Posts by whitav8

    Rich ,

    I agree that the SS percent values are really confusing in that the final pixel values are what we really want to know - however, with the sliding scale SteamVR printouts, that doesn't include what can be set with Render Scale Factor inside of Aerofly FS2. With my early Oculus use, I was able to run the Oculus Debug Tool HUD which provided a final value of the pixel dimensions of the render buffer and other performance graphs while actually flying since it was a transparent overlay on the app. I would like it if fpsVR did that but I don't think it adds up all the factors - both Steam VR Video and Application plus the in-game scale factor.

    What I was trying to show was an example of starting up several times (both the app AND SteamVR must be restarted ) and trying to find the fps breaking point for a given VR app, like Aerofly FS2, the 90fps point and maybe the 60fps point for use with reprojection. I also wanted to pick a repeatable view with an instrument panel and scenery. Then finally to pick a noticeable but difficult clarity measuring point - would be different with each aircraft - but for the Q400, it is now something on the CDU for me (without leaning in ). Obviously, it is still subjective but at least it is obvious to me that the recent KB fix has made some real improvements for the Odyssey+ . For each WMR HMD, the results will be different and with each PC CPU / GPU combination!


    Ken - it's hard to really tell, but I do see a difference from 1.1 to 1.5 RSF but whether it's necessary is left up to the user.

    Just for comparison sake, I measured frame rates to find what combinations of SS and RenderScaleFactor (after the 1903 update + blurriness fix) I could use with AFS2 at Orbx Monterrey with the Q400 - again I have a 5ghz 9700K and an RTX 2070 and my Odyssey+. I am sitting at the numbers with 10R and the default eye position (hit the space bar) which shows the left hand instrument panel. SS is set with SteamVR Video tab and Application tab= 100%

    max for 90 fps--------------max for 60 fps (expecting to use reprojection)





    Personally, I would rather operate at 90fps because reprojection seems jumpy right now. My clarity test is to read my weight on the Perf page of the CDU without leaning in. Shadows are High, Building and Tree density at medium - rest at Ultra - and I am using Vulcan, HQAA off. The improvement of clarity with the scenery is impressive as well as with the instrument panel.

    I was on Windows 10 Version 1809 waiting for the clarity fix that came out yesterday. My update to 1903 surprised me initially by apparently wiping out all my Desktop icons and Documents folders. I couldn't get the WMR portal to start either so I decided to uninstall it. After rebooting my PC, everything (Desktop and Documents ) came back as before and the WMR Portal started installing itself and it remembered my boundaries. I then checked for updates and finally KB4507453 wanted to install. I checked out IL-2, P3D, and Aerofly FS2 which all seemed remarkably clearer ( the "0" zeroes seem really easy to read ) but the reprojection:motionvector seems somewhat an FPS killer but with reduced artifacting (maybe) - better with it off though. I will need to spend some time trying various combinations of SS (I use 180% and 1.25 in-game )and repro options as well as in-game graphics options. For an Odyssey+ user, the clarity seems remarkable ( Aerofly FS2 at Innsbruck especially seems much better ) - and it must be stunning with a Reverb. I do notice especially now the sweet spot effect of the Odyssey+ (I have the widmovr lenses instead of glasses ) so that I can aim the center of my VR vision at the FMS CDU and read it well without leaning but not unless it is in the center of my view. The scenery in the distance is also clearer which helps immersion.

    HiFlyer ,

    I think I still like 200,100 in Steam and 1.75 in AFS2 . My test is to read the "30" on the PFD in the Q400 ( while stopped ) and also the "INIT" on the FMS CDU without leaning ( head directly above the seat notch ). I wish we could try some post process "sharpening" and I wish we had some control over MSAA, etc. I get a little aliasing "twinkling". Does our Nvidia Control Panel (I have the 2070 ) settings have much effect on clarity with AFS2?

    Still, I am pretty happy with the Odyssey+ and flight sims. Make sure you all have Apollo11 HD to celebrate the 50th anniversary this summer. It sure looks great on the Odyssey+

    Dave W.

    I first "landed" on the lake with the R-22 so I could measure the local height (560 m) and then used that for altitude instead of using autoheight=true. I finally adjusted it to 557 . As others have said, orientation is adjusted with "<[float64][orientation][-90]>" with the value in degrees.

    I include my tsc file - I positioned more toward Interlaken airport.

    I just wonder how the Nimitz ever got there.

    Dave W.


    Don't forget though that this sale is for the older original Odyssey without the anti-SDE or BlueTooth in the headset. It is a great headset anyway and many like it better due to the display image being "crisper".


    Thanks so much for bringing back this fighter - a lot to handle smoothly for me. Could you point to the TMD parameter that would allow me to add some more pitch rate damping.


    Dave W.

    I am the OP and my conclusion was as follows:

    "A summary of the results for my CPU (9700Kat 5Ghz) / GPU (RTX2070) show that the optimal spot for me is as follows:

    ASW=motionvector, SteamVR Video Tab at 212% and Application at 100%, In-game SS = 1.6, RenderTargetScale = 2.0, all of which provides a B+ image clarity. I wish we could try a "sharpening" filter (Unreal Engine has it) that might get it to an A- but maybe I have to wait for Gen 2. For this application, RenderTargetScale has a small clarity effect but significant AA effect."

    I set the Reprojection in the default.vrsettings file to "motionvector" so the FPS was a constant 45 - this allowed me to make all the other changes and still keep the frametime under 22.2 milliseconds. I wanted a fairly high density scenery viewpoint so I picked ORBX Innsbruck - at a parking spot so as to keep the viewpoint repeatable.

    What I wanted to do globally was to set the SteamVR Video tab (global SS) to 200% and the Application specific at 100% for all applications and then if the application has an internal SS setting, adjust that. First, I verified by actual test (measuring clarity and frametime (not FPS) in milliseconds) whether those SteamVR SS settings had any effect - I changed the 200% to 150%, 250%, and 100% and the change in frametime (and clarity) verified that there really was a change. Then I went back to the 200% Global - 100% Application in SteamVR and now only adjusted the Aerofly FS2 RenderScaleFactor from 1.2 to 1.7 and again I saw BOTH frametime (not FPS) and clarity change.

    The summary of all this was to show a concept of how to evaluate your settings - to see how much you can increase your settings towards maximum image clarity but still get the fluid 45 fps with Reprojection. I really don't want to get the stutters! The values that I chose were only for my CPU/GPU combination which is maybe at the 80% point of max performance in AFS2 with todays hardware. YMMV!!

    Flying around in VR within the sweetspot of the Odyssey+ and smooth reprojection gives a great flight - just beautiful.

    Dave W.


    I wear glasses too (waiting on my widmovr lenses to experiment ) and yes the "sweet spot" is difficult to keep right there for flight sims (have to keep checking and bumping the HMD ) - not as noticeable in many games or demos (really like theBlu and Apollo 11). I have progressive lenses and I also have to get them lined-up to get the most clear image. Even so, I like the image better than the Rift - things just look beautiful with the O+

    I my experiment above, I used the engine readouts in the center MFD of the Q400 for the clarity test without leaning in but with the eye at the reference eyepoint where the triangle device on the windshield is correct. The best was that I could barely read them.

    Dave W.

    I used the idea of watching the frametime from SteamVR in order to measure impact to performance along with a clarity study. I decided to repeat that kind of experiment and I used our flight simulator (Aerofly FS2 Q400 which has excellent performance and has some detailed scenery from ORBX (Ultra/Insane settings) for Innsbruck airport ) instead of car racing as a test case since there are many cockpit instruments with small fonts to get the best impression of image clarity (can I read the number without leaning). The ASW column refers to using motionvector or not, FPS was provided by the in-game printout, and I did try adjusting RenderTargetScale. A summary of the results for my CPU (9700Kat 5Ghz) / GPU (RTX2070) show that the optimal spot for me is as follows:

    ASW=motionvector, SteamVR Video Tab at 212% and Application at 100%, In-game SS = 1.6, RenderTargetScale = 2.0, all of which provides a B+ image clarity. I wish we could try a "sharpening" filter (Unreal Engine has it) that might get it to an A- but maybe I have to wait for Gen 2. For this application, RenderTargetScale has a small clarity effect but significant AA effect. I did have to always check to see that I was in the small sweet spot of the Odyssey.

    Here is a table of the test: (Sorry about the incorrect spacing)


    WMR Benchmarks (ASW = on => motionvector ) For 90fps = 11.1msec and 45fps =22.2msec max
    Test location is parking at ORBX Innsbruck
    Time FPS ASW SteamVR_SS IngameSS RenderTargetScale Clarity Comments
    12.8 45 On 200 1.6 2.0 B+
    15.8 58 OFF 200 1.6 2.0 B+ Why did the frametime go up a little??

    10.7 70 OFF 100 1.6 2.0 C+
    17.9 52 OFF 250 1.6 2.0 B++
    17.9 45 OFF 250 1.7 2.0 A- slightly clearer but strong aliasing begins
    15.0 42 On 250 1.6 2.0 B++ Clear but flicker on instruments
    12.3 45 On 212 1.6 2.0 B++ Optimal?
    12.7 45 On 212 1.6 1.0 B- less clear and with noticeable aliasing
    12.7 45 On 212 1.6 3.0 B++ noticeable AA improvement over 1.0
    10.5 45 On 150 1.6 2.0 B- Less clear but provides FPS headroom

    OK, so the latest combination that was recommended for image crispness for the WMR world (not just Odyssey+ but it has the "softest" image) and those with a substantial video card (I just installed an RTX 2070 on my 9700K@5Ghz ) is the combination of the following for Aerofly FS2:

    1) Set WMR Portal Headset Display Visuals to "Very high (beta)"

    2) default.vrsettings to "renderTargetScale" : 2.0

    3) SteamVR Supersampling to 200%

    4) AFS2 RenderFactor to 1.8

    Experiment with anti-aliasing/anisotropic settings

    No one knows if all these are really required - but the image is definitely better. I am starting at this condition and working back to see where it begins to fall off in clarity but gives back some FPS. Flying the Q400 in Innsbruck sure looks good - easy to read the airspeed on the PFD. What interests me is that our VR HMDs may actually have better image quality than we think - it's up to the graphic card and all these settings to produce the best pixels.


    Yes, I used the new R22 especially since I have a hard time reading the airspeed gauge (somewhat "far" away and small fonts). I also tried both the Q400 and the A320 since they have hard to read values for airspeed and altitude on the Primary Flight Display. If anyone can do so, let's try to see how much FPS we lose if we change nothing else than the renderTargetScale from 1.0 to 2.0. Maybe as a separate test, we can try increasing SS and change other items like Antialiasing and Anisotropic values... Maybe there is another value than 2.0??

    I would have been nice if Samsung could have provided an "EyeExam" application that just writes a pattern to their screen(s) without any WMR/Steam/... applications between us and the display - then we could see how clear it is natively. I think maybe some folks turned their Odyssey+ HMDs back without giving it time to see what really can be done.

    Dave W.

    Further comments on Steam Forum

    I am enjoying my Samsung Odyssey+ with AFS2 but would have to admit that the clarity could stand improvement. I would run up the SuperSampling value but it seemed to limit at about 1.5 or so in improvement and I couldn't easily read some instruments (but I really like the antiSDE). I just happened to come across this forum "conversation" ( somewhat of an argument ) on the Steam thread - go to the very last entries…276824488715073552/?ctp=2

    The summary of the idea is to try it for yourself - make a simple change to the file "STEAM\steamapps\common\MixedRealityVRDriver\resources\settings\default.vrsettings"

    "driver_Holographic" : {

    "renderTargetScale" : 2.0


    instead of 1.0 and see if you don't notice an improvement (restart WMR+SteamVrbeta ) - but it is possibly a placebo (I don't think so). If you are using motionReprojection with the variable color square indicator, it will be harder to see since it is now half the size it was. I feel that difficult to read instrument values like a smaller "0" are easier to read and the out the window scene has less shimmer. I am using SS set to somewhere between 1.5 and 2.0. Just try it and report back - I'm willing to take any negative responses because our perception of clarity varies with the individual and CPU/GPU configuration.

    Dave W.

    When I test Prepar3D, it is obvious that Single Pass Rendering in VR really helps (maybe by 30% or so). I know that AFS2 is very fast, but there is always room for improvement when talking about complex ORBX scenery and complex aircraft (Q400 vs C172). Does AFS2 use single pass rendering as yet?

    highflyer , I won’t get to use my own odyssey plus for a week so I really hope you discover all the best settings. Your comments are very important to many of us. In general what would you say about the clarity compared to a rift. Another words what do you think of the reduced SDE? How about tracking? Can you fly fine with your joystick? Have you tried to setup reprojection?