Crystal Light vs Reverb FPS?

[ryanbatc]

With my 12700k /32gb ram/ and 4080 will I have to turn down settings if I use CL?  I think the CL has higher res than the G2 if I'm not mistaken?  Not sure if my system would handle a CL?  Any thoughts?

[TheFamilyMan]

My thoughts, as a most likely future PCL owner who now has a G2, is that the MSFS (or whatever game/sim) graphics rendering resolution can be reduced such that the FPS can be reasonably managed.  The question then becomes can I handle the resultant display quality.  This is effectively what I now do to run MSFS and other things in VR with my 3080 ti/G2 to get by satisfactorily, so I hope the leap to a PCL will be as acceptable when the time comes.

Time comes consists of an all new build next year sporting a NV 50 series cards along with whatever AMD CPU is most butt kicking at that time.

Edited November 11 by TheFamilyMan

[AJZip]

I'm using the Crystal Light with a 4080 and 32 GB ram too and it's pretty happy at 90% of the top resolution. Actually, it will run reasonaby for me on full hi res but there tends to be more taxi and tight turn judder.

[AJZip]

As my rig is very similar in spec to yours, @ryanbatc , I'll do you a more detailed run through of my results and overall view when I get a chance tomorrow, if that's of any help.

[strider1]

2 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

With my 12700k /32gb ram/ and 4080 will I have to turn down settings if I use CL?  I think the CL has higher res than the G2 if I'm not mistaken?  Not sure if my system would handle a CL?  Any thoughts?

I don't have a G2 or a 12700k but my 4080 runs the CL adequately. A 5080 would be ideal!

[AJZip]

Hi again @ryanbatc

Normal disclaimers about my comments relating to my system/aircraft/scenery choice/etc/etc....  🙂

Against your spec, the main difference between our systems (see my signature for the details) is that I have my Ryzen 7 running at a boosted 5.5GHz - and that made a tangible difference with my Reverb G2 in terms of being able to tweak up graphics resolution and LOD values.  So I am not talking like for like entirely.

Reverb

With the Reverb, after lots of tweaking, use of OpenXR Toolkit, etc, etc, and with LOD's stretched, I got great results:  Good sharpness in the small sweetspot for instruments and close scenery only starting to fuzz out a bit at the horizon; very smooth in most normal situations, being pretty micro-stutter free in most situations other than taxi turns in certain aircraft or crazy low-level big city stuff.

So: Good sharpness in the sweetspot for instruments and close scenery only starting to fuzz out a bit at the horizon, but with everything stretched and tweaked as far as I could get away with on my system

And, if Microsoft weren't doing the dirty on us all, I would still be on the Reverb and being very happy with it

Pimax Crystal Light

This is important:  With the Crystal Light you should start off with pretty much all of the external performance tweaks, facilities, MSFS LOD's, system stretches & the like switched off or at default and let the Crystal Light do most of the work.  So, basically, you are starting off with something that can be very high performance from the start, with the ability to tone that performance down to suit your system capabilities.  That is quite a different mindset.

The three 'preset' resolutions in the Pimax Play software are Low; Medium; High. 

My guess is that, on your spec:

Low would be less sharp than the Reverb sweetspot, but (using their standard smoothing options) as smooth in terms of stutters, etc

Medium would be as sharp as the Reverb sweetspot for mid-distance scenery, but maybe a bit less sharp for instruments, but would probably be as smooth in terms of microstutters

High would be as sharp as the Reverb sweetspot for instruments, mid-distance scenery and for distance scenery, but will suffer from micro stutters

 

But, in the latest version of the Pimax Play there's a new facility where you can, effectively, dial in a fixed foveated customised resolution and resolution.  I have mine at 90% of full resolution and have superb sharpness for the cockpit / mid scenery and just a touch of fuzziness at the far horizons.  It's a guess, but I reckon at your clock speed, you would be able to set this at around 80%, giving you a pretty splendid result.

 

But there's another 'but': But remember that we are comparing this to the Reverb sweetspot.  And the Crystal Light's 'sweetspot' is absolutely huge...technically there is a boundary but, given that we users are quite used to moving our heads a small amount towards what we are looking at, that clarity is, basically, the whole cockpit, not just the instrument you are looking for...  

 

  

 

 

[turbomax]

21 minutes ago, AJZip said:

if Microsoft weren't doing the dirty on us all, I would still be on the Reverb and being very happy with it

I am still using my Reverb G2 with MSFS and am very happy with it, like many others too. we have discussed and discribed how easy it is in the other thread:

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/650370-the-day-microsoft-killed-mixed-reality-on-windows/

several solutions:

https://www.elevenforum.com/t/specify-target-feature-update-version-in-windows-11.3811/

https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/incontrol.html

 

[AJZip]

4 hours ago, turbomax said:

I am still using my Reverb G2 with MSFS and am very happy with it, like many others too. we have discussed and discribed how easy it is in the other thread:

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/650370-the-day-microsoft-killed-mixed-reality-on-windows/

several solutions:

https://www.elevenforum.com/t/specify-target-feature-update-version-in-windows-11.3811/

https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/incontrol.html

 

Yes - I'm probably going to try the 'Option 1'.  Prior to those more recent discussions - and when I was committing to having to replace the Reverb - the only options that seemed to be available were the ones that blocked all updates - and even those options looked like they would be overridden relatively quickly.  The above options seem to have changed that and it is on my urgent list to investigate further.  Thanks for re-flagging.

[FlyIce]

I just resumed flying with my Reverb G2 a few times after a long time flying only 2D screen for IFR practice. It reminds that G2 is still a great headset. Don't know why I'm still on 23H2 so far though, as I always just let Windows do updates whenever it wants. 

I'm really crossing fingers for the incoming crystal light. G2 + 150% oversampling in OpenXR + RTX 4090 DLSS + LOD 400 in MSFS is a killer combination for me. BTW, my FPS is around 40 +/- 5, which is fine with me, maybe not enough for some of you folks. 

Edited November 11 by FlyIce

[Fielder]

I used to have a Reverb G2. Now I have Crystal Light. Reverb gives better fps if you run the PCL at full resolution. PCL has a slider so can set the resolution exactly where you want, or you can use 3 resolution presets instead.

At the middle setting of the 3 presets, my PCL gives better fps than the G2. Also, the newest versions of Pimax Play has a feature to increase the fps by upscaling. For me this only gives about 15% more fps, but others are saying the increase is larger for them. Upscaling will slightly decrease the image quality, but to me it's not enough decrease to matter much.

the sweet spot, image clarity, snappy colors, absence of mura  (which I think looks like fog) is way better on the PCL.

A great many people seem to send back the lenses and complain. Pimax does replace them. Mine seemed spot on perfect right out of the box, I'm keeping them forever.

The PCL software is easy, works great, no issues, the VR always turns on without issues. This was not true with my G2.

Most GPU's can only run so many pixels or it won't display an image at all. No problem with one 4K monitor. If you have 2 monitors on and then turn on VR, the headset might never turn on because the GPU can handle that many pixels. This is a more common problem with hi res VR headsets. I could run 2 monitors (1440p) along with G2, but only 1 with PCL.

[Fielder]

The best thing about the PCL, is the image quality.

[peloto]

We don´t have the enough power to run the G2 90Hz 100% TAA, with the top hardware even with a 5090 I guess..., and engineers rising resolutions in PC HMDs. Wise.

Rise a minimal bit pixels for marketing if you want, ...and help with an eye tracking render, no either. Is there a plague of drunken CEO engineers when go to develop?

[turbomax]

90 Hz refresh rate of a display is not the same as the fps at which the game or GPU delivers a new frame and which may be much lower. for example: the game might deliver a variable refresh rate varying in my case usually between 30-45 fps while the monitor or VR headset is set at a fixed 90 Hz or even 120 Hz. but 90 fps is not even required for a smooth flying experience. unlike perhaps for ego shooters.

Edited November 12 by turbomax

[peloto]

Some people need 90Hz to not to watch flickering yes or yes in the G2s, I am happy with 60Hz 50-60fps (4090-13900K), because rarely I watch that flickering and mostly in the borders, in the not sweet spot, and changing from 60 to 90Hz nowadays is really a penalty in performance and smoothness and a no go for me at all, I prefer my 100% resolution and TAA no blurry and smoothness almost all the time. To buy and new VR HMD for to make some steps to behind in the VR experience...., I think I will buy first the PSVR2 than Pimax CL.

Hope the new HMDs coming in months, do it better for a PC (DisplayPort) HMD, it is not difficult, we don´t need a 30K HMD if there isn´t hardware and software to run it properly and with a worse result than much more less resolution.

Edited November 12 by peloto

[peloto]

45 minutes ago, peloto said:

 

Duplicated. This reply can be deleted, sorry. Would be good that possibility by our own.

Edited November 12 by peloto