My 2070 SUPER VR settings and suggestion (Reverb G2 - WMR)

My guess would be that it’s simple: it’s not a bug - London POIs and photogrammetry is much more complicated than before, of course it costs you a few FPS when all that is loaded.

Not really when you’re sitting on runway 27L at Heathrow facing away from all the photogrammetry and far enough away from it that it’s not even loaded in. Heathrow is way outside the city centre. And as I said, it’s the same at JFK. I’m down an average of 5-6 FPS across the board in all locations in VR.

I think it’s still very likely that some of the enhanced scenery is loading. Even the enhanced terrain mesh can cost FPS, and there are many things that can load at a distance. JFK for sure has Manhattan on the horizon affecting FPS. Not visible or obstructed by buildings doesn’t mean it’s not loaded or not eating FPS. I mean, the update that enhanced UK, put photogrammetry to London and introduced a lot of POIs that lead to people complaining that flying around London tanks FPS very likely has something to do with what you are describing… Much more likely than some new performance issue. Of course, generally the performance under VR is not good and needs to be improved. But this dows not sound surprising…

I know its not directly correlated to VR, but it seems like every update i lose 3-5 fps on the 2D test that i have, though there could be a connection with some hiccups i experience now in VR. (my 2d test is m20R at eglc, which now is 48 fps at 4k with render scale at 90 in 2d, most things on high, vector data at ultra, though with orbx eglc in play its around 45 fps, at one point bare eglc this was at 57 fps on 3080 ftw3)

Cruising around London with render scale 90 and terrain i think around 100, Openxr now at 50% (bug fixed) and everything on auto, i can fly in bonanza from eglc toward the west over the city with a scattering of juddering here and there, not horrid, smooth at times then a hiccup or two. I didnt perform the same test before the update though, so unsure if its worse/better in VR. I will try the Win key trick to see if it smooths things out.

Okay, perhaps London was a bad example to use because it got updates to the surrounding area.

Take just JFK, obviously there were no changes there in the update. Exact same conditions before and after the update have me an average of 4-6 FPS worse off.

Not saying this is common to everyone but I know I haven’t changed anything. I haven’t made changes to the Windows environment, I haven’t added anything new to my sim.

Very strange and frustrating as I’d recently settled on settings that I was happy with and could enjoy.

You don’t know whether they didn’t update the entire planet mesh, especially in trying to solve the world-wide spikes showing everywhere…

I’ve documented a bug already in the London PG mesh (a hole) and there might be other holes everywhere causing the rendering engine to spend time drawing these missing regions and pixels and causing a loss of fps overall in the process, because the code is not meant to deal with holes in the mesh at all.

Here is an example of mesh bug:
[World Update 3] London Photogrammetry Mesh Holes

Well, who knows, maybe you’re right. Impossible to know. Until the MSFS is better optimized and we’re struggling for every FPS anything can throw it off. Performance has to be better on high-end PCs, period. Until it is - anything can ruin the barely adequate VR performance.

I have an I9 and 3090, I followed the recommended settings in this thread with minimal success. After I changed the settings on the graphic card through Nvidia control panel, I was finally able to get the result that I was looking for. FPS on the monitor is 45, FPS on the head set is 28. I am happy overall, I can finally read the number in the cockpit EFIS, minimal stutters, (only when looking out the side windows). I did not see much of a change to the 28 FPS on the headset with the control panel settings but it does not seem to degrade the experience. I am running either high or Ultra on most of the graphic settings within FS. My impression is that you may have to fix the Nvidia settings via their control panel interface before you will appreciate the changes made with FS.

1 Like

@LoxToxic2000. What are your Nvidia CPL settings? Thanks for the info.

I was afraid somebody was going to ask. I wrote 2 pages of notes based on you tube videos.
Nvidia Control Panel Best Settings for Gaming and Performance Guide 2021 by Jhow Tech https://youtu.be/EPR1nJEvX2E

There are several videos along the same line, I looked for general consensus and implemented most all of them. I would watch a few of them and see what works for you.

I did not change any registry settings. I have found that you need to tweak Windows/Headset settings, (which are very few), the GPU settings via the Nvidia control panel, a couple of settings using the OpenXR developer tool, and then the rest is done in game. It solved my VR issues, and really made the desktop monitor look fantastic. I wish the look inside the head set was a good as the monitor, but I don’t mind the trade off for the VR experience. I find that with the VR it matches my real flying experience in light turbulence when looking out the side windows. :slight_smile:

Thanks @LoxToxic2000. I changed my Nvidia 3D Settings to go along with those described in the Jhow Tech YouTube video that you linked. I didn’t change any of my color settings, e.g., no switch to Nvidia colors.

The change in Nvidia settings definitely improved my performance with a 2070S as compared to @CptLucky8’s recommended Nvidia CPL settings BUT the overall 3D VR experience got quite a bit blurrier. My other settings in MSFS were as I have recently described and are pretty exotic relative to most users so I won’t rehash my sim settings here.

The one thing that particular struck me is that Stirling Castle (and maybe other new UK/Ireland POI’s loaded with photogrammetry?!) might make a great acid test for one’s VR settings. With my previous Nvidia and sim settings, Stirling Castle landscape was one big mess. Everything went black with a head turn, etc. With the Jhow Tech Nvidia 3D settings, although the scenery is blurrier, I get essentially no visual artifacts with head movements. Really smooth, BLURRY flying!!!

I turned on the Nvidia sharpening - maybe that’s what’s causing the blurriness. It would be great to find a way to increase visual sharpness in the final rendered G2 VR scene without going back to Stutterville blackness over Stirling Castle with my previous Nvidia 3D settings.

Can you share the exact settings for reference?

@JALxml @LoxToxic2000
I’ve watched the video and he is essentially making the same recommendations, except “Power Management mode” and “Texture Filtering Quality”. I’ll try it out of course but IIRC they were marginally making any difference, not something really as significant as you are experiencing?!

update: in the video he is also recommending using the latest NVidia driver. I was waiting for the next one until re-evaluating 457.30. Are you both running with the latest?

@LoxToxic2000
Can you create your own topic instead?

Will do, sorry to offend or step on your toes. It looks like I can delete them out of your thread and put them in another post, would you like me to do that?

The point is not stepping on my toes at all, this is a topic meant to sharing experiences and to evolve with feedback. However in being in your own topic, you’ll get more exposure and answers specific to your settings which might make this worthwhile.

Thanks for the advice and I will do as you suggest. For those that asked a few questions of me I will put the details in another thread and message you when that is done. Given my ignorance as to forums , posting and such it may take a bit for me to figure out how.

I think only moderators can move posts to a new thread. One could cut and paste content to posts in a new thread but I would think since there are only two other people besides yourself involved, one being me, we could all just edit our existing posts in this thread to indicate that any further discussion is being continued in a new independent thread. Since CptLucky8 has visited a number of outside threads and posted comments linking back to threads he’s started as being related material, I don’t see why, given how relatively few posts there’ve been so far in this thread about what difference, if any, the Jhow Tech settings make, that just linking existing posts here to a new thread, and otherwise leaving them be, should be a problem.

I have started a thread that is specific to my hardware configuration and details of the settings I use:

1 Like

If you’ve got a 2070 Super in your hands (or more to the point, in your rig), that’s probably about as good as you’re going to get without paying 2x or more of MSRP for a 30-series of some flavor that, as you noted, might give less of a performance boost as a new CPU. I’m on an overclocked (all-core 4.8GHz) i5-10600K atm, and am going to see if the 11th Gen has anything that can really show a difference without costing an arm and two legs and go from there.

I’m not holding my breath about even finding a GPU for another 12-18 months at this point, and I’m not willing to play around with AMD on the GPU front. Hypothetically, I would consider it for a CPU, but I’ve already got a pretty good LGA1200 MB that I really don’t want to replace. Both for financial reasons, as well as the fact that it would be a PITA to rip my old one out and put a new one in, and if something makes me change my mind about that, I’m probably gonna hold out until DDR5 is real and not stupid expensive.

We’re just at an awkward time right now regardless of how you look at things.

1 Like

I don’t remember where I’ve read it lately, but Intel has announced new CPUs by the end of the year (12th gen?) which are supposed to be on a new architecture, unlike the 11th gen which are more “incremental”. It might be worth waiting a little longer for the CPU.

However for the GPU, I believe any 3080 and 3090 might be worthwhile considering the jump in performance, especially if you’re not just using FS2020. However, the 3080 is probably not as attractive with the limited amount of VRAM if you do have a 20XX already, and don’t want to pay for a 3090 premium.

I wish they’d release a 3080 version with 16GB VRAM instead, but it only depends if you can both afford it and as importantly get a hold on it.

However the newest AMD video cards seem out of the equation for VR as far as I can tell from what I read.

1 Like