Question Graphics card question

[Masmune]

Hello,

I upgraded my Pc to a PCIe4.0 board but kept the GTX1080ti.

I can’t get more than 20fps with 3 characters. I’m wondering if I would benefit from one of the following: an RTX 3070, RTX3060, or a Radion 6700XT. Obviously the 3060 or 6700XT would be better based on price but I don’t want to spend $400 for minimal gains when $500 would be significant. Thanks!

 

[HolySchmidt]

Install MSI Afterburner + Riva Tuner Statistics Server, check the useage of your GPU. If you are under 98%, you wont benefit from a faster GPU cause you are in a CPU limit.

Post results here.

 

[Masmune]

Install MSI Afterburner + Riva Tuner Statistics Server, check the useage of your GPU. If you are under 98%, you wont benefit from a faster GPU cause you are in a CPU limit.

Post results here.

GPU usage is 100%. I ordered a 6700XT (what I could afford). Wish me luck! If you think the RTX3060 12Gb XLR8 is a better option, let me know (in the next hour before the 6700XT is ready for pickup LOL)

 

[HolySchmidt]

6700XT is the better option. But I dont know how much AMD is still affected with problems in VR.

 

[Masmune]

6700XT is the better option. But I dont know how much AMD is still affected with problems in VR.

I went with an nvidia 3070. It’s maybe slightly better.

 

[HolySchmidt]

For VR Nvidia right now is the best choice if you wanna avoid problems.

 

[Masmune]

For VR Nvidia right now is the best choice if you wanna avoid problems.

Thanks. It isn’t that much better vs the 1080ti to the point I’m wondering if it’s any better at all. I’m hopeful that with VAM2.0 I’ll be better off though with a new(er) card.

 

[HolySchmidt]

1080ti is and was a very powerful card. 3070 is only around 15-20% faster. So if your GPU usage is still at around 100%, your still GPU bottlenecked and should lower your graphic settings then (or buy a faster card ). VaM will eat up any hardware cause it's just performance hungry. Especially in VR it wants a very fast GPU. But it still depends on what you throw in your scene.

If you understand what eats up your performance the most, you can create scenes that will run with the FPS you wanna see. But I know your problem, VaM is really expensive if you wanna crank up the settings and still have 72+FPS.

 

[Masmune]

1080ti is and was a very powerful card. 3070 is only around 15-20% faster. So if your GPU usage is still at around 100%, your still GPU bottlenecked and should lower your graphic settings then (or buy a faster card ). VaM will eat up any hardware cause it's just performance hungry. Especially in VR it wants a very fast GPU. But it still depends on what you throw in your scene.

If you understand what eats up your performance the most, you can create scenes that will run with the FPS you wanna see. But I know your problem, VaM is really expensive if you wanna crank up the settings and still have 72+FPS.

I just couldn’t justify the 4070 at $850-$900 for this particular hobby. Still at 100% on the GPU with the 3070 too. I found that 35FPS is the minimum in VR for me personally that looks good and I can get that with 2-3+ people so I’m a happy guy and obviously much higher with 1-2. I am very new to all this and just learned that certain person/atoms absolutely destroy my FPS which was causing the issue. I also learned that loose fit clothing is also memory draining. No clue why those atoms are so intensive. I may ask the creator. Obviously the atoms that I can’t load are the ones I want! For anyone who stumbles on this: I jumped from 20FPS to about 24-25 FPS going from a 1080ti to a 3070. I paid about $180 for the 1080ti on Ebay and $600 for the 3070.

 

[HolySchmidt]

You have to be aware that females, many clothings and especially hair is very heavy on the physics calculation. But it depends on which clothing and which hairstyle. You can also turn off glute physics in the females tabs. I also recommend the GiveMeFPS plugin, could be essential for you.

 

[Toonen1988]

Just two things, which has absolutely nothing to do with GPU or CPU.

Your ram memory. I have still 16gb and it feels like 16gb is the minimum nowadays. If I use VaM, I almost use all my ram memory. Going to upgrade soon to 32gb or even 64gb. Check how much ram memory you are using.

Second thing, I can ran three characters fine with a normal GTX 1080, in desktop mode. I haven't tried in VR though.

Something else is causing huge framedrops on my machine, more then characters. Lighting..... VaM 1 can only render up to 6 light sources. With each light source, my FPS decreases insane.

Check how many light sources your scenes have. A better GPU can give you slightly better FPS, but I think we would benefit more if lighting would be better optimized, which is a very hard thing to do, and since the team is small.

VaM 2.0 should have better optimized lighting. If you use more then 3 light sources, FPS will be low, even on a high-end machine.

Don't get me wrong, buying a better GPU is always a good thing. But I don't want anyone to be disappointed after spending hundreds of dollars, and VaM still runs bad.

 

[lolmao500]

All those websites and youtubers testing video cards never use VAM... when it could easily destroy any card they put against it, doesnt matter if its a 4090 or the latest best CPU... I wished they included VAM in their benchmark results... Crysis is very easy to run compared to VAM with 3-4 people and like 6+ light sources.

 

[SlimerJSpud]

The lights can make a big difference too. Having too many lights set to ForcePixel will clobber FPS. Cycle through all the invisible lights in the scene and see what mode they are in. If they are all set to ForcePixel, then one by one, set them to Auto and see if they make any difference to the visual quality of the scene. If one makes a big difference, set it back to ForcePixel. If they don't make much difference, leave them on Auto. I've also seen short male hair items that jiggle and wave as if he was underwater. Stop any unnecessary hair motion that adds nothing. Facial hair and pubic hair do not need physics.

 

[Nameless Vagabond]

with an i9-13900k and a 4070ti i get about 60FPS with a customunityasset environment, "me" (a dude person atom) and two girl person atoms. with just one girl, i get more like 120FPS.

That's all with softbody physics on, simmed hair on the girls, minimal clothing (if any) and 2-4 spot lights.

Threesomes really do crush performance with VAM, so unless you want to drop some big money on some expensive hardware, make do with just one girl for now

 

[vhr0386]

I'd like to add to this thread without posting an entirely new topic. I'm currently running VAM on my Razer laptop with a i9-11900h and RTX 3080 16gb I feel like there are very few scenes that I can run at 30fps, let alone 60 or 120 using my Quest 2 via usb C cable. If I run VAM in desktop mode (4k) all my scenes run perfectly smooth. I feel like I've got some settings screwed up somewhere. This is really my first dive into PC powered VR so I have little experience. Any thoughts?

 

[HolySchmidt]

VR is a lot more demanding than desktop version. Calculate the pixel count of your display and your headset and you know. Additionally an 11900h is unlike a normal 11900/K, a 3080 laptop is unlike a normal 3080. And in general 32GB of Ram is recommended over 16GB. Laptops are fine for normal gaming. But if you want max performance you need a desktop pc.

 

[vhr0386]

VR is a lot more demanding than desktop version. Calculate the pixel count of your display and your headset and you know. Additionally an 11900h is unlike a normal 11900/K, a 3080 laptop is unlike a normal 3080. And in general 32GB of Ram is recommended over 16GB. Laptops are fine for normal gaming. But if you want max performance you need a desktop pc.

I understand they aren't the same as the desktop variants, but I can't imagine that a $4k laptop can't run these scenes above 30fps even. Seems like I have some settings off. *shrugs*

 

[HolySchmidt]

It heavily depends on what your scene looks like: 2 people (male/female) are mostly fine in general but adding a third person (female) is a no-no for most of the systems because of the physics which are mostly calculated on the CPU. In your case, if you say it runs perfect in 4K but very slow on your headset, are you sure the cable is on a 3.0 usb port AND you have the right cable AND VaM is running on your laptop on not on the headset?
Also did you scale up the display resolution in VaM OR the headset to any ratio? Cause this would bump up the resolution to whatever.

4K is 8.3 million pixels, Oculus Quest 2 has 7 million pixels. So in general you should get better performance on your headset than on your laptop.

 

[gayguy]

I am using i5 8400 with grtx 1770 ti for gr mode. Was wondering if i upgrade to rtx 4060 ti, will there be significant improvement? My cpu probably going to bottleneck my gpu for normal game but not sure though when comes to vr.

 

[Zxen]

I have the same issue as the OP with my nVidia GTX 1080 Ti graphics card (released in March 2017). In Task Manager in Windows 10 I could see that it was hovering above 90% usage at all times, usually around 98%. Loading speeds are crazy slow. I am running it on a 16GB 7200rpm mechanical drive, rather than a smaller SSD. I don't know how to move it over easily. I guess I could reinstall it on one of my SSDs. Thank you to the OP for spending the money and giving me the results - I thought the newer drives would be 10x faster by now, not 0.1x faster. Thanks for saving my wallet. Also, I am unable to run Quest Link wirelessly in my Quest 3 headset at all when I connect to my WiFi Repeater. There seems to be a minimum connection speed before it will work at all.