cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

FPS Increase or Decrease?

CoryandStuff
Explorer
So my question is whether our fps would be improved if games are set to the recommended 1280x800 (I believe that's the correct resolution for the current rift?) or would it be more tasking on our systems since the rift is cloning the monitor? If so then would the consumer version be even more demanding?

I can usually play games on Ultra settings but I am just curious, also my information may not be correct.
Just hoping to clear some things up. 🙂
26 REPLIES 26

nihilian
Honored Guest
Rendering at high resolution like 1080p is probably way more computationally intensive than cloning. For example, you could clone your display outbox with a DVI splitter box. You couldn't render a 3d scene with the same box.

geekmaster
Protege
Running the RiftDK display at anything other than its native 1280x800 resolution is bad for a number of reasons. The LCD controller does a poor job of downscaling compared to what your video card can do. Wrong resolution can also interfere with subpixel rendering and color optimization techniques, as used in high quality anti-aliasing, but would be especially important for things like subpixel font rendering (like Windows ClearType).

My programs in development use the RiftDK display exclusively in subpixel mode, to make the best use of the limited full-pixel resolution. They will not work well at non-standard (non-native/wrong) resolutions.

Let the computer do the downsampling, at let the RiftDK do what it does best, at its native 1280x800 resolution.

Now, I am curious what this has to do with "FPS" in the thread title. According to WikiPedia, FPS can also mean "Foot-Pound-Second" or "Feet Per Second". But this is a gaming crowd, where FPS generally means "First Person Shooter" (a type of game). Wherease this thread has been discussing changing the display RESOLUTION, so I suspect you mean FPS to mean "Frames Per Second" (which has not even been discussed in this thread until now). You were really not clear about which definition of FPS was to be implied in this thread title, but "Frames Per Second" seems like the best candidate.

Regarding Frames Per Second, the display panel used in the RiftDK supports up to 76Hz refresh rate (i.e. 76 "FPS"). Faster is better, because it reduces ghosting (after-images visible during fast head motion), but especially because it reduces head tracking latency when the next video image is displayed in a shorter time period. There have been success reports posted of using a RiftDK at 75Hz refresh rate, by adjusting the display timings.

kojack
MVP
MVP
"geekmaster" wrote:
Now, I am curious what this has to do with "FPS" in the thread title. According to WikiPedia, FPS can also mean "Foot-Pound-Second" or "Feet Per Second". But this is a gaming crowd, where FPS generally means "First Person Shooter" (a type of game). Wherease this thread has been discussing changing the display RESOLUTION, so I suspect you mean FPS to mean "Frames Per Second" (which has not even been discussed in this thread until now). You were really not clear about which definition of FPS was to be implied in this thread title, but "Frames Per Second" seems like the best candidate.

:shock:
Author: Oculus Monitor,  Auto Oculus Touch,  Forum Dark Mode, Phantom Touch Remover,  X-Plane Fixer
Hardware: Threadripper 1950x, MSI Gaming Trio 2080TI, Asrock X399 Taich
Headsets: Wrap 1200VR, DK1, DK2, CV1, Rift-S, GearVR, Go, Quest, Quest 2, Reverb G2

jwilkins
Explorer
Off topic, but you (geekmaster) just inadvertently gave me the idea to add sub-pixel polygon edge anti-aliasing to the engine I'm working on. It is a really retro 3D engine implemented in software, so I should be able to triple the apparent resolution by using the sub-pixels. It will only take a little more time drawing the ends of the polygon scan lines, but hopefully it should result in really smooth edges.
(╯°□°)╯︵┻━┻

CoryandStuff
Explorer
@geekmaster frames-per-second is the only one that makes sense so I thought a gaming community like this would be able to understand, but I should of been more specific. :')
Guess my main question is just if the rift demands more out of our computers or would it be less since the resolution is lower, for now.

jwilkins
Explorer
Personally I'm focusing on less demanding graphics that can run at high FPS. I do not think things have to be photo-realistic to be compelling in VR. Going to call this style "retro VR"
(╯°□°)╯︵┻━┻

SMOK3Y
Honored Guest
so my PC has a single GTX670, i5 2500k @ 4.4, 8gb ram & uses SSDs exclusively. if my system can run BF3 on triples at 5870x1080 30/50FPS (offline) it should be able to run 1280x800 (cloned) @ 60fps no worries hey? I do have a second GTX670 sitting there if need be too :geek:

atavener
Adventurer
No one has mentioned that the backbuffer (pre-distort) is recommended to be at a higher resolution... and I'm currently using 1920x1200 as a backbuffer and rendering with a "antialias-distort" shader to bring it to the framebuffer. Still experimenting with the antialias though... it's better but I'm not sure it's enough to justify the extra source resolution and texture fetches.

jwilkins
Explorer
The problem with higher resolution is the "telephone wire" effect. Thin features become even more aliased.

EDIT: I knew I probably should have gone into more detail.

For one, if you use lines and points, these are features that become smaller with higher resolution. If one ups the resolution they also have to make sure these features get drawn to the same thickness or they will tend to disappear, even with anti-aliasing. They actually are getting relatively thinner.

The second effect is that triangles tend to always draw at least one pixel, so thin objects rendered with triangles will suffer the same problem. Anti-aliasing still doesn't help as much as it should.

The solution of course is to make sure that any thin features are drawn the way you want them too no matter what the resolution. This entirely depends on what you are trying to do, so there isn't really one solution, or even a single definite problem.

So my sparse and cryptic comment above hardly deserved a "WTF?", since I was describing a real problem I've had to solve not some hypothetical situation that I just imagined.
(╯°□°)╯︵┻━┻