Which GPU for VR - Any first hand experience and Benchmarks?

[Duderei]

Hi,
I am only focussing on playing AC therefore performance in other Sims is not that important.

Running a 1080ti for years with my Reverb G1 it has been decent, however I was looking forward to the release of the RTX 40xx and the RX7900s.

I cannot justify spending the money on a 4900.
That seems to leave me with either a 4070ti or the 4080 or the AMD counterparts which seems to have VR performance issues.

Who owns any of these GPUs and uses VR or have a reliable benchmark, best case in comparison to a 1080ti.

Thanks for helping me finding the next GPU for my system.

 

[Vintagedriver01]

For VR I can only advice get the best performance Vcard thats within your budget.
Do not forget few very important things, does the new Vcard fit in your PC-case and can your PSU handle this new beast (Watts and connectors).
Read this:
https://babeltechreviews.com/category/reviews/

 

[Interslice]

I have an rtx 3070. It runs AC and rf2 very nicely on my samsung odyssey 2. It's obviously still an expensive gpu but the others are crazy money imo. I recently found i can run ACC at 90fps using openxr.

This is my headset mirror. I can read all the dashboard numbers, braking markers on track etc.

Edit: it's an odyssey +

 

[gearwhine]

I recently bought a lightly used rtx 3080 for £600 and was bottlenecked by my Ryzen 3600x which i did not expect. Just got me a Ryzen 5800x3d which after a few niggles has opened up my PC performance and should be able to react to most things for a while. I use a Rift S, while not very demanding i was having judder issues when racing online with a full grid. Running a constant 80fps now whatever i do. Reverb G2 next for me at some point. I only use AC by the way

 

[Robert Puszczewicz]

Hi,
I am only focussing on playing AC therefore performance in other Sims is not that important.

Running a 1080ti for years with my Reverb G1 it has been decent, however I was looking forward to the release of the RTX 40xx and the RX7900s.

I cannot justify spending the money on a 4900.
That seems to leave me with either a 4070ti or the 4080 or the AMD counterparts which seems to have VR performance issues.

Who owns any of these GPUs and uses VR or have a reliable benchmark, best case in comparison to a 1080ti.

Thanks for helping me finding the next GPU for my system.

Hi,

4070ti seem to have the best quality/price ratio in the new series.

You may find useful this comparison website: https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-RTX-4070-Ti-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1080-Ti/4146vs3918

Cheers,
Robert

 

[Prominente]

Hi,

4070ti seem to have the best quality/price ratio in the new series.

You may find useful this comparison website: https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-RTX-4070-Ti-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1080-Ti/4146vs3918

Cheers,
Robert

But for VR use, 4070Ti is not the card to get. It seems to be slower than 3080Ti/3090/3090Ti in VR at high resolutions. This is because of its stupidly narrow memory bandwidth.

While AMD's 7900XTX seems fine for flatscreen gaming, it also seems to lose to the last gen. NVidia cards in VR.

So, if you can't afford a 4090, a 4080 is the one to get. If that too feels too expensive, then a used 3090 or 3090Ti would be your best bet for VR gaming. If you can't find those, then a used 3080Ti or a 3080 12 GB will also be a good upgrade from a 1080Ti.

(I have the 4090 myself, and previously had a 3080Ti).

 

[Prominente]

Not to say, that a 4070Ti too would not be an upgrade from a 1080Ti. It certainly is. But it is a bit controversial for VR because its limited memory bandwidth (less than 3070Ti).

 

[Interslice]

Interesting. We know the buck but hard to figure the number that make up the bang!

 

[Duderei]

Thanks all for the responses inputs.
I read about the memory bus concerns comparing to the 3000 Generation which is why I would like to see some VR benchmarks specifically with the 4070ti which I still wasn't able to find anything meaningfull.

 

[ApexSpeedKeith]

@Duderei , I'm in the same boat. I've been scouring online for VR benchmarks with a 4070ti comparison and haven't found anything. There are some that are using it for flight simulators as well as a lot of comparisons of 4k gaming which VR is slightly above in order to make some assumptions. I've read that even though the 4070ti has memory bandwidth limitations, thee speed makes up for it to a degree. Even though the 4070ti does have a restrictive memory bus in comparison, it's still in direct competition with the high tier 30xx cards. So far I've had a 4070ti in my shopping cart, cancelled, then a 4080 in my shopping card, then cancelled since I can't really justify another $450 for 15-20% more performance. Some Youtubers are recommending to wait for the 4080 to come down in price, but who knows how long that will be?

 

[Prominente]

The only thing, that can currently be found, seems to be this Reddit thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualrea.../4070_ti_performs_worse_than_3080_12gb_in_vr/

Hopefully someone does proper tests, so that we can have some real data, that is the low memory bandwidth really a problem for 4070Ti in VR or not.

 

[ApexSpeedKeith]

I did see this article that did do some VR Preset scoring. https://hothardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-with-asus?page=3 - It puts it between a 3090 and a 3090ti, but closer to a 3090 in VR performance. All things considered, $800 for that kind of performance is a bargain in comparison to the nutso price hikes that have happened in the past 3 years. Memory bandwidth restricted or not, the way sim developers design around NVidia as opposed to AMD, at this price point, I think it's going to do fairly well for racing sims that are out now. The VRAM of the high end AMD cards sure is appealing, but the performance for VR is crap. I'm sure NVidia is thinking the same thing, but the Youtubers are pretty upset that this card didn't align with previous generation xx70ti cards in price per performance. Anyone looking for a GPU would've killed to buy a 3090 a year and a half ago for $800. The racing sims out there haven't changed since then. I would expect the release of the 40xx cards would have caused the bloated values of the 30xx cards to rapidly decline, but for some odd reason they're still through the roof from retailers. Maybe it will still happen because nobody in their right mind would pay over $1k for a 3090 when the 4080 is right there. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before that happens. On Facebook Marketplace, they're already flooded with 3080ti and 3080 cards at around the $600 mark so the value should eventually drop. If I was more patient and didn't mind going through the headache of buying a used GPU from a stranger, I may consider buying a used 3080ti to tide me over until this pricing headache settles itself, but I've got a stack of Amazon gift cards that I would prefer to use instead of paying cash.

 

[homer1007]

I have a 3080 with an i5 8600k driving a Reverb G2, I have everything just about maxed out and it works fine for me, super smooth in AC. I've encountered the odd track that might be inducing the occasional stutter but its rare.

 

[Elaphe]

10700KF with a 3080 Ti and a Pimax 5K Plus and max FOV. Very high details in all settings and I keep 90 fps all the time, except with rain, but since I don't like rain and I always drive with the few or scattered clouds setup, I don't have to worry. I get 90 fps with rain if I activate AMD fidelity, but that's a nasty trick which many people don't mention and that cannot achieve the same image quality as native resolution.

 

[Prominente]

I did see this article that did do some VR Preset scoring. https://hothardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-with-asus?page=3 - It puts it between a 3090 and a 3090ti, but closer to a 3090 in VR performance.

That test states, that the used resolution was 1332 x 1586 (which is ridiculously low), and it was a synthetic benchmark. I would not judge any purchase on that, and actual gaming performance with a high resolution VR headset (such as Varjo Aero or HP Reverb) might be completely different. Might also end up being the same, but still, we need better tests than that.

 

[Treeeeee]

Well, yeah, the more memory the better.
Generally in 2D if you want to go above 1440p, you need to have at least 12GB RAM due to memory needed for textures. Also consider memory bandwidth.

With VR, you will probably want to supersample to highest resolution possible, and target headsets with highest resolution.

So first not so humble recommendation is to look for 16GB+ VRAM (GPU memory) for some future proofing.
2nd is about raw performance... there go for the most you can, obviously, however if you can get 3090/ti for cheap that might be reasonable. Else I will be voting 4080/4090.

That is of course expensive and all, but if you start downgrading fidelity requirements, you might get away with slower.

Not to forget, for VR, and any game at 100+FPS you also need fast CPU/MEM combo.
Myself I am awaiting benchmarks for X3D 7000 series from AMD, as my 3800x is bottleneck in Assetto Corsa VR. It does alright, but if you start AI race with many other cars, it comes to 100...

 

[pitman]

Hey. I bought a 4070 TI and tested it with Assetto Corsa.
In Offline Single Player I have constant 90 FPS with all settings maxed out.
When I add 30 AI cars the frames drop down to 55 Frames.

I have to add that I use Ryzen 5 3600x and a Reverb G2.

When I join a server I have 70 FPS.
I reduced the settings step by step, but I stuck at 70 FPS.

Currently I use the same settings, which I used with the former GPU (RTX 2060) and still reach 90 FPS, whereas I had 90 FPS with the old combination of RTX 2060 and Ryzen 5 3600X.

Ii don't understand the reason, why I stuck at 70 FPS with RTX 4070 TI and Ryzen 5 3600X, no matter how low the graphic settings are.

What is going on there?

Any help is much appreciated!

 

[gearwhine]

Hi Pitman, i had the same problem when i upgraded to RTX3080 from 2060 super. No improvment and disapointing. My ryzen 5 3600x was the bottleneck. I bit the bullet and bought a Ryzen 7 5800x 3D which has excellent performance and now my VR with full grid is the same as solo. I use a Rift S which is less demanding than yours but i think you will find you have the bottleneck i mentioned. I also maxed out my ram to 32 which i think has smoothed things a little more.
PS see you on Sunday

 

[Navigator]

Isn't it so that 'what you drive' is the most important thing? (Not being a wise-ass, really wondering.)
I'm running an i5 11400 F with a RTX 3080 and all is just fine and dandy, CPU at 2,1 ms and 25% usage, GPU at 6,6 ms and 60/70 usage with all settings high and 90 fps for the Lenovo Explorer.
Then I downloaded a track (some Jeddah) and had 45 fps: it couldn't run it and I had to screw everything to the bottom.

So, you can have a NASA system, but if some mods are made "badly", you still can't run them......

 

[Vintagedriver01]

I did find on YT this guy who is testing GPU’s for AC-VR using the AC ingame video benchmark, not a real benchmark but better than nothing.
https://www.youtube.com/@Maraksot78/videos