I'm considering a new build, once the new NVIDIA gpus are released, but would prefer not to have to upgrade the quest 2 as well because money.

I've tried MSGS2024 with my quest 2 (cabled, airlink, virtual desktop--tried it all three ways) and it's been unplayable. Massive stuttering and fps in the low single digits (or fractional) when landing and taking off especially (who needs to see!), even with everything set to lowest possible quality.

This is odd to me as my system isn't *that* bad--ryzen 5 3600 cpu, rtx3070, everything on a speedy SSD with a solid internet connection). I can play in 2d mode at 'high end' quality with no issues, but once i go vr, forget it--it's a word not allowedshow.

So, all this preamble leads to the question of how much of the bottleneck is due to the system and how much to the quest 2? Can I expect a significant improvement if i substantially upgrade my system whilst keeping the quest 2 in place, or should i look to upgrading the quest 2 first?

it's a shame as i was really looking forward to playing this, even in low quality, but it's just hopeless atm. 

 

 

I have the quest 2. Got a lot of crashes with it but since last update have managed a quick flight but was less than half an hour test. I get around 42 fps in the countryside but settings dialled down. However cockpit pretty clear in TAA outside not great though. Think we are limited by the quest 2.  I use the link cable. Heard vdesktop is good but not investing yet as don’t use it that much as cod and Indiana taking up my time at present. Msfs 2020 is much more stable 

@aviophobia

If you've tested only in the last few days, I think VR performance got worse with the recent MSFS update, especially flying around airports. Unlike my other games, msfs runs best with virtual desktop at the moment (though still a bit stuttery even with minimal gfx). This is same for Q2 and Q3 for me

In addition, I recently changed form 50mb/s to 256mb/s internet, but made minimal improvement except photogrammetry improved very slightly. Probably not worth an internet upgrade for most folk. I assume asobo still have server issues.

 

 

thanks for the replies. maybe it will improve once microsoft has had more time to tweak the software.  i was hoping it was just a matter of changing settings and so on but i've tried everything i can think of and it's had no impact. it's just a disaster at the moment 😞  

I've been playing Contractors VR all evening. There were quite a few young kids from Germany and Belgium playing who said they got quest headsets for Christmas. I wonder if this year will set a record for VR sales?

I had the same as the old hardware above ryzen 5 3600 cpu, rtx3070 with a Quest 2. It was playable, but barely in 2020. 2024 does not perform as well, and I think it won't work very well in 2024 even with better computer. On the other hand the Quest 3 will play very nicely. in 2024. The Quest 3S is $100 cheaper but they say it is no good at all in MSFS. Q3 is the best choice to save money right now. It looks like sixty thousand were sold last month just on Amazon USA: Seems people really love it.

https://www.amazon.com/Meta-Quest-512GB-Powerful-Ultimate-Experiences/dp/B0DDWH41HB/

The Pico4 used to be a good cheap choice, but they are out of stock and therefore too expensive now for what you would be getting.

 

 

6:20 he says ipd 63 to 66 is fine with Q3 small binocular overlap. But otherwise if you have narrow or wide face the 3D stereo effect is less than what real eyes would see and fatiguing on the eyes.. This is something that wowed me when I got my PCL, the binocular overlap was greater than my old Q2 and so the 3D stereo effect was more perfect due to my unusual IPD eye distance spacing of my head.

the Q3 lenses will move apart from about 56 up to maybe 73, but it doesn't have much binocular overlap (because Meta wanted a wide field of view). My PCL has both large binocular overlap and a wide field of view, it has both.