Quote from cargame.nl :

Quote from NitroNitrous :

It's still cheaper than a good 3 monitor setup, so probably well worth it. Money is not an issue, the big question is if it will work or not

Everyone with such a device up to now is slower concerning racing compared to an old fashioned monitor. Until proven otherwise it doesn't work and it cannot replace a monitor or multi monitor setup. Probably funny to cruise around but thats about it.

Less speed maybe, but more fun and immersion perhaps?

Quote from Amynue :

http://uploadvr.com/end-of-an-era-oculus-rift-dk2-sold-out/

Does this mean I'm living in a dimension where eBay doesn't exist?

Quote from vitaly_m :

No thanks.

Funny how it went from a crowd funded project with cross-platform, open-source SDK, to a proprietary, closed-source SDK, then to a closed-sourced, non-cross-platform Facebook product. And then they ask loads of money for it.

Let's not forget they also recommend shelling out about #1200 for a PC that can actually run triple A games at 75 fps. VR is the future of gaming, but I'll wait for the Playstation VR and buy a PS4, at least then I'll know console can actually run the games in VR.

I've just got DK1, installed all the necessary software and I know it works because the demos like the Helix rollercoaster work, along with the head tracking movement. I have downloaded and installed the Live for Speed patch version 0.6G but when I try to select the Oculus in the options/view/3d menu the game says 'could not initialize oculus rift'
Can someone please help, thanks.

PS I did a forum search first but I couldn't find any posts.

Quote from Racon :

...but then none of them would work on a computer such as this, all C and no G. Why add any limitation you don't need to?

Because I know how to fit a GPU, I wouldn't have a clue fitting a MB and CPU and my 'local guy' charges the earth.

Quote from Racon :

Quote from Kidastronaut :

Why is LFS (which looks great) so smooth compared to other games? Asetta Corsa runs terribly on my PC yet LFS runs beautifully. It must be better programmed.

I think it's a matter of CPU vs GPU. I have an awesome CPU but an onboard GPU which barely even counts as such. LFS has a frame rate of 60-70, and iRental iRacing had a framerate of 2. Yes, two frames per second. Muchos Kudos Scawen!

If only all game makers made more use of the GPU, graphics cards are much easier to upgrade than CPUs which often require a motherboard upgrade as well.

Quote from Ped7g :

Quote from Kidastronaut :

PS I've heard people say that the DK2 needs a frame rate of at least 60 fps to be usable - two questions, does this only apply to racing games or to all types of games like Skyrim, and does this mean 60 fps PER EYE or 60 fps in total (30 fps per eye).

Steady 75FPS is a must for good experience. Then the experience may differ slightly by how much latency there is between head movement and final screen position. It sounds to me your HW will provide you with best possible experience in LFS.

If some game does not have steady 75, then if it at least is steady FPS, it will feel a bit sluggish.
If the FPS vary a lot, it will make your head tracking jerky and very unnatural, which may cause sickness easily.
Anyway, when you are under 75, the experience will feel more and more broken a disconnected from your head movement.

The consumer version is said to aim for 90Hz at least (would require steady 90FPS for perfect experience), maybe even more.

About "per eye". This is nonsense, the game does render single final image for OR, half of it is shown on left eye, other half is shown on right eye, so all the fps and timing are in regards to both left/right eye images at the same time, there's no delay for left/right. As the total pixel count is ~1.5* more than 2D, and there's some additional overhead to offset camera projection left/right, run the rendering two times, and do the head tracking, I think as a rule of thumb you can expect final OR fps to be at least half of your current fps (for the same height resolution as OR has). From that I think LFS will run beautifully for you. Skyrim will be probably quite a different beast...

Why is LFS (which looks great) so smooth compared to other games? Asetta Corsa runs terribly on my PC yet LFS runs beautifully. It must be better programmed. You're right about Skyrim btw. But I don't mind. If I can get good frame rates in the OR in LFS, rFactor (the first game) and some great older first person games like FEAR, FEAR 2 and Bioshock. I don't ecpect these older games to ever get native support but from what I've read they all work pretty well with VorpX.
If the DK1 had head tracking i would get that instead of the DK2 because of my PC specs, plus I think I'll give the CV of the rift a pass, unless I somehow get my hands on a seriously faster PC.

Quote from Amynue :

Quote from Kidastronaut :

My GPU is a lot better than my CPU.

It's not that great actually, performance-wise GTX 750Ti is only slightly faster than a GTX 560Ti.

You shouldn't have problem with running LFS with DK2 on that setup, but you may want to upgrade your GPU if you want to play some more demanding games in DK2.

The problem with getting a more advanced GPU is that my small DELL PC power supply unit means that I can only choose from graphics cards that do not require additional power and can be powered by the PCI-e slot. Most of the faster cards need to be plugged into the power supply unit for an extra 75watts power, this is not an option for me with my power supply unit.
Can you recommend a GPU that only uses power from the PCI-e slot and is significantly faster than a GTX 750ti?

I don't have 3D glasses, just the crappy red and Cyan type and steroescopic 3D, but it still creates two images so I can gauge how games will perform frame rate wise once i get the DK2. My frame rates almost halved from an average of 220 to around 140 at south city.

PS I've heard people say that the DK2 needs a frame rate of at least 60 fps to be usable - two questions, does this only apply to racing games or to all types of games like Skyrim, and does this mean 60 fps PER EYE or 60 fps in total (30 fps per eye).
Thanks.

Quote from vitaly_m :

U can try to set 3d mode and see on your usual monitor. I tried and got 90 fps instead of 120 (Fern Bay openconfig track)

Good idea, I'm gonna try this. Thanks.

Thanks for the replies, just a couple of things. The Oculus Rift resolution is only 1.5 times bigger than the resolution I'm using in 2D (as vitaly_m pointed out) but doesn't it also have to delay one of these two images slightly to create the 3D effect and if so, does this cause an increased load? Also how much performance drop off is caused by the head tracking?

Dell OptiPlex 760 Desktop
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5200 2.5GHz Processor (not great I know)
8GB DDR3 RAM
Nvidia GTX 750 ti (2GB DDR5)

My GPU is a lot better than my CPU.

One thing I've noticed is that I get significantly higher frame rates at 1400x1050 resolution than I get at a LOWER resolution of 1024x768. I'm hoping that the oculus rift DK2 is more reliant of the GPU and that my GPU will do most of the work and not rely on my less than stellar CPU.

I'm not sure if it's relevant but I use a logitech G27 wheel.

Last edited by Kidastronaut, Thu, 15 Jan 2015 15:36.

I'm buying the DK2 in a few weeks and I'd like to know the following.
In 2D with a single monitor, hotlapping with no other cars on track, I get between 220-305 fps at South City at a resolution of 1400x1050 32 bit 75hz, so what kind of frame rates can I expect with the DK2?
Thanks.

I've been reworking the textures using DDSconverer2 but some files won't convert, well they convery but no changes have been made to the textures, so I'm going to try the nvidia tools.