Pro edition; 22H2 clean install for GeForce and Radeon cards using separate identical NVMe SSDs.
• Latest DirectX
• SteamVR latest beta

Games

VR Games

• Assetto Corsa: Competizione
• Elite Dangerous
• F1 2022
• Kayak Mirage
• Moss: Book II
• No Man’s Sky
• Project CARS 2
• Skyrim
• Sniper Elite
• The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners

Synthetic

• Time Spy & Time Spy Extreme (DX12)
• 3DMark FireStrike – Ultra & Extreme
• Superposition
• VRMark Blue Room
• AIDA64 GPGPU benchmarks
• Blender 3.3.0 benchmark
• Geekbench
• Sandra 2020 GPGPU Benchmarks
• SPECworkstation3
• SPECviewperfect 2020
• Octanebench
• FCAT VR benching tool
• OpenVR Benchmark tool

NVIDIA Control Panel settings

Here are the NVIDIA Control Panel settings.

Unfortunately, we also did not have time to check out overclocking, but temperatures and noise levels are much lower than the RTX 3090 or RTX 3080 Ti FEs. We plan to follow up with a 40-plus pancake gaming review including DLSS 3.

Let’s check out performance using 10 VR games plus Workstation and creative benches.

First, we look at VR performance.

10 VR Games

For this review, we benchmarked the Valve Index using FCAT VR and set the SteamVR render resolution to 100% (2016×2240) which uses a factor of 1.4X (the native resolution is 1440×1600) to compensate for lens distortion and to increase clarity. The Index is still considered one of the best overall headsets due to its outstanding tracking and solid feature set, and we are going to compare the performance of the RX 4080 versus the RX 4090, the RX 3080 Ti, and against the RX 6900 XT at each game’s Ultra/Highest settings.

IMPORTANT: BTR’s charts use frametimes in ms where lower is better, but we also compare “unconstrained framerates” which shows what a video card could deliver (headroom) if it wasn’t locked to either 90 FPS or to 45 FPS by the HMD. In the case of unconstrained FPS, measuring just one important performance metric, faster is better.

We had planned to include Star Wars: Squadrons and MS Flight Simulator 2020, but neither game records properly with FCAT VR. So let’s individually look at our 10 sim-heavy VR games’ performance using FCAT VR.

First up, Assetto Corsa: Competizione.

Assetto Corsa: Competizione (ACC)

BTR’s sim/racing editor, Sean Kaldahl created the replay benchmark run that we use for both the pancake game and the VR game. It is run at night with 20 cars, lots of geometry, and the lighting effects of the headlights, tail lights, and everything around the track looks spectacular.

Just like with Project CARS, you can save a replay after a race. Fortunately, the CPU usage is the same between a race and its replay so it is a reasonably accurate benchmark using the Circuit de Spa-Francorchamps.

iRacing may be more accurate or realistic, but Assetto Corsa: Competizione has some appeal because it feels more real than many other racing sims. It delivers the sensation of handling a highly-tuned racing machine driven to its edge.

Here are the ACC FCAT VR frametimes using VR Ultra using the RTX 3080 Ti, the RTX 4080, and the RTX 4090. Unfortunately, the latest ACC patch made it impossible to bench the RTX 6900 XT.

Here are the details are reported by FCAT-VR:

The RTX 3080 Ti managed 91.83 unconstrained FPS with 4649 (36%) synthesized frames with 1 dropped frame and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4080 delivered 118.42 unconstrained FPS with 207 (2%) synthesized frames with 1 dropped frame and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4090 achieved 164.03 unconstrained FPS together with 1 synthetic frame but with no dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The ACC racing experience is best with the RTX 4090 although the RTX 4080 delivers a nearly constant 90 FPS on the Epic VR preset unlike the RTX 3080 Ti which requires more than one-third of its frames to be synthesized. Only the RTX 4090 has the performance headroom to increase the render resolution to above 100% or use the Index’ faster refresh rate (120Hz/144Hz) or even to use a higher resolution headset like the Reverb G2.

Next, we check out Elite Dangerous.

Elite Dangerous (ED)

Elite Dangerous is a popular space sim built using the COBRA engine. It is hard to find a repeatable benchmark outside of the training missions.

A player will probably spend a lot of time piloting his space cruiser while completing a multitude of tasks as well as visiting space stations and orbiting a multitude of different planets. Elite Dangerous is also co-op and multiplayer with a dedicated following of players.

We picked the Ultra Preset and we set the Field of View to its maximum. The RX 6900 XT wouldn’t run with the latest driver according to the error message.

Here are the frametimes.

Here are the details as reported by FCAT-VR:

The RTX 3080 Ti managed 182.93 unconstrained FPS with 2 synthesized frames plus 1 dropped frame and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4080 delivered 230.98 unconstrained FPS with 1 synthesized frame and 1 dropped frame and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4090 brings 296.16 unconstrained FPS together with 2 synthetic frames but with 2 dropped frames and 2 Warp misses.

The experience playing Elite Dangerous at Ultra settings is not perceptibly different on any tested video card but the RTX 4090 has a lot more performance headroom to increase the render resolution or to use a higher resolution headset like the Reverb G2 or the Vive Pro 2.

Let’s look at our newest VR sim, F1 2022.

F1 2022

Codemasters has captured the entire Formula 1 2021 season racing in F1 2022, and the VR immersion is good. The graphics are customizeable and solid, handling and physics are good, the AI is acceptable, the scenery is outstanding, and the experience ticks many of the necessary boxes for a racing sim.

Here is the frametime plot for F1 2022.

Here are the details as reported by FCAT-VR.

The RX 6900 XT delivered 132.21 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 3080 Ti managed 152.67 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 4080 achieved 200.24 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 4090 delivered 254.72 unconstrained FPS together with 3 synthetic frames plus with 3 dropped frames and 3 Warp misses.

The experience playing F1 2022 using the Ultra preset is not very different on any of these video cards but the RTX 4090 and RTX 4080 have considerably more performance headroom to use 120Hz/144Hz or to use a higher resolution headset.

Kayak VR: Mirage

The outstanding near-photorealistic visual fidelity really sets Kayak VR: Mirage apart from other simulators. It boasts a wide range of locales with day/night/sunset options offering tropical, icy, desert, and even stormy scenarios with trips to Costa Rica, Antarctica, Norway, and Australia and occasional interactions with wildlife. It can be played as a relaxing sim or as a strenous workout with competitive time trials which offer asynchronous multiplayer and ranking on global leaderboards.

We benchmark at 100% resolution with the highest “Cinematic” in-game settings but do not use DLSS or FSR.

Here is the frametime plot for Kayak VR: Mirage.

Here are the FCAT-VR details.

The RX 6900 XT delivered 189.78 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized frames or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 3080 Ti managed 201.89 unconstrained FPS with 1 synthetic frame plus 1 dropped frame and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4080 delivered 257.16 unconstrained FPS with 1 synthesized and 1 dropped frame and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4090 got 329.35 unconstrained FPS together with 1 synthetic frame and 1 dropped frame plus 1 Warp miss.

Kayak VR: Mirage looks fantastic at 100% resolution with maximum settings and would be well-suited for play on the Reverb G2 with any of our test cards.

Next, we look at Moss: Book II.

Moss: Book II

Moss: Book II is an amazing VR experience with much better graphics than the original game. It’s a 3rd person puzzle adventure game played seated that offers a direct physical interaction between you (the Reader) and your avatar, Quill, a mouse that bring real depth to the story. Extreme attention has been paid to the tiniest details with overall great art composition and outstanding lighting that make this game a must-play for gamers of all ages.

Moss II boasts very good visuals and we use the in-game highest settings.

Here are the frametimes plots of our four cards.

Here are the details are reported by FCAT-VR:

The RX 6900 XT delivered 260.40 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 3080 Ti managed 242.83 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 4080 delivered 308.44 unconstrained FPS with 1 synthetic and 1 dropped frame and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4090 achieved 436.34 unconstrained FPS no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The experience playing Moss II on the Valve Index is identical between cards. It is not demanding so it can be played on a high resolution headset like the Reverb G2 or the Vive Pro 2 and supersampling may also be used.

Next, we will check out another demanding VR game, No Man’s Sky.

No Man’s Sky (NMS)

No Man’s Sky is an action-adventure survival single and multiplayer game that emphasizes survival, exploration, fighting, and trading. It is set in a procedurally generated deterministic open universe, which includes over 18 quintillion unique planets using its own custom game engine.

The player takes the role of a Traveller in an uncharted universe by starting on a random planet with a damaged spacecraft equipped with only a jetpack-equipped exosuit and a versatile multi-tool that can also be used for defense. The player is encouraged to find resources to repair his spacecraft allowing for intra- and inter-planetary travel, and to interact with other players.

Here is the No Man’s Sky Frametime plot. We set the settings to Maximum which is a step over Ultra including setting the anisotropic filtering to 16X and upgrading to FXAA+TAA. Since DLSS is available for RTX cards and the Quality setting improves performance without impacting image quality, we used it. Updated: We did not use any upscaling method.

Here are the FCAT-VR details of our comparative runs.

The RX 6900 XT brought 104.13 unconstrained FPS with 1601 (23%) synthesized frames plus 9 dropped frames and 9 Warp misses.

The RTX 3080 Ti managed 119.88 unconstrained FPS with 14 synthetic frames and with 1 dropped frame and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4080 delivered 159.10 unconstrained FPS with 2 synthesized frames but no dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 4090 achieved 201.96 unconstrained FPS together with 17 synthetic frames but with no dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The experience playing No Man’s Sky using the highest settings is not very different using the three GeForce video cards but RX 6900 XT gamers may want to lower some individual settings to remain above 90 FPS. The RTX 4080 and RTX 4090 have enough performance headroom to increase the refresh rate, render resolution, or to perhaps use a higher resolution headset.

Let’s continue with another VR game, Project CARS 2, that we still like better than its successor even though it is no longer available for online play.

Project CARS 2 (PC2)

There is still a sense of immersion that comes from playing Project CARS 2 in VR using a wheel and pedals. It uses its in-house Madness engine, and the physics implementation is outstanding.

Project CARS 2 offers many performance options and settings and we prefer playing with SMAA Ultra rather than to use MSAA.

We used maximum settings including for Motion Blur.

Here is the frametime plot.

Here are the FCAT-VR details.

The RX 6900 XT delivered 163.67 unconstrained FPS with 1 synthesized and 1 dropped frames plus 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 3080 Ti managed 142.16 unconstrained FPS with 2 synthetic frames plus 2 dropped frames and 2 Warp misses.

The RTX 4080 got 200.88 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized frames nor dropped frames and no Warp misses.

The RTX 4090 achieved 253.50 unconstrained FPS together with 3 synthetic frames plus 2 dropped frames and 2 Warp misses.

The experience playing Project CARS 2 using maximum settings is similar for all four video cards but the RTX 4090 and RTX 4080 have far more performance headroom to increase the frequency to 120Hz or to use a higher resolution headset.

Next we will check out a classic VR game, Skyrim VR.

Skyrim VR

Skyrim VR is an older game that is no longer supported by Bethesda, but fortunately the modding community has adopted it. It is not as demanding as many of the newer VR ports so its performance is still very good on maxed-out settings using its Creation engine.

We benchmarked vanilla Skyrim using its highest settings plus we increased the in-game Supersample option to maximum.

Here are the frametime results.

Here are the details of our comparative runs as reported by FCAT-VR.

The RX 6900 XT provided 162.13 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 3080 Ti managed 194.63 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 4080 achieved 239.08 unconstrained FPS with 2 synthetic frames plus 2 dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4090 delivered 337.76 unconstrained FPS together with 2 synthetic frame and with 2 dropped frames plus 1 Warp miss.

All cards deliver an identical vanilla Skyrim VR experience with a ton of extra performance headroom to add mods and, in addition, to raise the render resolution using the two faster cards.

Next we check out Sniper Elite VR.

Sniper Elite VR

Sniper Elite VR’s visuals are decent with good texture work that is well-realized. The building architecture and panoramas look good, explosions are convincing and the weapons convey a sense of weight, although not achieving realism. It is primarily an arcade style sniping game featuring its signature X-Ray kill cam, but it offers multiple ways to achieve goals including with explosives and by using three other main weapon choices besides your rifle.

We benchmarked using the Highest settings.

Here is the frametime plot.

Here are the details:

The RX 6900 XT delivered 222.93 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 3080 Ti got 239.07 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 4080 delivered 223.33 unconstrained FPS with no synthesized or dropped frames nor Warp misses.

The RTX 4090 brought 318.03 unconstrained FPS together with 1 synthetic and 1 dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

All four cards deliver a similar playing experience on High with the faster two cards offering more performance headroom. We recommend that any performance headroom be used for increasing the SteamVR render resolution. Since the RTX 4080 only matches the RX 6900 XT and is behind the RTX 3080 Ti, we suspect it may be a driver issue.

Last up, The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners.

The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners

The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinner is the last of BTR’s 10 VR game benching suite. It is a first person survival horror adventure RPG with a strong emphasis on crafting. Its visuals using the Unreal 4 engine are very good and it makes good use of physics for interactions.

We benchmarked Saints and Sinners using its High preset and we left the Pixel Density at 100%. Here is the frametime chart.

Here are the details as reported by FCAT-VR.

The RX 6900 XT delivered 240.00 unconstrained FPS with 1 synthetic frames and 1 dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 3080 Ti managed 222.18 unconstrained FPS with 1 synthetic frames and 1 dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4080 got 260.94 unconstrained FPS with 1 synthetic frames and 1 dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

The RTX 4090 achieved 366.41 unconstrained FPS together with 6 synthetic frames and with 4 dropped frames and 4 Warp misses.

Playing The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners using the in-game Ultra preset and 100% Pixel Density is similar for all 4 cards but there is significantly more performance headroom for the RTX 4090 and to a lesser extent the RTX 4080 for increasing the render resolution or using a higher resolution headset.

Let’s check out synthetic VR tests and unconstrained framerates.

Unconstrained Framerates & Synthetic VR Benchmarks

The following chart summarizes the overall Unconstrained Framerates (the performance headroom) of our two cards using our 10 VR test games. The preset is listed on the chart and higher is better. In addition, we present three synthetic VR benchmarks.

The RX 4080 FE averages close to one-third higher unconstrained frames for many VR benchmarks and sits in between the RTX 3080 Ti and the RTX 4090 FE in this important performance metric. However, unconstrained framerates are just one metric that has to be taken together with the frametime plots to have real meaning.

It is clear that the RTX 4090 and the RTX 4080 are ready for higher resolution headsets than the Valve Index. In many cases, either card may be able to use the higher refresh rates of 120Hz/144Hz for fast-paced and/or sim racing games.

Creative, Pro & Workstation Apps

Let’s look at Creative applications next to see if the RTX 4080 is a good upgrade from the RTX 3080 Ti or RX 6900 XT. We test starting with Geekbench.

GeekBench

GeekBench is an excellent CPU/GPU benchmarking program which runs a series of tests and times how long a GPU (in this case) takes to complete its tasks. It benchmarks OpenCL, Vulkan, and CUDA performance

OpenCL, Vulkan, and CUDA Performance

The RTX 4080 OpenCL, Vulkan, and CUDA performance are charted below.

Next we test the summary charts below show the overall comparative performance scores.

Again, the RTX 4090 performance is outstanding.

Next up, Blender benchmark.

Blender 3.3.0 Benchmark

Blender is a very popular open source 3D content creation suite. It supports every aspect of 3D development with a complete range of tools for professional 3D creation.

For the following chart, higher is better as the benchmark renders a scene multiple times and gives the results in samples per minute.

Blender’s benchmark performance is highest using the RTX 4090, and often the amount of time saved is substantial over using the next fastest card, the RTX 4080.

Next, we look at the OctaneBench.

OTOY Octane Bench

OctaneBench allows you to benchmark your GPU using OctaneRender. The hardware and software requirements to run OctaneBench are the same as for OctaneRender Standalone.

We run OctaneBenc 2020.1.5 for Windows and here are the RTX 4080’s complete results and overall score of 946.30

Here is the summary comparing the three cards that can run this render benchmark.

The RTX 4090 is a beast of a card when used for rendering and the RTX 4080 sits in between, above the RTX 3080 Ti.

Next, we move on to AIDA64 GPGPU benchmarks.

AIDA64

AIDA64 is an important industry tool for benchmarkers. Its GPGPU benchmarks measure performance and give scores to compare against other popular video cards.

AIDA64’s benchmark code methods are written in Assembly language, and they are well-optimized for every popular AMD, Intel, NVIDIA and VIA processor by utilizing the appropriate instruction set extensions. We use the Engineer’s full version of AIDA64 courtesy of FinalWire. AIDA64 is free to to try and use for 30 days.

Here is the chart summary of the AIDA64 GPGPU benchmarks with the RTX 4090, the RTX 4080, the RTX 3080 Ti, and the RX 6900 XT side-by-side.

Generally the RTX 4090 is faster at almost all of AIDA64’s GPGPU benchmarks than the other cards with the RTX 4080 in second place. So let’s look at Sandra 2020 next.

SiSoft Sandra 2020

To see where the CPU, GPU, and motherboard performance results differ, there is no better tool than SiSoft’s Sandra 2020. SiSoftware SANDRA (the System ANalyser, Diagnostic and Reporting Assistant) is a excellent information & diagnostic utility in a complete package. It is able to provide all the information about your hardware, software, and other devices for diagnosis and for benchmarking. Sandra is derived from a Greek name that implies “defender” or “helper”.

There are several versions of Sandra, including a free version of Sandra Lite that anyone can download and use. 20/21-R16a is the latest version, and we are using the full engineer suite courtesy of SiSoft. Sandra 2020 features continuous multiple monthly incremental improvements over earlier versions of Sandra. It will benchmark and analyze all of the important PC subsystems and even rank your PC while giving recommendations for improvement.

With the above in mind, we ran Sandra’s intensive GPGPU benchmarks and charted the results summarizing them. The performance results of the RTX 4080 and RTX 4090 are compared with the performance results of the RTX 3080 Ti, and the RX 6900 XT.

Second only to the RTX 4090, the RTX 4080 is faster than the RTX 3080 Ti and it distinguishes itself in every area – Processing, Cryptography, Financial and Scientific Analysis, Image Processing, and Bandwidth.

Next up, SPEC benchmarks.

SPECworkstation3.1 Benchmarks

All the SPECworkstation 3 benchmarks are based on professional applications, most of which are in the CAD/CAM or media and entertainment fields. All of these benchmarks are free except for vendors of computer-related products and/or services.

The most comprehensive workstation benchmark is SPECworkstation 3. It’s a free-standing benchmark which does not require ancillary software. It measures GPU, CPU, storage and all other major aspects of workstation performance based on actual applications and representative workloads. We only tested the GPU-related workstation performance as checked in the image above.

Here are our RTX 4080 raw SPECworkstation 3.1 raw scores:

Below are the SPECworkstation 3.1 RTX 4090 results summarized in a chart along with the three competing cards, the RTX 4090, the RTX 3080 Ti, and the RTX 6900 XT. Higher is better since we are comparing scores.

The RTX 4090 is not a workstation card, yet it uses brute force to win most of the benches against the other cards with the RTX 4080 in second place.

Finally, we benchmark using SPECviewperfect GPU benches.

SPECviewperf 2020 GPU Benches

The SPEC Graphics Performance Characterization Group (SPECgpc) has released a 2020-22 version of its SPECviewperf benchmark that features updated viewsets, new models, support for up to 4K display resolutions, and improved set-up and results management. We use the highest available 3800×2120 display resolution for high end cards.

Here are SPECviewperf 2020 GPU RTX 4080 benchmarks summarized in a chart together with our three competing cards.

Although we see three architectures with different strengths and weaknesses, the RTX 4090 is a beast in SPEC benchmarks followed by the RTX 4080 in a solid second place.

After seeing the totality of the benches, creative users may choose to upgrade their existing systems with a new RTX 4080 or 4090 based on the performance increases and the associated increases in productivity that they require. The question to buy a RTX 4080 should be based on the workflow and requirements of each user as well as budget. Time is money to a professional depending on how these apps are used.

Let’s head to our conclusion.

Final Thoughts

Besides suffering with COVID-19, this has been an enjoyable exploration evaluating the new Ada Lovelace RTX 4080 FE versus the RTX 4090 FE, the RTX 3080 TI FE, and Gigabyte RTX 6900 XT Gaming OC. The RTX 4080 performed brilliantly performance-wise, blowing away its other two former flagship competitors and slotting in almost one-third slower than the RTX 4090.

The RTX 4080 at $1199 is a decent upgrade from the $1199 RTX 3080 Ti although it is not as impressive as upgrading from a RTX 3090 ($1499) to a RTX 4090 ($1599). If a VR enthusiast wants the very fastest card, then the RTX 4090 is the best choice for high resolution VR headsets and for creative/workstation apps. For $400 less, the RTX 4080 is a solid choice and it will provide a performance uplift over the RTX 3080 Ti, but not as dramatically as the RTX 4090.

In the last Ampere generation, the $699 RTX 3080 provided the best value, but almost unbelievably, the RTX 4090 provides the best performance bang for buck in Nvidia’s new Ada Lovelace lineup so far. We also notice that there is plenty of performance room for a possible future RTX 4080 Ti to slot in between the RTX 4080 and the RTX 4090.

We are very impressed with the RTX 4080 raw performance after testing it over the past few days in VR. It currently stands as the second fastest video card in the world and would be a solid choice for a high resolution VR headset.

The Founders Edition of the RTX 4080 is well-built, solid, good-looking, and it stays cool and quiet even when overclocked – the big card does not get hot like the RTX 3090 and under load it is quieter than the RTX 3080 Ti FE. The RTX 4080 Founders Edition offers a big performance improvement over the previous $1199 RTX 3080 FE for VR and pro apps although it doesn’t give as great a value as when the RTX 3080 FE launched for $699 two years ago.

However, we cannot give any final verdict now as there is a lot more RTX 4080 benchmarking results on the way next week. We will more extensively test the RTX 4080, RTX 4090, RTX 3080 Ti, and RX 6900 XT using 40-plus pancake games including testing DLSS 3 to determine overall value. Future reviews will hopefully test AMD’s upcoming 7000 series cards and we also plan to test the role of the CPU for VR performance. Stay tuned to BTR!

Happy Gaming!

The RX 6600 XT is priced starting at $379 while the factory overclocked Red Devil is priced higher than the $399 RTX 3060 Ti Founders Edition, yet AMD has positioned its newest mainstream video card against the entry level $329 RTX 3060. We have found the Red Devil RX 6600 XT to be a bit faster than than the RTX 3060 in rasterized pancake games but outclassed by the Ti. For this VR showdown, we will use the Valve Index and 10 VR games to compare the performance of the RX 6600 XT with the RTX 3060.

We want to see if the RX 6600 XT is worthy of AMD’s claim of VR premium and how it compares with the RTX 3060 which is adequate as an entry level mainstream card to power a Valve Index. Although a fast CPU is important for geometry and other processing, smooth VR delivery depends mostly on the video card. An underpowered video card can even cause reprojecting and artifacting for a substandard playing experience that may even lead to VR sickness.We currently benchmark ten VR games using the Valve Index that features 2880×1600 resolution (1440×1600 pixels per eye), the same as the Vive Pro and with similar performance at 90Hz/90FPS. BTR’s testing platform is an overclocked Intel Core i9-10900K, an EVGA Z490 FTW motherboard, and 32 GB of Vulcan Dark Z DDR4 at 3600MHz on a recent clean install of Windows 10 64-bit Pro Edition.

It is important to be aware of VR performance since poorly delivered frames can make a VR experience unpleasant. It’s also important to understand how we accurately benchmark VR games using FCAT-VR as explained here. But before we benchmark our VR games, check out our Test Configuration below.

Test Configuration – Hardware

• Intel Core i9-10900K (HyperThreading/Turbo boost On; All cores overclocked to 5.1GHz/5.0Ghz. Comet Lake DX11 CPU graphics)
• EVGA Z490 FTW motherboard (Intel Z490 chipset, v1.3 BIOS, PCIe 3.0/3.1/3.2 specification, CrossFire/SLI 8x+8x), supplied by EVGA
• T-FORCE DARK Z 32GB DDR4 (2x16GB, dual channel at 3600MHz), supplied by Team Group
• Valve Index, 90Hz
• EVGA RTX 3060 Black 12GB, stock clocks, on loan from EVGA
• Red Devil RX 6600 XT 8GB, stock clocks, on loan from PowerColor
• 2 x 1TB Team Group MP33 NVMe2 PCIe SSD for C: drive (one for AMD; one for NVIDIA)
• 1.92TB San Disk enterprise class SATA III SSD (storage)
• 2TB Micron 1100 SATA III SSD (storage)
• 1TB Team Group GX2 SATA III SSD (storage)
• 1TB T-FORCE DELTA MAX SATA III SSD (storage), supplied by Team Group
• ANTEC HCG1000 Extreme, 1000W gold power supply unit
• Samsung G7 Odyssey (LC27G75TQSNXZA) 27? 2560×1440/240Hz/1ms/G-SYNC/HDR600 monitor
• DEEPCOOL Castle 360EX AIO 360mm liquid CPU cooler
• Phanteks Eclipse P400 ATX mid-tower (plus 1 Noctua 140mm fan)

Test Configuration – Software

• GeForce 471.68 drivers – Stock settings in the NVIDIA control panel
• Adrenalin 21.8.1 drivers. Stock settings in the AMD control panel
• Windows 10 64-bit Pro edition; latest updates
• Latest DirectX
• All 10 VR games are patched to their latest versions at time of publication
• FCAT VR Capture (non-public) Beta
• FCAT VR Beta 18 (non-public)
• SteamVR – at 100% resolution

10 VR Game benchmark suite & 1 synthetic test

Synthetic

• OpenVR Benchmark

SteamVR Games

• Assetto Corsa Competizione
• Borderlands 2
• Boneworks
• Elite Dangerous
• Half Life: Alyx
• No Man’s Sky
• Pavlov
• Project CARS 2
• Skyrim
• The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners

It is important to remember that BTR’s charts use frametimes in ms where lower is better, but we also compare “unconstrained framerates” which shows what a video card could deliver (headroom) if it wasn’t locked to either 90 FPS or to 45 FPS by the HMD. In the case of unconstrained FPS which measures just one important performance metric, faster is better.

Let’s individually look at our ten VR games’ performance using FCAT VR. All of our games were benchmarked at 100% SteamVR resolution as we benchmark the Red Devil RX 6600 XT to see how it compares with the EVGA RTX 3060 Black.

The OpenVR benchmark ranks the RX 6600 XT and the RTX 3060 almost identically.

But we really want to see gaming benchmarks. First up, Assetto Corsa Competizione.

Half Life: Alyx

Half Life: Alyx uses an adaptive/dynamic scaling algorithm which uses a card’s performance headroom to subsample in demanding scenes and to supersample in less demanding scenes. We used its console commands to lock the SteamVR resolution to 100% so that it did not supersample or subsample and we set the graphics preset to High.

Here is the frametime plot for Half Life Alyx.

Here are the details as reported by FCAT-VR.

The RX 6600 XT delivered 114.87 unconstrained FPS with 2 dropped frames and 2 Warp misses, but 222 (4%) of its frames were synthesized.

The RTX 3060 managed 114.43 unconstrained FPS with no Warp misses but with 2 dropped frames and 399 (6%) synthetic frames.

Half Life: Alyx isn’t particularly demanding unless the Super Resolution increased in SteamVR settings, but unless console commands are used, the game will automatically subsample or supersample as needed and it will run fine with High settings on both cards. Unfortunately, while playing the game, Warp misses happened too frequently with the 6600 XT to mar an otherwise good VR experience.

Next, we will check out another demanding VR game, No Man’s Sky.

No Man’s Sky

No Man’s Sky is an action-adventure survival single and multiplayer game that emphasizes survival, exploration, fighting, and trading. It is set in a procedurally generated deterministic open universe, which includes over 18 quintillion unique planets using its own custom game engine.

The player takes the role of a Traveller in an uncharted universe by starting on a random planet with a damaged spacecraft equipped with only a jetpack-equipped exosuit and a versatile multi-tool that can also be used for defense. The player is encouraged to find resources to repair his spacecraft allowing for intra- and inter-planetary travel, and to interact with other players.

Here is the No Man’s Sky Frametime plot. We set the settings to Standard, but we also set the anisotropic filtering to 16X and upgraded to FXAA+TAA. Although DLSS is available for RTX cards and the Quality setting improves performance without impacting image quality significantly, we did not test with it.

Here are the FCAT-VR details of our comparative runs.

The RX 6600 XT delivered 76.91 unconstrained FPS with no dropped frames nor Warp misses, but 3221 (50%) frames were synthesized.

The RTX 3060 produced 103.61 unconstrained FPS with no dropped frames nor Warp misses, and it only required 191 (3%) synthetic frames.

Although, the RTX 3060 gives a better experience over the RX 6600 XT in No Man’s Sky using the Standard preset, it isn’t strong enough to play on the Enhanced setting without synthesizing frames.

Next we check out Pavlov.

Pavlov

There is a real sense of immersion that comes from playing Pavlov in VR. Pavlov is the most popular multiplayer VR shooter with a primary focus on its community. Realistic fast-paced combat is a large part of its core experience, and even tanks have been added.

We benchmarked using the training sessions with the highest settings.

Here is the frametime plot.

Here are the details:

The RX 6600 XT delivered 165.97 unconstrained FPS with no dropped, synthesized frames, or Warp misses.

The RTX 3060 delivered 175.96 unconstrained FPS also with no dropped, synthesized frames, or Warp misses.

The RTX 3060 delivers an identical VR experience to the RX 6600 XT although it has a little more performance headroom. We recommend that it be used for increasing the SteamVR render resolution or for playing at 120Hz.

Next we will check out another demanding VR game, Project CARS 2

Project CARS 2

There is a real sense of immersion that comes from playing Project CARS 2 in VR using a wheel and pedals. It uses its in-house Madness engine, and the physics implementation is outstanding. We are disappointed with Project CARS 3, and will continue to use the older game instead for VR benching.

Project CARS 2 offers many performance options and settings and we prefer playing with SMAA Ultra.

We used maximum settings including for Motion Blur although it looks best to us on Low or Medium. For lesser cards, we would also recommend lowering grass and reflections to maximize framerate delivery as motion smoothing or reprojection tends to cause visible artifacting.

Here is the frametime plot.

Here are the FCAT-VR details.

The RX 6600 XT managed 100.15 unconstrained FPS with 17 dropped frame and 17 Warp misses but 566 (6%) frames were synthesized.

The RTX 3060 achieved 77.43 unconstrained FPS with 1 dropped frame and with 1 Warp miss but with 4820 (50%) synthetic frames. It had no Warp misses.

The experience playing Project CARS 2 on our medium VR settings is unsatisfactory for both cards and we would recommend lowering individual settings or even lower the resolution a bit as needed to stay out of reprojection. The RX 6600 XT is faster, but the VR experience is spoiled by dropped frames and Warp misses.

Let’s benchmark Skyrim VR.

Skyrim VR

Skyrim VR is an older game that is no longer supported by Bethesda, but fortunately the modding community has adopted it. It is not as demanding as many of the newer VR ports so its performance is still very good on maxed-out settings using its Creation engine.

We benchmarked Skyrim VR using its highest settings but we did not increase or Supersample the resolution.

Here are the frametime results.

Here are the details of our comparative runs as reported by FCAT-VR.

The RX 6600 XT delivered 128.30 unconstrained FPS with no dropped or synthetic frames and there were no Warp misses.

The RTX 3060 managed 129.39 unconstrained FPS, also with no dropped frames or Warp misses, but 26 synthetic frames were produced

Both cards deliver an identical experience with a little bit of performance headroom to add mods or to Supersample.

Last up, The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners.

The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners

The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinner is the last of BTR’s 10 VR game benching suite. It is a first person survival horror adventure RPG with a strong emphasis on crafting. Its visuals using the Unreal 4 engine are outstanding and it makes good use of physics for interactions.

We benchmarked Saints and Sinners using its highest settings and we left the Pixel Density at 100%.. Here is the frametime chart. Please note that the Pixel Density is 100%.

Here are the details as reported by FCAT-VR.

The RX 6600 XT produced 120.55 unconstrained FPS with 7 dropped frames and 7 Warp misses, but 114 (2%) frames were synthesized.

The RTX 3060 managed 115.00 unconstrained FPS with no dropped frames nor Warp misses and 37 (1%) synthetic frames were generated.

Playing The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners using the in-game maximum settings and 100% Pixel Density should be similar for both of our cards although the RX 6600 XT has too many dropped frames and Warp misses.

Let’s check out our conclusion.

Conclusion

It is great to see AMD and NVIDIA delivering two mainstream cards that are both priced below $400 – if they can be found at all at MSRP – that drop the entry price for VR. The EVGA RTX 3060 Black sits in a unique position as the fastest $329 MSRP video card available for VR and it offers reasonable performance for use with a Valve Index, and no doubt it would offer excellent performance for an original Vive, Rift CV1, or even for a Rift S. The Red Devil RX 6600 XT at above $400 should be slightly faster, but unfortunately it suffers from microstuttering together with excessive dropped frames and Warp misses, and we suggest that AMD’s driver team should address this.

Both the RTX 3060 and the RX 6600 XT can max multiple VR games in our benching suite if the resolution is left at 100% or slightly subsampled, or if the in-game settings are lowered. But if someone is going to spend $1000 for a premium HMD, it makes sense to pair it with a faster video card like the RTX 3060 Ti Founders Edition which is MSRP/SEP priced below the Red Devil RX 6600 XT. However, one cannot pair a high resolution headset like the Reverb G2 or the Vive Pro 2 with either card.

The RTX 3060 is a good card for high/medium quality PC VR at a rather bargain price of $329 – if it can be purchased at this price – and the RTX 3060 Ti is a more solid offering for $70 more. Unfortunately, the RX 6600 XT at $379 barely matches the experience of the RX 3060 at $329 – never mind the Red Devil at above $400 – and it needs some attention from AMD’s driver team before we can give it a solid recommendation for VR. We did not test DLSS in VR nor did we use FSR and will leave that comparison for a future review.

Next up, we plan to review Myst which launches tomorrow on Steam also in VR. It features ray tracing in the pancake version and DLSS in both versions.

Stay tuned to BTR!

Happy VR Gaming!

BTR received a Pro 2 review kit from HTC/VIVE nearly four weeks ago and we have been working to achieve the highest performance with the best visuals using a RTX 3080 Ti. The Pro 2 is a high resolution VR headset with a per eye resolution of 2448×2448 that will cause even the fastest video cards to struggle at SteamVR’s default 150% Render Resolution.

BTR has been reviewing and benchmarking VR games and hardware since 2016 when we started out with a Rift CV1 (1080×1200) and then upgraded to a Vive Pro (1440×1600) two years later, and then a Valve Index (1440×1600) especially for its wider field of vision (FoV) and higher refresh rate options 144Hz/120Hz vs. 90Hz. Recently we reviewed a Reverb G2 on loan from Hewlett Packard (HP) and also a Reverb G1 (both at 2160×2160).

The original Pro and the Index, both at 1440×1600 per eye resolution, although they are a noticeable upgrade over the Rift CV1’s 1080×1200 per eye resolution, the “screendoor” effect (the unlighted space between pixels) is still visible. However, the Reverb G2 has almost eliminated it by using improved lenses and and an LCD display at 2160×2160 resolution per eye to earn its reputation as the best headset for VR sims even if its tracking is not perfect. Now Vive uses an even higher “5K” resolution LCD for the Pro 2 with 2448×2448 per eye native resolution and with a new bespoke dual stacked Fresnel lens design .

The Reverb G2 at $599 and the Vive Pro 2 at $799 are competitors and they are both aimed at professional or prosumer consumers rather than strictly at VR gamers like the Index, Cosmos, or the Quest 2 are. Although the G2 is a complete $599 VR kit, the Pro 2 headset by itself costs $799 and it still requires two base stations ($199 each) and two controllers ($199 each) making the full Pro 2 kit considerably more expensive. The Pro 2’s gaming advantages lie primarily with its outstanding base station tracking although the G2 can also be set up in a mixed VR configuration also by using Vive Trackers and dongles with base stations and SteamVR controllers.

Since 2016, BTR has continued to focus on VR, and not only do we review select VR games, we benchmark and chart their frametimes and unconstrained framerates (the performance headroom) with multiple video cards from AMD and NVIDIA using FCAT VR. Because the Pro 2 is the newest high resolution headset, we picked the RTX 3080 Ti to test the performance of 6 representative VR games “best playable” settings. The new Ti about 10% faster than a RTX 3080 or less than 5% slower than a RTX 3090 and its performance should be in the same class as a RX 6800 or RX 6900 XT.

Let’s take a closer look at the Pro 2 which launched earlier this month and its evolution from the Pro which launched in 2018. The improvements between the original Pro and the Pro 2 lie primarily in 3 areas: (1) improved lenses, (2) wider field of view (FoV), and (3) a higher resolution LCD.

• New bespoke dual stacked lens
• Wider FoV
• New high resolution “5K” LCD panel (higher refresh rate to 120Hz, brighter, lower persistence, reduced mura, better contrast and colors)

Because they are so similar, we were able to simply switch out the original Pro and install the new Pro 2 in its place taking care only to replace the link box and update the software. Everything else except for minor cosmetic differences/colors are the same.

Unfortunately, the Pro 2 sports the same only fair headphones/audio solution and the same poor microphone, but the same basic well-constructed/well-balanced headset with the same weight, ergonomics, and layout that was introduced in 2018. We had hoped that they might have made made more improvements but HTC/Vive is concentrating on VR for industry with their completely redesigned and lighter Focus 3 so they only made the barest of necessary upgrades to an already solid headset.

We find that the screen door effect (SDE) is completely gone using the Pro 2 and its overall clarity is even better than the G2. Although god rays and even excessive brightness are still issues for many, and some OLED purists are offended by an LED display, the Pro 2’s increased clarity is impressive, and the widened FoV for those whose face fits the headset or who take the time to modify it is the difference between wearing small googles and wearing a scuba mask.

By using the Pro 2 and comparing its visuals to the older headsets, VR becomes more immersive, the colors are better, the clarity and detailing are much more impressive, and even small text can be easily read. We even feel it edges out the G2 in 3 areas: FoV, larger sweet spot, and slightly higher overall clarity. But the Pro 2’s biggest positives are for its ability to be used wirelessly and that it is a native SteamVR headset although Vive chose to pair it with their own Vive Console. Another plus is its ability to handle 120Hz/120FPS for action games. It’s big negative is its high price – $799 for just the headset (+$400 for the base stations/controllers) compared with $599 for the G2 which is a complete kit and has already been discounted substantially by some etailers.

After spending nearly a month with the Pro 2, we sent the review sample back to Vive and purchased our own headset from Newegg to use as our go-to set for VR and also for future benchmarking to compare performance with the Reverb G2 and with the Valve Index. Overall – despite its faults – it is the highest resolution headset available and it works well for VR benchmarking and gaming. However, it is a challenge to find the right game settings and the appropriate SteamVR Render Resolution to deliver an enjoyable VR experience without exceeding even the fastest video card’s capabilities.

Before we check performance, let’s get started by unboxing the Pro 2 on the following page.

Unboxing

The Vive Pro 2 review sample kit arrived in the same style box as our 2018 review sample of the original Vive Pro. Everything between the two kits are identical except for the headsets and the cable link boxes. Here is the full unboxing of the Vive Pro kit that is the same for the Pro 2.

We tested and benchmarked the Pro 2 review sample for 3 weeks and then returned it to Vive as we had received our own Pro 2 headset that we purchased from Newegg for $729 from their preorder promotion. Following is the unboxing of the retail headset. If you already have an original Vive or Pro setup, you are ready for the Pro 2 – just swap the headsets and the link boxes – and follow the software prompts.

We like Viveport for the ability to preview and play many VR games and we will take advantage of their free two month subscription included with our purchase of the Pro 2 headset.

In the box you will find the Pro 2 headset, the link box, and the necessary DisplayPort and USB 3.0 cables..

The contents of the box are below.

Below we see the Pro 2 (left) go face-to-face with the the original Pro. Only the colors have changed.

Top down view below. The ear cushions are cosmetically different but it has the same decent positional audio but it is not as good as the Index audio.

The new design does a much better job of accommodating glasses wearers. Easy adjustments for tightening the headset remain permanent until changed which makes it easy to remove or to put on the headset.

Aside from the well-worn out faceplate of the original Pro, it’s difficult to tell the headsets apart – except by looking at the lenses..

The VIVE Pro 2 uses a new bespoke dual stacked lens design paired with a “5K” LED panel. Actually, it’s “2.5K” to each eye (4896×2448 total; 2448×2448 per eye) which is a huge amount of pixels for any video card to handle. By comparison, the original Pro currently boasts 1440×1600 pixels per eye. Once the sweet spot is found, one can see that the FoV has been widened to what Vive calls 120 degrees – probably not, but slightly wider than the Index and definitely wider than the original Pro. Although we lik the deeper blacks of OLED panels, the Pro 2’s LCD is a superior panel and its blacks are deeper than the Index and good enough for Elite Dangerous.

The base station external tracking of the Pro 2 remains outstanding and it is the single factor that makes it an overall better choice over the Reverb G2. Although the G2’s positional head tracking is responsive, some rotational latency may be noticed at times, and positional controller tracking jitter is more noticeable for shooters that is not visible with the Pro 2.

Setup

The setup for the Vive Pro requires installing two base stations on opposite sides of the room with the VR gamer in the middle. Usually they are mounted high up on a wall for tracking which is much more complex and time-consuming than setting up the self-contained tracking of the Windows Mixed Reality (WMR) G2. Refer to BTR’s original review of the Pro for setup procedures. The main difference is that the Pro only needed SteamVR whereas the Pro 2 requires the new Vive Console to run alongside it.

There are currently five settings in the Vive Console to cover most capable video cards from a GTX 1070 to a RTX 3090. However, to take full advantage of the Pro 2’s high native resolution with a fast video card, only Ultra and Extreme should be considered. Unfortunately, setting Extreme for demanding VR games which requires exactly 120 FPS delivered at a strict cadence – never falling below 120 FPS – will require faster video cards than are currently available. If exactly 120 FPS cannot be delivered, then the framerate is automatically halved to 60 FPS which is not ideal and somewhat defeats the purpose of using the Extreme setting in the first place.

A reason for considering Extreme 120Hz is for visually undemanding action games or for games where the player may be satisfied with a 60 FPS delivery which is still a better option than 45 FPS (from using Ultra/90 FPS where the framerate is also halved). We tested and benchmarked the Pro 2 on Ultra and Extreme settings since we want to take advantage of the full 2448×2448 per eye native resolution of the panel and also look for some general rules for setting the SteamVR Render Resolution for the best VR experience.

Motion Smoothing & Delivering framerates at an Exact Cadence

Benchmarking VR is quite complex due to the fact that VR needs to sustain a fixed framerate target locked to 90 FPS (or 120Hz; but we will use 90Hz in our following examples). If a PC can not meet that 90 FPS target, the frame rate is halved to 45 FPS to make sure that there is no judder or it may cause a VR type of motion sickness.

A game cannot exceed 90 FPS otherwise the player will see tearing in the HMD and may also feel sick. A VR game’s delivered framerates simply cannot vary from a locked framerate or the player may get VR sick. It is essential to a great VR experience that framerates are locked to either 45 FPS or to 90 FPS.

A TV uses Motion Smoothing to create a new frame between two existing frames to smooth out and increase the framerate. Unfortunately this adds latency so it must be adapted differently for VR. Motion Smoothing is used when a VR application can’t deliver exactly 90 FPS. By examining the last two delivered frames, Motion Smoothing predicts the future motion and animation to extrapolate a new in-between frame. Synthesizing new frames keeps the current application at the full 90Hz framerate, advances motion forward properly, and avoids judder.

One may think of VR benchmarking in terms of how often the framerate meets or does not meet the 90 FPS standard for a premium VR experience. The more often performance drops below 90 FPS, the worse the VR experience becomes. SteamVR’s Motion Smoothing (or Vive’s Motion Compensation) helps to reduce potential motion sickness by dropping to 45 FPS, but it is a degraded visual experience.

Since VR is personal to each individual’s tolerances, it’s difficult to determine what is or what is not “acceptable”. When the framerates are downgraded to 45 FPS there are some artifacting and ghosting especially of objects in motion because of Motion Smoothing that may often be perceived as a blur with some temporal displacement.

Motion Smoothing does motion prediction by inserting a synthetic frame, every other frame with a cadence that looks something like this:

Frame 0: Frame created by the GPU

Frame 1: Frame synthesized by Motion Smoothing

Frame 2: Frame created by the GPU

Frame 3: Frame synthesized by Motion Smoothing

Frame 4: Frame created by the GPU … and so on.

Even though there is a downgraded visual experience with 45 FPS Motion Smoothing compared with 90 FPS, it is generally better to have Motion Smoothing than not to have it. If the framerates cannot be locked at 90 FPS and do not drop to a locked on 45 FPS, then frames will be dropped and the resulting judder may result in unease and/or VR sickness. Motion Smoothing will lock you into 45 FPS if your frame rate is anywhere between 45 and 90 FPS. The lower frame rate is in exchange for a smoother frame delivery. Motion Smoothing scaling may also synthesize two or even three frames for every frame delivered.

Why the Vive Console’s Motion Compensation is not the same as SteamVR’s Motion Smoothing

SteamVR’s Motion Smoothing comes with a cost of reduced image quality due to synthesized and extrapolated frames which are also sometimes called “reprojection” and it unfortunately is even more pronounced with Vive’s Motion Compensation. We have witnessed it cause some very strange and jarring artifacting with shimmering or bubbling and distortion on object edges that can be very distracting.

Although the Vive Console’s Motion Compensation is supposedly the same as SteamVR’s Motion Smoothing according to Vive, because the new lens and display require its own algorithms, it is visibly inferior to Steam’s solution and we hope it is a work-in-progress. Its distortion varies from game to game, being particularly bad in Elite Dangerous on higher settings and in racings sims, to barely noticeable in other VR games.

Because of its current flaws, we benchmark with Motion Compensation off and aim for a continuously delivered 90 FPS requiring a higher standard for our RTX 3080 Ti than if we left the Vive Console at default. We also recommend that a VR gamer test each game to see if Motion Compensation works properly without annoying artifacting; and if not, play with it off and lower settings or drop the SteamVR Render Resolution to ensure that 90 FPS are being constantly delivered.

A VR gamer can view delivered framerates using the SteamVR console under the “Developer” tab and check the setting to allow you to see framerates/Hz in the HMD overlay. You need to aim for all-green with maybe a few orange bars here and there for an ideal custom VR experience.

Variability with setting SteamVR’s Render Resolution why it may be lowered from its default 150%

There is variability built into SteamVR so that a custom render resolution is set each time it is started and it may vary depending on the PC’s processes that are running when it runs its test. Generally, for high end video cards (RTX 3080 through RTX 3090) it is set at 3900×3900 per eye which is SteamVR’s default 150% Render Resolution Render resolution which automatically scales to whatever it thinks is best for your system while the Vive Console handles display resolution.

Unfortunately, even a RTX 3090 cannot handle the demands of 3900×3900 per eye resolution at a minimum and steady delivery of 90 FPS for most modern visually demanding VR games so we have to find another way to improve performance without impacting visuals too badly – nor do we want to use Vive’s current implementation of Motion Compensation. This will require lowering the SteamVR Render Resolution on a per app basis.

Some may question why it appears necessary that 150% Render Resolution (3900×3900) is used in the first place when the Pro 2’s native panel resolution is only a per eye 2448×2448. This is because of lens barrel distortion and the way VR images are warped and then adjusted in software.

All VR headset lenses distort the image presented on a virtual reality screen which has to be warped by software to counteract the optical effects of the lenses. Instead of being square, the images appear curved and distorted until viewed through appropriate lenses.

VR platforms typically use a two-step process that first renders a normal image (above left) and afterward uses a post-processing pass that warps the image to the HMD’s view (right). The original Pro’s and the Index’ display resolution is 1440×1600 but the SteamVR Render Resolution is 2016×2240. The G2’s display resolution is 2160×2160 but the SteamVR Render Resolution increases to 3168×3096 whereas the Pro 2’s display resolution is 2448×2448 and the SteamVR Render Resolution is 3090×3090.

VR does not use simple upscaling like Supersampling a flat display. In VR, if you render at 150% of a panel’s native resolution, you still need to assign actual color/light values to the pixels, and assigning values from that 150% render resolution to 100% pixels isn’t straightforward. SteamVR uses complex algorithms for image scaling which may not be for only “clarity”; rather they’re methods of fitting an image rendered at one resolution to the display of a different resolution. Motion Smoothing/reprojection/frame synthesis may complicate it further as headsets apparently have to do some color correction when using it.

SteamVR has apparently decided that approximately 150% is optimum for fast video cards since the first HMD generation and it appears that they haven’t updated their formula to account for the high-resolution panels of the G2/Pro 2.

Increasing the render resolution to 150% is efficient especially for the pixels in the center of the viewing area because they are close to the ideal 1:1 native resolution after applying a 1.3x to 1.4x lens barrel distortion compensation. It’s done because the barrel distortion compensation countering the distortion caused by the lenses enlarges what is viewed in the center of the viewing area. Not all pixels in a VR HMD have the same value to the viewer because of distortion that is somewhat analogous to the human eye – the center of our vision is for detail while the periphery is better at noticing quick motion.

SteamVR’s frame buffer is about 150% of a panel’s native resolution but that extra resolution is wasted on the viewing periphery where the lens distortion compresses objects. In this case, it is rather wasteful like using pancake full screen Supersampling for anti-aliasing. Here is where NVIDIA’s Lens Matched Shading would be really helpful if the devs would implement it.

The problem is that the Pro 2’s native per eye resolution at 2448×2448 using SteamVR’s default 150% render resolution is scaled to approximately 3900×3900 per eye and no current GPU can run that resolution at a constant 90 FPS for demanding modern VR games. It is far more demanding than pancake gaming’s Ultra/4K 120 FPS goal.

It appears to us that Vive set a slightly lower base/100% value for the Pro 2 (1.3X compensation for barrel distortion, not 1.4X) but SteamVR’s default 150% render resolution still scales it too high. Actually viewing through the Pro 2’s lenses starting at 100%, at 120% Render Resolution the overall visuals seem to improve to nearly as good as at 150%. Although there are small visual differences that can be seen primarily when switching back and forth, 150% over 120% or even over 100% isn’t generally too noticeable while VR gaming.

It is interesting that Vive makes a compromise when setting Extreme/120Hz which is a much more demanding setting requiring that framerates be delivered above 120Hz in a steady cadence. For Extreme, SteamVR only scales to around 3344×3344 at 150% Render Resolution which evidently uses a lower compensation factor for lens distortion.

Either way, 150% is not practically better than 100% or native resolution for the playing experience compared with bogging down the video card by too high of a Render Resolution. In fact, the image quality of the Pro 2 set to the original Pro’s SteamVR Render Resolution of 2016×2240 is much better on the new HMD and the SDE is eliminated. On the other hand, one cannot increase the Render Resolution or Supersample the original Pro’s image to eliminate the SDE or to match the Pro 2 visuals.

Perhaps Pro 2 gamers may set their SteamVR base global resolution to the panel’s native 2448×2448 resolution and then increase the render resolution on a per app basis as far as it can so long as a constant framerate above 90 FPS (or at least above 45 FPS) is steadily delivered. And forget about Extreme (120%) unless you are simply aiming for a steady 60 FPS.

Next up we give our experiences and a comparison of the Pro 2 with the Reverb G2, Index, and Pro followed by the test configuration before we head to benchmarking. There we will focus on how to maintain the best playable settings for a steadily delivered framerate without the need for synthetic or dropped frames which are especially distressing for simmers.

The Pro 2 VR Experience & Test Configuration

Over the past 4 weeks, we have formed impressions of the similarities and differences between the Pro 2 versus the G2 and also versus the Index and the Pro. The Pro 2’s new LCD panel offer higher contrast and brightness than the original Pro while reducing pixel persistence while also offering better consistency in brightness and in color consistency from one pixel to the next. The Pro 2’s LCD panel improvements allow for better looking text and overall clarity than the older headset and it at least matches what the G2 provides.

The Pro 2 and G2 text are significantly clearer and easy to read over the Pro/Index mostly by virtue of their higher resolution. Higher resolution makes a real difference to overall clarity, and the screendoor effect (SDE) is gone. On the other hand, god rays emanating from high contrast elements are present in all high resolution HMDs that use Fresnel lenses. It is about the same as the Pro/Index. The Pro 2’s field of view appears to be slightly wider than the Index and noticeably wider than the G2 or the Pro.

Comparing simple shooter-type games created for VR, the higher resolution of the Pro 2 over the Index or Pro doesn’t make too much difference – especially since the older headsets can use Supersampling with less demands on the video card. However, games with a lot of detail or text; or even old games like Skyrim – especially when you are looking off into the distance – the Pro 2’s increased resolution makes a big improvement to realism and immersion. It is almost as if a fog lifts by playing with the Pro 2 over playing with the Pro/Index as everything becomes clearer and more detailed.

After much experimentation, we found the visual “sweet spot” for the Pro 2 is better for us than for the G2 or for the older headsets. The only advantage of the original Pro has is its deeper blacks by virtue of its OLED display. In practice, however, we didn’t have any issues playing games like Elite Dangerous and Star Wars: Squadrons where the deep black of space is required. Overall, the image quality of the Pro 2 is better than the Index, the Pro or the G2. However, the G2 wins as the most comfortable of the three headsets due to its comparative lightness although the Pro and the Pro 2 are the most balanced.

VR Gaming with the Vive Pro 2

The Vive Pro 2 is a much more demanding headset than the original Pro or the Valve Index by virtue of its higher resolution. Image resolution has been increased per eye from the Pro’s (or Valve Index’) 1440 x 1600 to 2448 x 2448. This higher resolution gives it exceptional clarity with no screen door effect, but it is also demanding on video cards. By default at the Ultra or Extreme preset, the Vive console uses 150% SteamVR Render Resolution for the Vive Pro 2 which appears to be set to 3900×3900 per eye for high end GeForce cards RTX 3080/3080 Ti/3090 at the time we benchmarked our games.

Some VR gamers prefer to lower the SteamVR Render Resolution which is set at 150% which is often used to compensate for a headset’s lens distortion instead of lowering a game’s preset or by dropping individual settings. At 50% SteamVR Render Resolution, there is a clear degradation of visuals which indicates that the SteamVR Render Resolution slider is working properly. However, at 150% Super Resolution, the frametimes go up and framerates are cut in half (which is bad introducing dropped frames and judder) but the variable way that Motion Compensation adds to visible artifacting precludes us from using it.

Ultimately we decided to test – depending on a games performance – at a SteamVR Render Resolution of 150%, 100%, and even at the panel’s native resolution to try and find the right mix of the best playable settings to remain above 90 FPS.

Please note that FCAT VR doesn’t distinguish dropped frames from synthesized (Motion Compensated/reprojected) frames using the Pro 2 (or the Reverb G2) like it properly does for the Valve Index and the Vive Pro. It is likely that FCAT VR is not fully optimized for the Pro 2 although its results appear to be accurate and in line with fpsVR and the SteamVR developer console overlay.

Test Configuration – Hardware

• Intel Core i9-10900K (HyperThreading/Turbo boost On; All cores overclocked to 5.1GHz/5.0Ghz. Comet Lake DX11 CPU graphics)
• EVGA Z490 FTW motherboard (Intel Z490 chipset, v1.3 BIOS, PCIe 3.0/3.1/3.2 specification, CrossFire/SLI 8x+8x), supplied by EVGA
• T-FORCE DARK Z 32GB DDR4 (2x16GB, dual channel at 3600MHz), supplied by Team Group
• Vive Pro 2, on loan from HTC/Vive; the Wireless Adapter is not used for benchmarking
• RTX 3080 Ti Founders Edition 12GB, stock clocks, on loan from NVIDIA
• 1TB Team Group MP33 NVMe2 PCIe SSD for C: drive
• 1.92TB San Disk enterprise class SATA III SSD (storage)
• 2TB Micron 1100 SATA III SSD (storage)
• 1TB Team Group GX2 SATA III SSD (storage)
• 500GB T-FORCE Vulcan SSD (storage), supplied by Team Group
• ANTEC HCG1000 Extreme, 1000W gold power supply unit
• BenQ EW3270U 32? 4K HDR 60Hz FreeSync monitor
• Samsung G7 Odyssey (LC27G75TQSNXZA) 27? 2560×1440/240Hz/1ms/G-SYNC/HDR600 monitor
• DEEPCOOL Castle 360EX AIO 360mm liquid CPU cooler
• Phanteks Eclipse P400 ATX mid-tower (plus 1 Noctua 140mm fan)

Test Configuration – Software

• GeForce 471.11 Game Ready drivers – High Quality, prefer maximum performance, single display, no optimizations, Vsync is off as set in the NVIDIA control panel
• Windows 10 64-bit Pro edition; latest updates
• Latest DirectX
• All 6 VR games are patched to their latest versions at time of publication
• FCAT-VR Capture (latest non-public Beta)
• FCAT-VR (non-public Beta 18)
• SteamVR – at variable render resolutions specified on the charts
• fpsVR

6 VR Game benchmark suite

SteamVR /Epic Platform Games

• Assetto Corsa Competizione
• Elite Dangerous
• No Man’s Sky
• Project CARS 2
• Skyrim
• The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners

Please Note: It is important to remember that BTR’s charts use frametimes in ms where lower is better, but we also compare “unconstrained framerates” which shows what a video card could deliver (headroom) if it wasn’t locked to either 90 FPS/120 FPS or to 45 FPS/60 FPS by the HMD. In the case of unconstrained FPS which measures just one important performance metric, faster is better.

Next let’s look at the Pro 2’s performance using a RTX 3080 Ti to find the best playable settings for 6 games to maintain framerates above 90 FPS.

Performance Benchmarking “Best Playable Settings” and the Conclusion

All of our games were benchmarked at the panel’s native (or just above it), 100%, or 150% SteamVR resolution or (as noted) with the Vive Console set to Ultra/90Hz or Extreme/120Hz.

It is important to remember that BTR’s charts use frametimes in ms where lower is better, but we also compare “unconstrained framerates” which shows what a video card could deliver (headroom) if it wasn’t locked to either 90 FPS/120 FPS or to 45 FPS/60 FPS by the HMD. In the case of unconstrained FPS which measures just one important performance metric, faster is better.

Before we do our testing with the RTX 3080 Ti, we want to follow up our RTX 3070 Ti testing featuring Skyrim with Motion Compensation On vs. Off.

Motion Compensation does as expected although FCAT VR does not distinguish between dropped and synthesized frames. It increases the synthetic frames generated and inserted in-between frames instead of dropping them keeping the framerate high but at the expense of visual artifacts caused by temporal issues with prediction. It will help make some games more playable but probably should be avoided especially for sims.

Overall, we do not like nor recommend Vive’s Motion Compensation currently as it tends to introduce far more artifacts than SteamVR’s Motion Smoothing. VR gamers should test it for themselves to see which games are tolerable and which are not.

Next we are going to look for playable settings using our RTX 3080 Ti with our six test VR games.

First up, Assetto Corsa Competizione.

Assetto Corsa Competizione

BTR’s sim/racing editor, Sean Kaldahl created the replay benchmark run that we use for both the pancake game and the VR game. It is run at night with 20 cars, lots of geometry, and the lighting effects of the headlights, tail lights, and everything around the track looks spectacular.

iRacing may be more accurate or realistic, but Assetto Corsa Competizione has some appeal because it feels more real than many other racing sims. It delivers the sensation of handling a highly-tuned racing machine driven to its edge. Unfortunately, it is probably the most demanding of the racing sims and it may not yet be well-optimized for VR.

VR High

Here are the frametimes using the VR High preset which is custom set in SteamVR to just above the panel’s native per eye resolution of 2472×2472 at 90Hz/Ultra or at 2464×2464 at 120Hz/Extreme.

Here are the details are reported by FCAT-VR:

The RTX 3080 Ti at Ultra/90Hz (2472×2472) delivered 95.10 unconstrained FPS with 460 dropped frames (5%) which means it stayed above 90 FPS 95% of the time delivering a decent VR experience but at just above the panel’s native resolution. Individual settings may be dropped to maintain a steady above 90 FPS VR High experience if this lower resolution is acceptable.

At Extreme/120Hz (2464×2464) it delivered 95.46 unconstrained FPS together with 5968 dropped (48%) frames which means almost half of the frames will be dropped (or synthesized using Motion Compensation). 120Hz may be better suited for future video flagship cards.

VR Low

Here are the frametimes using the VR Low preset at Ultra/SteamVR default 150% Render Resolution and at Extreme/150% and 100% Steam Render Resolutions.

Here are the details are reported by FCAT-VR:

At 90Hz/150% SteamVR default Render Resolution (3924×3924), the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 90.43 unconstrained FPS with 2481 (27%) dropped frames

At 120Hz/150% Render Resolution (3376×3376), it delivered 105.10 unconstrained FPS together with 6363 dropped (50%) frames making it unsuitable for play unless Motion Compensation can be used to deliver a steady 60 FPS at this very high default SteamVR 150% Render Resolution.

At 120Hz/100% Render Resolution (2756×2756), our RTX 3080 Ti delivered 130.88 unconstrained FPS together with 739 dropped (6%) frames making it acceptable for the VR Low setting. It suggests that Ultra/90Hz would give the best VR experience for ACC and there would be enough performance headroom to raise individual settings from the Low preset and/or the Render Resolution above 100%.

Next, we check out Elite Dangerous.

Elite Dangerous

Elite Dangerous is a popular space sim built using the COBRA engine. It is hard to find a repeatable benchmark outside of the training missions.

A player will probably spend a lot of time piloting his space cruiser while completing a multitude of tasks as well as visiting space stations and orbiting a multitude of different planets (~400 billion). Elite Dangerous is also co-op and multiplayer with a very dedicated following of players.

VR High

We picked the High Preset and we set the Field of View to its maximum. Here are the Elite Dangerous 100% Render Resolution frametimes on VR High using both 120Hz and 90Hz settings.

Here are the details are reported by FCAT-VR:

Using SteamVR’s 100% Ultra/90Hz (3184×3184) Render Resolution, the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 95.00 unconstrained FPS with 21 dropped frames making it acceptable for optimum play.

Using SteamVR’s 100% Extreme/120Hz (2756×2756) Render Resolution, it delivered 111.17 unconstrained FPS together with 4191 dropped (49%) frames making it largely unsuitable for play except at 60 FPS with Motion Compensation (if it works properly).

The experience playing Elite Dangerous at High settings is acceptable using the Pro 2 at 100% SteamVR Render Resolution but we may want to consider the experience of playing on VR Medium with a higher Render Resolution also.

VR Medium

Here are the frametimes testing VR Medium on 90Hz and 120Hz comparing SteamVR’s 100% Render Resolution performance with 150%.

Here are the details are reported by FCAT-VR:

Using the VR Medium preset at 90Hz/100% Render Resolution (3184×3184), the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 149.07 unconstrained FPS with no dropped frames.

At 90Hz/150% Render Resolution (3900×3900; chart has typo), it delivered 98.92 unconstrained FPS with 4 dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

At 120Hz/100% Render Resolution (2756×2756), the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 159.11 unconstrained FPS with 6 dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

At 90Hz/150% Render Resolution (3376×3376), it delivered 130.40 unconstrained FPS with 259 (3%) dropped frames.

This above results indicate that we can play Elite Dangerous on the Medium preset at either Ultra or Extreme settings up to the default 150% SteamVR Render Resolution, or we can use the High preset at up to 100% SteamVR Render Resolution at Ultra/90Hz in the Vive Console without needing Motion Compensation.

Let’s continue with another demanding VR game, No Man’s Sky.

No Man’s Sky

No Man’s Sky is an action-adventure survival single and multiplayer game that emphasizes survival, exploration, fighting, and trading. It is set in a procedurally generated deterministic open universe, which includes over 18 quintillion unique planets using its own custom game engine.

The player takes the role of a Traveller in an uncharted universe by starting on a random planet with a damaged spacecraft equipped with only a jetpack-equipped exosuit and a versatile multi-tool that can also be used for defense. The player is encouraged to find resources to repair his spacecraft allowing for intra- and inter-planetary travel, and to interact with other players.

Here is the No Man’s Sky Frametime plot. We set the settings to Enhanced which is above Low but below High, and we also set the anisotropic filtering to 16X and upgraded to FXAA+TAA.

We also set the DLSS setting to Balanced which is below Quality but above Performance and Ultra Performance in an effort to maintain as much performance as possible without compromising image quality too much.

Here are the FCAT-VR details of our comparative runs at 90Hz/100% SteamVR Render Resolution and at 120Hz/100%.

Here are the details.

Using the Vive Console Ultra/90Hz preset at SteamVR’s 100% Render Resolution (3204×3204), the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 97.03 unconstrained FPS with 256 (3%) dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

Using the Extreme/120Hz preset at SteamVR’s 100% Render Resolution (2756×2756), it delivered 114.49 unconstrained FPS with 3530 (38%) dropped frames.

We would suggest dropping a setting if necessary so the RTX 3080 Ti can deliver a constant 90 FPS at Ultra/100% Render Resolution. It has a superior image even using the Enhanced Preset with 100% Render Resolution and it plays and looks very nice using DLSS Balanced. DLSS is a lifesaver in this regard as without it, it would not be possible to play at 90 FPS even on Enhanced without dropping or synthesizing frames.

Next, we will check out another demanding VR game, Project CARS 2.

Project CARS 2

There is a real sense immersion that comes from playing Project CARS 2 in VR using a wheel and pedals. It uses its in-house Madness engine, and the physics implementation is outstanding.

Project CARS 2 offers many performance options and settings and we prefer playing with SMAA over using MSAA.

We use all settings on Medium with everything else on. If necessary, we recommend lowering grass and reflections further to maximize framerate delivery as motion smoothing or reprojection tends to cause visible artifacting.

Here is the frametime plot where this time we benchmarked Ultra/90Hz and Extreme/120Hz with the panel’s native resolution and also at 100%.

Here are the FCAT-VR details.

Using the Medium settings at 90Hz/Native Render Resolution (2472×2472), the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 101.33 unconstrained FPS with 10 dropped frames.

At 90Hz/100% Render Resolution (3224×3224), it delivered 60.45 unconstrained FPS with 4602 (49%) dropped frames.

At 120Hz/Native Render Resolution (2456×2456), the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 66.38 unconstrained FPS with 52 dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

At 120Hz/100% Render Resolution (2780×2780), it delivered 77.47 unconstrained FPS with 4006 (39%) dropped frames.

At either Native or at 100% Render Resolution, The Pro 2 is able to deliver 60 FPS steady using the Extreme/120Hz setting which may be an acceptable option for some. Otherwise Medium settings on the Ultra/90Hz at the panel’s native resolution may be a better option for others.

Let’s benchmark Skyrim VR.

Skyrim VR

Skyrim VR is an older game that is no longer supported by Bethesda, but fortunately the modding community has adopted it. It is not as demanding as many of the newer VR ports so its performance is still very good on maxed-out settings using its Creation engine.

We benchmarked Skyrim VR using its highest settings but we did not adjust in-game Supersampling.

Here are the frametime results.

Here are the details of our comparative runs as reported by FCAT-VR.

Using Skyrim’s highest settings at 90Hz/Native Render Resolution (2464×2464), the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 219.58 unconstrained FPS with 1 dropped frame.

At 90Hz/100% Render Resolution (3184×3184), it delivered 122.85 unconstrained FPS with 1 dropped frame.

At 90Hz/150% (SteamVR Default) Render Resolution (3900×3900), the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 97.27 unconstrained FPS with 2781 (22%) dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

At 120Hz/100% Render Resolution (2732×2732), it delivered 156.40 unconstrained FPS with 372 (2%) dropped frames and 1 Warp miss.

At 120Hz/150% Render Resolution (3344×3344), it delivered 124.32 unconstrained FPS with 4891 (29%) dropped frames.

As before, raising or lowering the SteamVR Render Resolution is a great way to adjust the performance. Skyrim VR cannot be played without dropping or synthesizing frames at maxed out in game settings at SteamVR’s default 150% Render Resolution. Fortunately, it looks like 120% is an attainable compromise for a RTX 3080 Ti and the visuals are not degraded substantially compared with 150%.

Last up, The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners.

The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners

The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinner is the last of BTR’s Pro 2 VR test games. It is a first person survival horror adventure RPG with a strong emphasis on crafting. Its visuals using the Unreal 4 engine are outstanding and it makes good use of physics for interactions.

We benchmarked Saints and Sinners using its highest settings, but we left the Pixel Density at its default in game 100%. Here is the frametime chart using both Vive Console Ultra and Extreme Presets at 100% and at 150% SteamVR Render Resolution settings.

Here are the details as reported by FCAT-VR.

Using Saints & Sinner’s highest settings at 90Hz/100% Render Resolution (3184×3184), the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 106.30 unconstrained FPS with 2 dropped frames.

At 90Hz/150% (SteamVR Default) Render Resolution (3900×3900), it delivered 79.05 unconstrained FPS with 2827 (47%) dropped frames.

At 120Hz/100% Render Resolution (2756×2756), the RTX 3080 Ti delivered 132.38 unconstrained FPS with 437 (5%) dropped frames.

At 120Hz/150% Render Resolution (3404×3404), it delivered 107.56 unconstrained FPS with 4133 (48%) dropped frames.

The best Pro 2 settings for The Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners using a RTX 3080 Ti to avoid either Motion Compensation or dropped frames are the highest in-game settings using the Vive Console at Ultra/90Hz and at 100% SteamVR Render Resolution.

Using a RTX 3090 may allow the Render Resolution to be increased while using a RTX 3080 may require dialing back settings or lowering the Render Resolution a bit. It takes experimentation coupled with checking the SteamVR developer overlay in the headset to find the best playable settings.

Let’s check out our conclusion.

The “Best” HMD

There is no such thing as the “best” HMD unless you are just talking about specs, in which case, the Pro 2 wins by virtue of its higher resolution. VR is more “alive” and immersive using the Pro 2 over the original Pro or the Index. Unfortunately, at $799 the Pro 2 – by itself without considering the base stations and controllers costs – is much more expensive than the Reverb G2 at $599. The G2 setup is also less complex and time-consuming. The advantages that the Pro 2 has over the G2 are with its more precise tracking, wider FoV, and its ability to use wireless for a completely untethered experience.

If you are a racing or flight sim enthusiast, the G2 may be a better choice over the Pro 2. However, for action games and especially for standing games or for shooters where precise tracking is critical, the Pro 2 is a better choice – if price is no object. Unfortunately, we find the Pro 2 to be overpriced at $799 as a consumer headset as Vive shifts to industry VR away from the consumer market. But if a VR gamer already has a top video card and a Vive headset/base station tracking, then the Pro 2 may be an excellent almost drop-in upgrade solution.

We wish to extend our thanks to HTC for loaning us a Pro 2, and we enjoyed testing and evaluating their new VR headset. We like it so much that we purchased a Pro 2 from Newegg for our own enjoyment as well as for future benchmarking.

Unfortunately, Vive software still appears to be a work in progress – especially in regard to Motion Smoothing – and it appears that a default SteamVR target of 150% Render Resolution is simply too high for this generation of video cards. As long as a gamer is willing to tweak his Pro 2 and per-application settings, the Pro 2 is an outstanding VR headset for gaming.

Next up we are going to review our “off grid” mostly solar-powered office followed by a 1TB SSD review before we return to VR. We will continue to benchmark the Pro 2 and will also follow-up this review with another showdown with the Reverb G2 using the top AMD and NVIDIA video cards.

Happy VR Gaming!

Into the Radius by indie developer and publisher, CM Games (Creative Mobile) of Estonia, is one of the first VR games to use DLSS 2.0. It is a single player stealth survival adventure/exploration game which is set in the dangerous world of the Pechorsk Exclusion Zone that is basically “S.T.A.L.K.E.R. VR” with an incredible atmosphere and unforgiving gameplay.

BTR has been benchmarking Into the Radius since November 2020 as its performance demands on a video card are relatively high since is set in a huge open world with a decent draw distance, and the minimum recommended video card is a GTX 1070. For this review, we are going to max out its in-game settings and use FCAT VR to compare DLSS performance On versus DLSS Off using a Valve Index (Quality DLSS) at 90Hz and 120Hz as well as the much more demanding Reverb G2 (Quality and Balanced DLSS versus Off) at 90Hz.

BTR’s testing platform is an overclocked Intel Core i9-10900K, an EVGA Z490 FTW motherboard, and 32GB of Vulcan Dark Z DDR4 at 3600MHz on a recent install of Windows 10 64-bit Pro Edition using NVIDIA’s latest GeForce Game Ready Driver, 465.89.

It is important to be aware of VR performance since poorly delivered frames can make a VR experience unpleasant. It’s also important to understand how we accurately benchmark VR games using FCAT-VR as explained here. But before we benchmark Into the Radius, check out our Test Configuration below.

Test Configuration – Hardware

• Intel Core i9-10900K (HyperThreading/Turbo boost On; All cores overclocked to 5.1GHz/5.0Ghz. Comet Lake DX11 CPU graphics)
• EVGA Z490 FTW motherboard (Intel Z490 chipset, v1.3 BIOS, PCIe 3.0/3.1/3.2 specification, CrossFire/SLI 8x+8x), supplied by EVGA
• T-FORCE DARK Z 32GB DDR4 (2x16GB, dual channel at 3600MHz), supplied by Team Group
• Reverb G2, on loan from HP
• Vive Pro, on loan from HTC/Vive
• RTX 2080 Ti Founders Edition 11GB, stock clocks, on loan from NVIDIA
• RTX 3080 Founders Edition 10GB, stock clocks, on loan from NVIDIA
• 1TB Team Group MP33 NVMe2 PCIe SSD for C: drive
• 1.92TB San Disk enterprise class SATA III SSD (storage)
• 2TB Micron 1100 SATA III SSD (storage)
• 1TB Team Group GX2 SATA III SSD (storage)
• 500GB T-FORCE Vulcan SSD (storage), supplied by Team Group
• ANTEC HCG1000 Extreme, 1000W gold power supply unit
• Samsung G7 Odyssey (LC27G75TQSNXZA) 27? 2560×1440/240Hz/1ms/G-SYNC/HDR600 monitor
• DEEPCOOL Castle 360EX AIO 360mm liquid CPU cooler
• Phanteks Eclipse P400 ATX mid-tower (plus 1 Noctua 140mm fan)

Test Configuration – Software

• GeForce 465.89 Game Ready drivers – no optimizations in the NVIDIA control panel
• Windows 10 64-bit Pro edition; latest updates v10.0.19042 Build 19042
• Latest DirectX
• Into the Radius is patched to it’s latest version at time of publication
• FCAT VR Capture (latest non-public Beta 04/02/21)
• FCATVR Analyzer (non-public Beta 18)
• SteamVR – latest non beta version at 100% resolution
• WMR – latest version at default

DLSS 2.0, Graphics Settings & IQ – Benchmarking the RTX 3080 Ti & RTX 2080 Ti with FCAT VR

Originally, there were no user options for changing individual graphics settings other than High, Medium, and Low presets. There is also a slider to drop or subsample the resolution down to 65%, or to increase the resolution to 110%. We picked High plus 110% resolution for the Valve Index (90Hz/120Hz) and 100% resolution for the more demanding Reverb G2 (90Hz).

DLSS 2.0 settings were added in last week’s patch and they now have options for Off, Quality, Balanced, Performance, and Ultra Performance.

DLSS 2.0

NVIDIA’s DLSS 2.0 creates sharper and higher resolution images using dedicated AI processors on GeForce RTX GPUs called Tensor Cores. The original DLSS 1.0 required more work on the part of game developers and resulted in image quality approximately equal to TAA. DLSS 2.0 uses an improved deep learning neural network that boosts frame rates while generating crisper game images with extra performance headroom to maximize settings and increase output resolutions.

NVIDIA claims that DLSS 2.0 offers IQ comparable to native resolution while rendering only one quarter to one half of the pixels by employing new temporal feedback techniques. Its goal is to achieve the same (or better) IQ (image quality) as a natively rendered frame of the same resolution more efficiently which allows the game’s framerate to increase. A pancake DLSS 2.0 game may internally render at 1080P and then use DLSS to upscale the image to 4K with a similar IQ/level of detail but render it much more quickly.

DLSS 2.0 generally offers RTX gamers four IQ modes: Quality, Balanced, Performance, and Ultra Performance. These settings control a game’s internal rendering resolution with Quality DLSS using the highest internal resolution and the best image quality (IQ), and Ultra Performance delivering a lesser IQ by using a lower internal resolution.

For example, the pancake game, Death Stranding, has implemented Performance DLSS 2.0, 1080p ? 4K; and Quality DLSS 2.0, 1440p ? 4K. However, we do not know exactly how DLSS 2.0 is implemented for VR. Last week, we asked NVIDIA for details and will update this review if/when we hear from them.

In our opinion, the Quality DLSS 2.0 Into the Radius implementation looks as good as without DLSS, and it’s somewhat better than Performance DLSS which appears a bit more blurry to us. We think that Quality DLSS 2.0’s larger hit to the frame rate is worth it over using Performance DLSS 2.0. We would prefer to lower other settings before we drop DLSS 2.0 from Quality to Performance. However, the in-between Balanced DLSS also looks very good to us – especially on the Reverb G2 – and we would not hesitate to recommend that VR gamers check it out and decide for themselves.

FCAT VR Performance Benchmarking the RTX 2080 Ti & RTX 3080 with FCAT VR

It is important to remember that BTR’s Frametime Plot charts use frametimes in ms where lower is better, but we also compare “unconstrained framerates” which shows what a video card could deliver (headroom) if it wasn’t locked to either 90 FPS (or 120 FPS/Index) or to 45 FPS (or 60 FPS/Index) by the HMD. In the case of unconstrained FPS which measures just one important performance metric, faster is better.

Valve Index Performance – 90Hz & 120Hz at High/110% Resolution – Quality DLSS vs. Off

The RTX 3080 – High/110%, Refresh Rate at 90Hz

Here is the Frametime plot of the RTX 3080 run at High, 90Hz, and at 110% resolution.

Here are the FCAT VR details.

The RTX 3080 averages 209.47 Unconstrained FPS on High settings/110% resolution delivering the ideal 90 FPS cadence without DLSS and there were no dropped frames nor Warp misses, but it did require 4 synthetic frames with DLSS Off. It delivered 198.73 Unconstrained FPS with no dropped frames or Warp misses and 3 synthetic frames with Quality DLSS On.

There is no difference in IQ or performance in playing with DLSS On or Off, but the Unconstrained FPS with DLSS On seems strangely low compared with Off. So let’s increase the Index refresh rate from 90Hz to 120Hz which puts more of a demand on a video card.

The RTX 3080 – High/110%, Refresh Rate at 120Hz

Here is the Frametime plot of the RTX 3080 run at High, 120Hz, and at 110% resolution.

Here are the performance details.

At 120Hz, the RTX 3080 averages 194.39 Unconstrained FPS on high settings/110% resolution without DLSS and there were no dropped frames nor Warp misses, but it did require 10 synthetic frames with DLSS Off. It delivered 243.61 Unconstrained FPS with no dropped frames or Warp misses and 4 synthetic frames with Quality DLSS On.

There is no difference in performance even at 120Hz and we would try 144Hz except that Into the Radius is not an action game that requires it, so we tested next with a weaker video card, the RTX 2080 Ti flagship of the last generation.

The RTX 2080 Ti – High/110% Refresh Rate at 90Hz

Here is the Frametime plot of the RTX 2080 Ti run at High, 90Hz and at 110% resolution.

Here are the details.

At 90Hz, the RTX 2080 Ti averages 155.90 Unconstrained FPS on high settings/110% resolution delivering the ideal 90 FPS cadence without DLSS and there were no dropped frames nor Warp misses, but it did require 2 synthetic frames with DLSS Off. It delivered 191.84 Unconstrained FPS with no dropped frames or Warp misses and 2 synthetic frames with Quality DLSS On.

Again, there is no difference in IQ or performance in playing with DLSS On or Off so we increase the Index refresh rate from 90Hz to 120Hz.

The RTX 2080 Ti – High/110% Refresh Rate at 120Hz

Here is the Frametime plot of the RTX 2080 Ti run at High, 120Hz and at 110% resolution.

Here are the FCAT VR performance details.

At 120Hz, the RTX 2080 Ti averages 144.58 Unconstrained FPS on high settings/110% resolution delivering less than the ideal 120 FPS cadence without DLSS although there were no dropped frames nor Warp misses. However, without DLSS it required 938 synthetic frames (11%). It delivered 150.32 Unconstrained FPS with no dropped frames or Warp misses and only 96 synthetic frames were needed (1%) with Quality DLSS On.

Now we see a noticeable performance improvement using DLSS Quality using a RTX 2080 Ti when the Index panels’ refresh rate are increased to 120Hz with High settings at 110% resolution. So let’s see how these same two cards fare using the Reverb G2 at High 90Hz/100% resolution – and this time, we also add Balanced DLSS performance comparisons.

Reverb G2 Performance – High/100% Resolution (90Hz) – Quality & Balanced DLSS vs. Off

The RTX 3080 – High/100% (90Hz)

This time we leave our settings on high but drop the resolution from 110% used with the Index to 100%. The G2 refreshes natively at 90Hz with no higher option. We also benchmark the DLSS Balanced setting in addition to Quality and without DLSS (native).

Here is the G2 Frametime plot of the RTX 3080 run at High, 90Hz and at 100% resolution. Please note that synthetic frames are (most likely) reported as dropped frames by FCAT VR.

Here are the FCAT VR performance details.

The RTX 3080 averages 97.11 Unconstrained FPS on high settings/100% resolution without DLSS and there were no dropped frames nor Warp misses, but it did require 431 synthetic frames (6%) with DLSS Off. It delivered 99.29 Unconstrained FPS with no dropped frames or Warp misses but required 180 synthetic frames (3%) with Quality DLSS On. Using Balanced DLSS, the RTX 3080 averaged 102.90 Unconstrained FPS with no dropped, synthetic, or Warp misses, and only 26 frames needed to be synthesized.

We can see that DLSS provides a needed performance uplift for the Reverb G2 even with the RTX 3080. So next let’s see how the RTX 2080 Ti fares with the G2 at the same settings.

The RTX 2080 Ti – G2 High/100% (90Hz)

Here is the Frametime plot of the RTX 2080 Ti run at High, 90Hz and at 110% resolution.

Here are the FCAT VR details.

The RTX 2080 Ti averages 90.92 Unconstrained FPS on high settings/100% resolution without DLSS and there were no dropped frames nor Warp misses, but it did require 695 synthetic frames (9%) with DLSS Off. It delivered 96.69 Unconstrained FPS with no dropped frames or Warp misses but required 200 synthetic frames (3%) with Quality DLSS On. Using Balanced DLSS, the RTX 2080 Ti averaged 103.72 Unconstrained FPS with no dropped, synthetic, or Warm misses, and only 2 frames needed to be synthesized.

There is some inconsistency between runs performed at different times between the two video cards as the time of day quickly and constantly changes inside the Into the Radius game world, but the runs using the same card may be considered much more reliable and representative of relative performance. No matter how you look at it, DLSS improves performance without noticeably impacting visuals while playing.

Let’s head to our conclusion.

Conclusion: DLSS is Recommended!

Into the Radius is not a AAA game with a large studio behind it. It’s a huge open world indie game with a lot of content that is continually being improved by very passionate devs who appear to be responsive to their community. When it first released, Into the Radius had issues with bugs and physical interactions but the developers have continued to enthusiastically support it and optimize it for performance, and they promise to continue to develop it with an ambitious roadmap through Q2 2021.

Into the Radius will not appeal to everyone as it is a difficult and slow-paced stealth adventure exploration survival game where you will never be able to run through the zone with your guns blazing. It’s hardcore and very unforgiving, and it absolutely does not hold your hand. If you like adventure, love depth and physical realism, and don’t mind waiting for the devs to address any remaining performance and interaction issues, this game is a gem. For example, the latest DLSS patch broke WMR controllers settings and we had to use a community made set of bindings to interact with the G2 controllers properly.

We are pleased to see that the Into the Radius devs have chosen to implement DLSS 2.0 into their game. DLSS 2.0 is a miracle for pancake games and it appears that it also gives a solid performance uplift with VR in this game. Using Quality DLSS versus DLSS Off, it is very hard to see any IQ difference, and Balanced DLSS only appears to give the visuals a very slight blur. If you play Into the Radius and would like more performance, we recommend that you first try all four levels of DLSS for yourself instead of lowering settings or the in-game resolution.

Next up, Sean is hard at work on his ‘Sim Side: 2021 Test Suite Overview, Part 2’ (iRacing), and Rodrigo will also bring you a NVIDIA Resizable BAR performance analysis later this week! For the week after, we will bring you a very special unlocked video card overclocking review.

Happy Gaming!

UPDATED 04/09/2021 10:15 AM

We just got information from a CM Games Developer on how DLSS 2.1 is implemented:

“The presets and everything else is inside the DLSS plugin and we don’t have much control over it so it should be basically same parameters as for pancake games. Ultra performance takes something like 30% resolution, and goes upwards from there.”