Hello, just going to post my experience with this game. I thought Assetto Corsa Competizione was the worst racing game for VR but I was wrong, RaceRoom is. For me, this is just broken. In order to get 90fps with a HP Reverb G2 with other cars in track, I need to go 50% resolution and almost lowest graphic settings. These are my system specs: - GPU: AMD 6900 XT - CPU: Ryzen 5900x - RAM: 32GB 3600 mhz (4x8) - Hard Disk: M.2 1000 GB - Motherboard: X570 Aorus Pro - OS: Windows 10 - Drivers: Adrenalin 21.10.1 So, with almost the best computer you can get in 2021 (only 3090 could beat the 6900 XT), and running a 8 years old game with almost rFactor 1 graphics, I am having to go lowest and 50% resolution for a smooth 90fps experience in VR.... Is this just acceptable? For me, this is completely broken. I am aware Nvidia users are also having a similar experience with a 3080, but sure not as bad as with AMD. I already tried disabling Shadows, and etc... so I don't think there is much more to try. This is just broken guys, I hope it will be fixed soon. Regards.
Some people? Literally 100% of people are running almost lowest settings. In ACC at least I can go medium-high settings and overall, the graphics are more realistic. I like RaceRoom but buying a 3000€ computer for having problems does not worth it.
I drive with VR only (AC, ACC, Raceroom and Automobilista 2). Mostly Raceroom (by far). And running an AMD 5800x/RX6800 (non XT) combo I'm really enjoying it. But due to the immense amount of pixels to be calculated under VR, in most of the titles compromises have to be made to get the appropriate performace. In terms of graphics quality the best title is AMS2, but R3E also runs very decent (better than ACC which always suffers from microlags). For Raceroom I run 55% resolution in Steam, but with a "-vr 2.0" start-parameter for R3E (which then pushes resolution again). I completely turned off reflections and shadows. My most important configuration setting is: running my Reverb G2 with 60Hz. This way R3E runs very smooth and even a really demanding title like MSFS2020 gives me quite a decent experience. But of course you're absolutely right: regarding your "top notch" hardware it should be easier to get a satisfying performance. It's really time to update the graphics engine to be able to make use of modern hardware components (e.g. by running more threads).
I can Support this with all drivers after the 20.4.2/20.5.1 RaceRoom via VR is crashing or since the drivers from the beginning this year 21.x the performance is really bad. With a 5700XT like in my case, i have at least the possibility to change/stay at the old 20.5.1 drivers, and this runs smooth like hell against the new 21.x.x drivers, but with the new 6x00 generation this possibilty is not available anymore. I already tried different drivers and I also tried this on a complete fresh Windoiws installation https://forum.sector3studios.com/in...-wirking-with-racerroom-vr.16751/#post-228176 https://forum.sector3studios.com/index.php?threads/bad-performance-in-vr.17424/#post-228071 https://forum.sector3studios.com/index.php?threads/what-with-vr.16636/#post-220395
Here is the thing: to run 90 fps with 30 AI gt3 cars in Hockenheim with HP Reverb G2, I need to go almost lowest settings and 44% SteamVR resolution. That's with a 6900 XT and a Ryzen 5900x. Oh my god... this defo needs improvements, there is no way it can run that bad. My reaction for having to go those settings for 90 fps with this computer is just puaaaagg
The question is, is RaceRoom the Problem or the AMD Drivers. Because with my 5700T and the old driver from may 2020, everything is fine. The problems started with the drivers after 20.5.1
Most probably DX9 holds back a better performance in VR. Thanks to the devs we're able to run Raceroom in VR although being DX9. I've got quite a beefy machine myself and have to run medium/low settings to get good results. It is what it is.
I also read about problems with AMD GPUs and VR in other forums. E.g. at IRacing, MSFS2020 etc. Especially in connection with WMR headsets. And they all don't have DX9. For me, this is not an RRE problem alone, but an AMD GPU (driver) problem.
Nevertheless Raceroom is still my preferred racing title with VR. It's by far better than ACC (which has permanently micro stutters and an inferior graphics quality in VR). And better than AC because using the content manager together with VR is quite annoying. Ok, AMS2 looks better with VR (while still offering a very good performance), but I somehow don't like it's physics and FFB and miss all the variants of online races and challenges Raceroom offers. But yes: I sometimes regret that I built up my PC using an AMD card. On the other side there simply weren't any (affordable and deliverable) alternatives at that time.
I belong to an age group that played FS98 and Falcon 4 with frame rates 12-17 where you fought for every single frame, because it made a feelable, perceivable difference. I can tell you, landing a plane with fps=13 is not funny. But in those times, you got used to it. The bottle neck of course was hardware. One had to live with it, and make the best of it. Compromises when setting up options were always on order. Eye candy balanced versus sufficient non-jerkiness so that a flight control actually was something like flight "control". Its like this with today's VR sets, too. The hardware is not yet up to support the resolutions of latest VR visors, even less so at an affordable cost. Thats how it is. Live with it. The G2 is known to be very demanding on hardware. A title like RR with old DX and thus non-optimised memory management and all that, reveals these discrepancies easier than a latest, optimised title. All I can say, is this. My specs are in my profile, its an i7 8700, 32 GB RAM (never need it all...) a 1080 GTX with 13 GB, and a Oculus Rift from autumn 2017. And I can run AC and RR with 30, 40, 50 cars on track - smoothly. From 50-60 on, RR becomes stuttering (wiht maxed GFX!) I even can run ACC with full field of cars at night, and with thunderstorm on max, lightshow, in the middle of the pack. The system gets very hot, smoke lies in the room's air, I can put lunch on the PC to get the meal BBQed while I drive - but it works. Maybe some people have too high expectations when investing much money. A sense of realism and considering the possibilities - and impossibilties of given kits and softwares, are on order. I plan for a new rig in early 2023. I got my current one in autumn 2017, but in early 2023 Facebook will become mandatory for running Oculus, and I do not accept that. I will not leave it to just buying another VR set, because I expect that my system will have problems supporting it. All stuff available right now is more demanding in that regard than the Oculus Rift. The system then will be a bit older than five years, which is the absolute minimum I demand hardware for 3000 coins to last. I am not happy, but I can live with it, and more important: I can afford it. Needless to say, Oculus stuff I have bought twice with the Rift: the first and the last time ever. Else I can only say: its good gear, for its time. Because I can play what I want to play with it, smoothly. With medium or better GFX options. Much stuff maxed out. If I am lucky, the EU will force FB to giove up its plans for Oculus and FB linking, it is clearly illegal by European laws anyway. Then I will keep my hardware until it breaks.
I don't think it is a hardware limitation, it is 100% a software issue. What I see in VR market is that the software lacks optimization from big aspects. Half Life Alyx is a perfect example of how to optimize a game for VR. The graphics there are just mind blowing and the performance is just amazing, you can go 100% supersampling in the G2 with Ultra settings. Assetto Corsa also runs amazing, with almost 100% supersampling and maxed out graphic settings. But then... we have the non optimized stuff: Assetto Corsa Competizione, RaceRoom and... even iRacing in some tracks. From my personal experience, RaceRoom has been by far the worst one, because in order to get 90 fps I have to go PS1 graphics + 44% resolution (which almost looks as a Rift S). It's just terrible. In ACC at least I can get decent graphics and enjoy it so much, but here... uffff. You could think about using FSR to improve the situation, but no, it doesn't work in RaceRoom too, it gives error, which is a big handicap. This is the main problem of VR right now: Software. With HP Reverb G2 I think we have arrived to what we imagine VR was supposed to be, the resolution is just like a monitor, the colors are just as good as a normal monitor, and everything is completely fine to say godbye to monitors, but... the optimization of most games, and the problems you have to face is what make people regret going VR. I don't know if it is also related to AMD driver, because I know people with 3080 facing the same issues. In my opinion this is just broken because the game is DX9 and it is also using just 1 CPU core or whatever. VR Chat is also a good example of how broken optimization can be. It is built in Unity and it only uses 1 core of my CPU too, and... it can lead into non sense fps problems too. In my opinion, this doesn't make sense, RaceRoom graphics are closer to rFactor 1 than Assetto Corsa, and a 6900 XT should be able to easy get 90 fps with maxed out settings and 100% resolution. Regards.
Oculus Rift has a resolution of 1080x1200 per eye. G2 has 2160x2160 per eye. Thats factor 3.6 . 3.6x as many pixels must be calculated. That equals a single screen monitor with a 3045x3045 resolution. Thats more pixels than 4K/Ultra HD ! You thus need to have 3.6 times the GFX- and VR-related calculation power for the G2 to run it with same frames and details as that old OR. Its easy to overestimate hardware potential, especially if one paid a lot of money for it. I have see people doing that for years, and two decades, in flight simming. Now, that is the hardware thing. You said it is the software, and yes, I agree on that too, it is also the software - heck it is one decade old almost, and it is DX9. What do you expect...? I think the sim is very optimised - for DX9 standards. They moved from 32 Bit to 64 Bit some years ago. I see it running all smooth and fine - on my hardware, 4 years old. I think they indeed have gotten out of it what is possible with this engine. It makes no sense to compare it to newer engines and later DX's. I spend ten minutes to google around a bit, to see if something I thought is still valid: and I saw that it seems to be still valid indeed, and that is that the G2 is a monster having very steep hardware demands. Not few people complain about it being a hog. Also, it seems that AMD-based systems tend to have a bit more issues with VR than Intel-based ones. In the end, it could be and probably is due to both things that you face problems: the software'S age and aged technical standards, and the hardware being had for BBQ by the G2. Both may cause a confounding effect additionally when being combined: critical hardware demands of the G2 meet old software with limitations to interact with new hardware. Test with an older VR set, if you can lease one?! A lower resolution, a much lower resolution. Maybe also test without VR, is the sim still giving you performance issues then? In VR with OC, i can have around 50 cars on the Nordschleife without jerkiness, but on a single monitor, I can run with 99.
G2 being demanding is not an excuse I guess. Why? I can run Assetto Corsa 100% resolution and maxed out settings.
AC is DX10 and DX11. And a different engine. I leave it to coders to compare the pros and cons of both titles' engines from a performance point of view. I tend to think the AC engine is more modern. And yes, AC VR works great although it was not planned for and got injected later on only. RR uses Steam's VR interface, btw, AC's VR is an in-house build. Stefano or Marko once indicated that it gave them hell to make.
And that's what I mean, it is either DX9 or how VR was introduced in this game, but the performance is terrible
Well, terrible not for me, for me RR works great. I tend to think you demand too much when thinking latest hardware interacts always perfectly with old software with a very outdated tehcncial interface (DX, engine). Maybe the interface is incapable to make best use of latest hardware!? Because it was not made and optimised for technology ten years ahead when the software was made? Well, I start to fall into a guessing game now, and that helps nobody. I'm out. Good luck, hope you get it solved somehow one day.
It works terrible with HP Reverb G1 or G2 headsets for both: AMD and Nvidia users. It's just a fact. I hope we get it solved one day too.
I run most everything on high with i9 / 2080ti, including shadows... exceptions are MSAA x4, reflections at lowest setting (cubemap I think it's called?), and car contact shadows at 6. I'm running a Quest 2 with max res @ 5408x2736, 90Hz. Also, I use the Oculus Tray Tool and set ASW @ 45 Hz, along with a couple other optimizations inside of OTT (FOV Multiplier .80, Oculus Homeless). For those of you unwilling to use asw, I see no hope, with today's hardware. For me, I can tell no difference in native 90 Hz vs asw 45 Hz, while racing... it's smooth as butter. The exception would be viewing a replay. If it weren't for asw, I wouldn't even bother with vr, as there is no sim (modern) I can run with graphics maxed/close to max and achieve native 90 fps. DLSS and AMD's solution may allow for it, or at least get us closer, for sims running Directx 11+.
"and set ASW @ 45 Hz" I can do that and run 100% resolution, but ASW adds a lot of artifacts that make the experience so bad for me, at least with a G2 and AMD card.
IMHO it is way better to run the G2 native with 60Hz (instead of 90Hz) and therefore be able not to use ASW / reprojection. Reprojection doesn't work very well on AMD cards (yet) and always will produce quite ugly artifacts and often bad stuttering. This week I raced a few laps on screen (47'' LG TV) instead of VR. But it was instantly obvious: I love my G2 and running Raceroom with VR! Racing without felt so game-ish. So no: in my opinion Raceroom definitley isn't "completely broken" for VR users. But you have to accept some compromises concerning grahpics settings. Like almost always in VR.