TnT Quest 2 Settings - Sharp and SMOOOOTH!

Ok! Here is the result of my tests with the Index: I see no difference at all. I’m used to HIGH, so I first tried LOW and then ULTRA, and this changes nothing whatsoever to the EFIS screens, and I can’t find any particular difference on the decals either. It might be possible some of the cockpit interior materials and fabrics are showing maybe a few more details but I’m not even sure of this. Either it doesn’t work on my system, or this setting works in tandem with another one I didn’t set like yours, or the Index resolution is lower and in practice it doesn’t show, or maybe it was just placebo, or actually my vision has become so poor I can’t distinguish any difference either. ???

Nevertheless, as far as I remember, this setting was supposed to only affect cockpit textures but more particularly, the cockpit texture overlay effect (this is the effect of recreating bumps and ridges on the plastics and the fabrics). It is not dissimilar in nature to the other setting, Texture Synthesis, except this one if I’m not mistaken is about the “details” on the ground.


I appreciate all your effort and this might work for high end cards and systems, but lower scale -just no. We will have to accept basic settings. Screen tearing/flashes of light and judders will be caused by this. One day MSFS will be as fluid as Aerofly FS 2, no tweaking needed. Really The amount of money people have spent just to get into MSFS 2020 VR is incredible! I would never have thought I would spend over $2500 on a computer simulation! but here we are.

1 Like

Thank you so much for the feedback and replying back! I had exactly that WOW-effect after endless combinatioms, finally having found this config. Blown away how smooth it runs and how sharp it still looks, my next thoght was “you gotta share this”! I was just very nervous if it applies and works that well for others. And after a day I see it really does for many, not just here, but also on FB. And I’m just a happy man!
I acknowledge not everyone will embrace the super-sharpened 60% renderscale appearance, but as said I find everything relevant like cockpit and landscape supersharp, I accept how trees and contours look and this resulting smoothness is just unbeaten. Yeehaa! :smiley:

1 Like

Oh yes, this is indeed a big finding. I’ve also been attached to 100% renderscale for long and under-estimated the powers of super-sampling.
And the advantage is obvious: it takes much longer for a CPU to actually render a full image with all geometry, 3d-positioned, anti-aliased, super-sampled textures, lighting, reflections, etc. than to just scale it up - with an apparently very smart algorhythm. One just have to find the right combination, which gives full speed advantage yet still looks good. I’m glad you’ve found it on the G2 with 70% game-scale and 100% OXR. And pleased my guide could also be of some help for a G2 user!

1 Like


I try yesterday your Setup, and its the first time in vr i have 2 Times flight the same result without evertime flight make a new Setup. i am really happy. but i have a Problem. i fly VfR without Landing Prozedure, and i See the Landing lights From the airport to late or have Problems to find that in vr. which Setup Position make the lights on ground from the airports better to See?

Thx for your Hard work i love IT so much

ryzen 3700x
32 GB ram
quest 2

1 Like

@CptLucky8 thanks for sharing the texture findings. I did a quick test yesterday and the only difference on ULTRA I noticed were the cockpit surfaces. The textures are very fine and also the bump-maps on plastic covers, fabric and leather are indeed very sharp and nice. I noticed an FPS drop though (2-3 fps) and in the end, I also went back to HIGH. It looks very good as well and I try to preserve my fps buffer/headroom.

1 Like

@Rug4Ever thanks a lot for the feedback, I’m very glad it works for you!
I’m a bit puzzled by the airport lights, because I also fly a lot at dusk (love the colors and lights when slowly getting dark), but didn’t notice that visibility problem. In the end I’m afraid this may be linked to the 60% renderscale, which is kind of the magic of my recommended setup. You could carefully try 70% renderscale in-game if it helps on the distanced lights, but please bear in mind the smoothness trade-off for that increase is quite considerable. By increasing renderscale only from 60% to 70% you are actually increasing the number of rendered pixels by 36%. Good luck!

I’ve just tested it again and you are right. No difference in resolution of EFIS or steam gauges on ULTRA.

I have no explanation as to why the cockpit textures originally seemed better to me. Probably due to sloppy testing when I did not take into account different lightning conditions depending on current weather or time of day. Or maybe my headset lens were less foggy.

Anyway, I apologize for the misinformation, I have modified my original post so as not to mislead anyone.

1 Like

@CroppingPoem113 thanks a lot for your detailed feedback, very valuable!

With regards to your two aspects:

  1. Resolution / image clarity

Well, I have to admit you are running on a real “deluxe config” when it comes to resolution. Let’s quickly compare (left mine, right yours):
In-Game Renderscale: 60% vs. 100% (factor 2.78 - this is +178% more pixels to render)
Oculus: 3920x1984 vs. 4704x2384 (factor 1.44 or +44% more pixels)
Tray Tool: 1.6 vs. 1.6 (same)
Oculus refresh: 80hz vs. 72hz (here you have kind of -10% less work for the GPU compared to me)

By multiplying both pixel factors (it’s not 100% appropriate), you get to a factor of 4 or 400% ! This is what I would call a “zero compromise” approach when it comes to resolution and image clarity. No surprise you get a diamond-sharp image by doing so, not really comparable to mine by any means, but I really wonder about the smoothness. I’m not an FPS-hunter and prefer to just assess the smoothness as visually perceived. And I believe if looking straight forward it may still work as the movement in the center appears “slower”. However, I can’t believe it still works well when looking to the side, down at the ground - unless flying high with IFR. I tried this settings, but the stuttering periods were just killing me. For me as a VFR discoverer and often chasing in a bush plane or a jet through mountain canyons, I primarily needed REAL smoothness YET STILL looking pretty ■■■■ good and sharp. That was my “impossible goal” and above is the final outcome that works really well for my personal preferences (and I gladly see some others’ too) . If you’re rather into cruising high, airliners etc. I trust you can enjoy your approach too, but I guess even then take-off and landings will be quite a pain and stutter fest? As always, it’s a lot about personal preferences and individual style of flying / what you want to enjoy in the sim…

  1. FOV settings

This is another, very interesting topic. Again, it’s very individual, but this time it’s about the face shape, IPD, how “deep” the eyes are positioned “in the skull”, the forehead, glasses or not, etc. etc. I believe with FOV everyone has to test and find his personal sweet spot. For example I can’t go below 0.9 vertically as then I perceive the horizontal borders and I really hate this cardboard / window look. But I fully agree to your point, with glasses and higher distance to the lenses, the round headset borders reduce the FOV and thereby hide the display borders and I trust you FOV of 0.8, 0.8 works perfectly in your case / better than mine. Maybe I should include a chapter with some general advice in the guide above, primarily how to test the FOV settings in Oculus Home and find one’s personal sweet spot. What do you think?



@creekflyer9722 I really understand your frustration and agree what we have to spend on a really strong PC to cope with FS these days is a heavy invest, just impossible for many…

What I don’t really agree with are basically the comparisons to Aerofly FS2 or similar. I hope you agree that FS comes with a completely different level of photo-realism. I mean how the sun-light affects the air/ atmosphere, the weather, snow, rain, thunderstorms, the reflections, the cities, the lights, etc… There’s so much more being rendered compared to FS2 and the look is different. I bet I can distinguish FS2020 from FS2 at any given screenshot within seconds…

Getting such an image fidelity requires a lot of resources. And it requires even much more to compute this in VR. In that sense, FS introduces the next-gen simulation and is a true game changer. Unfortunately it’s made for today’s and the future hardware and not really feasible for older machines.

I agree there’s still room for optimisation and very hopeful for upcoming improvements, the DX12 release etc. etc. Devs are also confirming in the latest video they are making great progress on optimisation ahead of the Xbox release, especially with regards to memory handling and perfomance. So, yes I believe FS will run faster, maybe even +25%? But I expect no miracles and it will continue to require strong hardware to really “fly”.

Believe me, my new PC was a heavy lift for me and my family in December, but the greatest thing I afforded myself after many years. I follow VR developments since 30 years (I’m 43) and even used to travel to experience VR in ■■■■■■ quality. If someone would have shown me the FS in VR as a paid experience a year or two ago, I would be willing to pay quite some money every weekend just to fly in that quality for… say 30 minutes. In the Netherlands, I saw a VR centre wher you could drive Assetto Corsa in VR for 20€ - 15 minutes!!! And now, I have both, anytime - in mind-blowing quality, at least for ppl like me knowing how VR used to look years ago…

Is it now worth the 2500 bucks? That really is a very individual question, I guess…and again; sorry for everyone not being even in a position to raise this question…


@Ohmsquare a very nice table overview you have made btw! :+1:

1 Like

Ah - I’ve messed up my list of settings for you there, I said TAA 100 but I meant 80! I’m so sorry, your replies are so detailed! Serves me right for replying so late at night!

But your general point is still valid, my rendering is much higher, and absolutely yes it’s all a trade off. I am not an airliner fan, I’m a TBM at 10,000 ft cruise and low approaches kinda guy.

With my settings I’m getting locked at 30fps, and I judge the smoothness / lack of stutters by looking sideways out the window at passing taxiway signs / scenery / clouds. Your settings are defo the most consistent for smoothness everywhere, I do have areas I just can’t fly without turning my settings down from my ideal.

I hope you don’t think I’m shooting you down, quite the opposite - you’ve done amazing work and it’ll help loads of people!

But I’d be lying if I didn’t say that when I read your OP saying you’ve got super sharp and super smooth, I was excited, but for me it was actually super blurry and super smooth.

You said that even the small EFIS writing is legible with yours but I found it too blurry to read smaller text on the TBM G3000’s.

Unless I got something wrong…? Have you tried 72hz 1.3, OTT 1.6, TAA 80, (which is VR Flight Sim Guy Steve’s settings I think?) and do you agree it’s much sharper?

Thanks again for all your help! I worry recently that my replies sometimes come off as rude or dismissive but I mean them to be genuine thoughts and questions and conversational, I hope that comes across!

P.S maybe I’ll do two recordings today using the Quest 2’s built in recorder, one with your settings, and another where I’ve just tweaked my render settings, and you can see if it matches what you’d expect?

1 Like

No way, I didn’t find your post wrong in any sense, that’s what I call a good, constructive discussion, so absolutely no worries.

I’m really puzzled by your TDM930 feedback though as this plane is also among my favorites and the Garmins are really great! I’m even sitting quite a bit backward and up compared to the standard position. Ok I have to admit I can’t read e.g. the tiny, green rpm value on the middle display from that position, but white text, all the rest and overall readability is really great. So I can definitely re-assure my instruments are super-clear and really don’t know how it renders on your end as blurry… just puzzled where this difference may sit. I do wear my corrective lenses in VR… :wink: :man_shrugging:t2:

Renderscale of 80% makes much more sense and seems way more digestible for our PCs, but then I can assure you I have been flying with (probably exactly) this setting combo as I was set to 1.3 in Oculus and 80% then - and I was quite happy, but still bugged by these intermittent slow-downs and stutters.

72hz is a good option to reduce the gpu load quite a bit, but I can’t bear it well, happy for everyone who can.

1 Like


I have try today morning exact the same Setup as yesterday and today i get every 5 sec a Flash and i dont know why. its so Hard evertime have problems with vr in msfs. what can i do? exact the same Setup

seems to be related to the latest Oculus update


Suggestions have been to deselect the Oculus beta participation option within the PC Oculus App, if you’ve selected it as per original setup advice, which should roll you back to the previous stable version…?

Haven’t flown today yet, the update installed after my last flight last night so will see what happens…

I have been thinking whether it’s now okay to remove the Beta participation, seeing as several updates have landed since then and surely it was only advised in order to get early version stability when FS2020 first implemented VR?

1 Like

@TonyTazer1504 thanks friend.

Interesting indeed… I’ll have another play around later today, try and get some videos on youtube and link here for comparison.


@CroppingPoem113 couldn’t test the latest Oculus update yet, but in case I run into similar issues I will follow your advice and try deselecting Beta participation. :+1:

1 Like


I have leave the openxr beta and now i dont change in the vr Modus in msfs

Hi @Rug4Ever , sorry I’m not sure I understand what you mean.

Do you mean you can’t enter VR?

We are talking about the Oculus Beta, not the OpenXR beta, so perhaps this is a different issue?

Let us know.