Question System requirements for VR

[brasileirinho]

Hello there!

I've been playing VAM in desktop mode for some time with an RX570 + Ryzen 5 1600 16GB RAM. After configuring the GivemeFPS plugin, the performance is great and the impact on quality almost unnoticeable (the main performance problem is hair physics)

But I'm thinking about getting myself a Meta Quest 2. So what are the minimum recommended specs to use it?

 

[atani]

There's no minimum requirements besides the ones stated by the device's manufacturer. The minimum is just saying it can run, not how good of a experience you get.
With VR usage a bigger burden on your system will take place, it now has to deal with more screens at a higher resolution. Very roughly, expect FPS in VR to be half of what you get with desktop mode, this should give you an idea of what to expect and how much of a compromise you might need to make to improve the experience.

However, nothing like tities right on your face. And there's also a whole world of VR porn if VR VaM is too taxing on your system.

 

[brasileirinho]

There's no minimum requirements besides the ones stated by the device's manufacturer. The minimum is just saying it can run, not how good of a experience you get.
With VR usage a bigger burden on your system will take place, it now has to deal with more screens at a higher resolution. Very roughly, expect FPS in VR to be half of what you get with desktop mode, this should give you an idea of what to expect and how much of a compromise you might need to make to improve the experience.

However, nothing like tities right on your face. And there's also a whole world of VR porn if VR VaM is too taxing on your system.

Let me elaborate the question a little bit better then. What's the minimum specs you guys think it's alright? Would an RX6600 be enough? I still don't have a VR headset, so I don't know what should be my target FPS. For desktop mode, I target 40~60FPS.

 

[atani]

If you're not upgrading any components, then you're evaluating what you can achieve with your current hardware. You can reduce quality as much as you want to improve performance, where you draw the line to when it's below acceptable is dependent on you.
The ballpark figure of half the FPS in desktop gives you an idea of where you stand. If you get 30 FPS on a scene in desktop, 15 FPS in VR will break physics a bit, so what you'll do is mess a bit with settings and see what you'd need to get it up to 40+ (desktop). Do the compromises you made, like reduced rendering, disabling soft-body physics or whatever you did, is it still acceptable to you?
The above method can tell you what to expect from scenes using a VR headset, the compromises you're willing to make define what is "alright".

 

[brasileirinho]

If you're not upgrading any components, then you're evaluating what you can achieve with your current hardware. You can reduce quality as much as you want to improve performance, where you draw the line to when it's below acceptable is dependent on you.
The ballpark figure of half the FPS in desktop gives you an idea of where you stand. If you get 30 FPS on a scene in desktop, 15 FPS in VR will break physics a bit, so what you'll do is mess a bit with settings and see what you'd need to get it up to 40+ (desktop). Do the compromises you made, like reduced rendering, disabling soft-body physics or whatever you did, is it still acceptable to you?
The above method can tell you what to expect from scenes using a VR headset, the compromises you're willing to make define what is "alright".

That means which GPU and CPU would be nice? (I just want opinions)

 

[4891357819873599187198257]

What I can suggest is simply what ive experienced, others can likely give more/better details but; i upgraded recently to an rtx 3060 + amd ryzen 5 5600x. To compare my rtx 3060 with the rx6600, this is a similar comparison (6600XT);

"The RTX 3060 did edge ahead by a 7% margin at 1440p, but overall performance was very similar. Performance was also similar when testing with Apex Legends. In short, the 6600 XT was slightly faster at 1080p and then slightly slower at 1440p"

So you could choose either for somewhat similar experience that experience being; 1 female with untouched hair settings + all physics turned on + one piece of clothing sim off + 4 point lighting rig + subsurface skin scattering plugin + max all graphic settings except render scale at 1.25 out of 2 + 1 no hair/physics/clothes male = just under a noticable FPS drop/slight input lag which i live with for the luxury of all my maxed settings. Could probably do 1.0 render scale with minimally noticeable FPS loss. SSD btw ofc.

Just one noobs experience hopefully its an okay reference for what to expect with similar rig as mine.

 

[atani]

That means which GPU and CPU would be nice? (I just want opinions)

If you're going to buy new components then that's a different story. I suggest you take a look at the Benchmarks thread in the General category.

 

[HolySchmidt]

Yep, take a look in HERE to see what you can expect at VR with what hardware.
What's the desktop resolution you play at?

The Meta Quest 2 has an eye resolution of 1832 x 1920 (3.5 milion pixels), so double that (2 eyes) makes 7 milion pixels. If you game at 1920x1080 (FHD) that's 2 milion pixels. So at normal resolution without changing any settings your GPU has to do 3.5 times the work of 1920x1080. Don't underestimate.

 

[brasileirinho]

Yep, take a look in HERE to see what you can expect at VR with what hardware.
What's the desktop resolution you play at?

The Meta Quest 2 has an eye resolution of 1832 x 1920 (3.5 milion pixels), so double that (2 eyes) makes 7 milion pixels. If you game at 1920x1080 (FHD) that's 2 milion pixels. So at normal resolution without changing any settings your GPU has to do 3.5 times the work of 1920x1080. Don't underestimate.

I play at 1080p.

Is all performance coming from the GPU? So CPU won't really increase framerates? In the performance tab, a big chunk of frametime is spent on scripts...

 

[HolySchmidt]

VaM is eating every hardware for breakfast. Be it GPU or CPU. You can create a scene with only 2 females and every physics settings maxed out, and you will be easily CPU bottlenecked. Or just load a huge environment with lights all over the place, you will be GPU bottlenecked.

So, it's not easy to say when you are bottlenecked by either your CPU or GPU, but it's safe to say you can't have enough hardware power. CPU is as important as the GPU, for the physics. And we all know, we want that physics
One female is ok, two is already a problem, even with a 13900K. But, I can tell you that, a 13900K is doing a pretty good job even compared to a 12700K, which I had before. Scenes with 2 females are now playable at around 40fps. With the 12700K it was around 23fps, settings maxed out.