Assetto Corsa in VRPC 

  • Thread starter r3b3ld3
  • 440 comments
  • 115,061 views
Not to mention the frame times that are fluctuate like hell, no my eyes prefer a clear sunny sky.

BTW I have special made prescription lenses for my headset and it’s working great. What important here is to get lenses from well respected spectacle glass manufacturers for like Zeiss, Essilor, Nikon, Pentax etc, but not from unknown sources, because this could be a printed lens or a cheap made in China product.
Do you mind telling us where you got your lenses from ?

I'm thinking of going with the VR ROCK lense inserts for my crystal light . I'm not sure what lenses they use .
 
Ah, so the Q3 video compression is absolutely 100% not a problem so long as you're very careful not to make things too difficult for it. Gotcha. Exactly as I thought. And exactly why it would always be nagging at the back of my mind whenever I was driving.

I don't think there's any magic that'll make compressed video over USB appear to be as solid as a native feed, but I guess it's just something I'll have to try for myself somehow.

Edit: I've been researching this USB video compression issue since the Quest 2 came out, and again with the Quest 3. The very best that people can say is that the compression isn't too distracting, or that it's acceptable, or that they only see it if they look for it. None of that would work for me. I'd always be wondering (as I was with my short time with the Q2) why I've 'upgraded' from the CV1 to get sharper visuals that are then subject to blurring and pixellation and duller colours due to video compression. It just doesn't make sense.
And that's ignoring the added latency, the occasional hitching and the occasional flash of pure black frames that I was getting in the Q2. The CV1 is much lower-res, but it's a rock-solid performer over Display Port. The Q2 always felt like it was struggling to keep up with things, which in a sense it was.
No, I think that no matter how good people say the USB video feed is over USB with the Q3, it'll always be somewhat flaky compared to DP. And I'm sure there's quite a bit of subjective denial going on with some Q3 users as to how good it objectively really is, as if they're trying to convince themselves that the compromises are minimal.
Present company excepted, of course..! :)
I used to have the bit rate on my quest 3 at 960mbs via the oculus de-bug tool and the artifacts were hardly noticeable, using 4x aa helped to hide the problem.
The artifacts were only really noticeable in the far distance in the image

On a side note , racing at night is better now in my opinion with the new LCS shaders in AC . The lighting seems more realistic and I've got dynamic shadows turned on in CSP , just struggling to find a good ppfilter for it in VR .
 
Do you mind telling us where you got your lenses from ?

I'm thinking of going with the VR ROCK lense inserts for my crystal light . I'm not sure what lenses they use .
Do these replace the original Crystal Light lenses or fit over the top of them?
If the latter, won't they potentially introduce glare and need a thicker face gasket?

Still fuming that Pimax chose a stupid focal length. Adding prescription lenses to counteract this adds, what, £150 to the cost for ZEISS lenses and a new face gasket?
 
They fit over the lenses in the headset, so yes you would need a thicker face gasket, and potentially loose some fov id imagine.

And yes Pimax need to change their focal length to be like the quest 3 etc ,
 
Last edited:
I used to have the bit rate on my quest 3 at 960mbs via the oculus de-bug tool and the artifacts were hardly noticeable, using 4x aa helped to hide the problem.
The artifacts were only really noticeable in the far distance in the image

On a side note , racing at night is better now in my opinion with the new LCS shaders in AC . The lighting seems more realistic and I've got dynamic shadows turned on in CSP , just struggling to find a good ppfilter for it in VR .
It's the far distance clarity that would be the main reason for upgrading (the cockpit is already sharp in my CV1 at 1.6x supersampling). The more I look into this the more I'm reminded about my reasons for rejecting the Q3 in the first place.
There really does not seem to be an ideal solution.
 
It's the far distance clarity that would be the main reason for upgrading (the cockpit is already sharp in my CV1 at 1.6x supersampling). The more I look into this the more I'm reminded about my reasons for rejecting the Q3 in the first place.
There really does not seem to be an ideal solution.
You gonna be using that CV1 for a long time yet mate . There doesn't seem to be a headset coming out in the next year or 2 that is gonna fix all these issues 😔
 
You gonna be using that CV1 for a long time yet mate . There doesn't seem to be a headset coming out in the next year or 2 that is gonna fix all these issues 😔
Crystal Light seemed like the perfect solution until the focal length bombshell dropped. I know prescription lenses can be added but it'll add ~£150 with a new gasket and reduced FOV and chance of added glare, pushing the total price over £1,000 for a lesser experience.
In all honesty PS2VR is now the front-runner for me. Fresnel lenses are a shame but seem like the lesser of many evils compared to video compression and a high price (and I'm still wary of getting into bed with a company that has Pimax's terrible reputation).
It's all very frustrating.
 
But that's a GPU/CPU issue, and nothing to do with VR. I can easily run a situation like that at a rock solid 90fps with my 4080.

Or do you mean that type of situation would always stutter over USB due to bandwidth throttling?

All those extra’s like rain, clouds, PPfilters will cost you performance especially in VR mode, while maybe the new 4080/4090/7900XTX will eat everything, but all the Vcards below will soon or later have difficulties in maintaining a straight Frame time. Keep in your mind a straight FT is in my POV essential, I even prefer the 60FPS cap, if this is straight, more then 90FPS fluctuating. Luckily it was a long way but it’s now more a less 90FPS straight, with only a few exceptions.
Still trying to figure out a decent benchmark to test all the impact of some adjustments on the FT.

Do you mind telling us where you got your lenses from ?

I'm thinking of going with the VR ROCK lense inserts for my crystal light . I'm not sure what lenses they use .
VRoptician.com using Zeiss lenses (my fav.) at the time of purchase.
No need for extra gasket or whatever extra, think it did cost me €85,-
 
Last edited:
VRoptician.com using Zeiss lenses (my fav.) at the time of pupurchase.
Same, they offer near and far/regular versions. Maybe one of them helps counter the pimax focal lenght better? Also, I've got both versions for the Aero and one of them, gave me slightly better contrast/blacks. I didn't need any facial interface replacement. Also use a set for quest 3 and have the facial interface set to it's default depth location. So from my experience most default facial interfaces work just fine with lens inserts. But, when they don't, like with my rokid max, and your eyelashes are constantly touching the lenses, it is the most annoying feeling ever. PsVr 2 would still almost double the resolution of the CV1 and according to Sony even 1650 gpu can power the hmd. Coming from 1st gen fresnel lenses to psvr2 frensel lenses should be no issue. Just like going from Oled to Oled. Just the halo headstrap (and unproven performance on pc) are question marks.
 
Just a guess, but if you do not have problems with your eyelashes when using your glasses, then you will not have problems with your VROptician lenses as they are close to the HS lenses. Some supplier use a Pince-nez style lenses and these should be avoided, as here I can imagine your eyelashes are squeezed.

Same, they offer near and far/regular versions. Maybe one of them helps counter the pimax focal lenght better? Also, I've got both versions for the Aero and one of them, gave me slightly better contrast/blacks. I didn't need any facial interface replacement. Also use a set for quest 3 and have the facial interface set to it's default depth location. So from my experience most default facial interfaces work just fine with lens inserts. But, when they don't, like with my rokid max, and your eyelashes are constantly touching the lenses, it is the most annoying feeling ever. PsVr 2 would still almost double the resolution of the CV1 and according to Sony even 1650 gpu can power the hmd. Coming from 1st gen fresnel lenses to psvr2 frensel lenses should be no issue. Just like going from Oled to Oled. Just the halo headstrap (and unproven performance on pc) are question marks.
For @Tummie555 and @jac0 you both seems to have the Q3 do you face the bandwidth throttling, Mascot is talking about.
 
Last edited:
I would have to quess "no"... I don't know what bandwidth throttling would result in (I guess more artefacts) ... but I don't know if that is happening (I certainly don't notice any compression artifacts). Frametime I also don't pay attention to too much, what I do check for is to have nearly no Application Frame Drops (as they translate in annoying micro-stutters).
(you can check that with the performance overlay of the Oculus Debug Tool)
 
Considering only the graphic quality, the figures and data are:

Quest 3:

4'557.312 pixels per eye
Normal LCD panel (not mini led)
No local dimming
Approximately 960 Mb/s (compressed video)

Crystal Light:

8'294.400 pixels per eye (+82%)
Mini led panel
With local dimming
With DisplayPort = 32 Gb/s (33X bandwidth)

For me, I think the decision is clear. I come from a Reverb G2. I hope I don't regret it when I order it. I also have a 4080, which runs the G2 without any problem at a constant 90 FPS even in rainy and night conditions. That is to say, I think it will be able to run the CL without many compromises.

I must also say that I have always used VR with dedicated glasses and I have never had any problems with them. On the contrary, they have the advantage of protecting the lenses of the HMD themselves and I have never seen them produce glare or reflections.
 
Considering only the graphic quality, the figures and data are:

Quest 3:

4'557.312 pixels per eye
Normal LCD panel (not mini led)
No local dimming
Approximately 960 Mb/s (compressed video)

Crystal Light:

8'294.400 pixels per eye (+82%)
Mini led panel
With local dimming
With DisplayPort = 32 Gb/s (33X bandwidth)

For me, I think the decision is clear. I come from a Reverb G2. I hope I don't regret it when I order it. I also have a 4080, which runs the G2 without any problem at a constant 90 FPS even in rainy and night conditions. That is to say, I think it will be able to run the CL without many compromises.

I must also say that I have always used VR with dedicated glasses and I have never had any problems with them. On the contrary, they have the advantage of protecting the lenses of the HMD themselves and I have never seen them produce glare or reflections.
One thing to consider is the DP1.4 cable bandwidth limit.

Don't forget that although the crystal is 2880x2880 per eye , the rendering resolution is a lot higher, 5100x4300 per eye for full resolution .

I have put the figures in a display bandwidth calculator on line and at full resolution the crystal outputs more bandwidth than DP1.4 can transmit without compression so future HMD are gonna need DP 2.1 to transmit all the data at higher resolution
 
Just a guess, but if you do not have problems with your eyelashes when using your glasses, then you will not have problems with your VROptician lenses as they are close to the HS lenses. Some supplier use a Pince-nez style lenses and these should be avoided, as here I can imagine your eyelashes are squeezed.


For @Tummie555 and @jac0 you both seems to have the Q3 do you face the bandwidth throttling, Mascot is talking about.
I have only used the Quest 3 a couple of times to test stuff with AC, so I might not be to best person to ask. I use it mainly wireless with my DIY Virtual Pinball table, using a dedicated Wifi6E router (2400mb connection, 160mhz bandwith,bitrate set to 400Mb). And It always looks gorgeous to me. Rarely I see some hickups where Virtual Desktop automatically adjust picture quality, but thats the 1% exceptions. Of course playing pinball doesn't require your to look into the distance (where artifacts usually occur). Though, with the Quest 2, I noticed artifacts in Onward a lot (tested wireless and wired), so I guess I'm not insensitive to it. Anyway, I guess the short answer would be: No, but my use case doesn't align with the source of the question.

Bonus pic of the vPin :D (I'm proud of it)

20240605_185846.jpg
 
I have only used the Quest 3 a couple of times to test stuff with AC, so I might not be to best person to ask. I use it mainly wireless with my DIY Virtual Pinball table, using a dedicated Wifi6E router (2400mb connection, 160mhz bandwith,bitrate set to 400Mb). And It always looks gorgeous to me. Rarely I see some hickups where Virtual Desktop automatically adjust picture quality, but thats the 1% exceptions. Of course playing pinball doesn't require your to look into the distance (where artifacts usually occur). Though, with the Quest 2, I noticed artifacts in Onward a lot (tested wireless and wired), so I guess I'm not insensitive to it. Anyway, I guess the short answer would be: No, but my use case doesn't align with the source of the question.

Bonus pic of the vPin :D (I'm proud of it)

View attachment 1362232
I love VR pinball, the PinballFX 2 and Star Wars tables are excellent. So that's a short table with flippers and haptics that you use with the HMD?
 
I love VR pinball, the PinballFX 2 and Star Wars tables are excellent. So that's a short table with flippers and haptics that you use with the HMD?
Yes, i don't want to go to far off topic in this thread, but a quick reply doesn't hurt anyone. 😅 It's a wooden cabinet built to the exact dimensions of a real pinball table, but cut in half. It's an all-in-one solution, housing a PC with 10700k and 3080, and 2 amplifiers with 2 basshakers and 4 exciters for surround haptic feedback, which sort of works like Simxperience Simvibe, but a lot more refined. You can literally feel the ball roll across the table with pinpoint accuracy (and all the bumpers/ramps/flippers/etc) Than two controller boards, real pinball buttons (no click), real analog plunger, real lockbar and real pinball legs. Monitor and mouse trackpad are built into the lid. Only two cables come out the cabinet, power and ethernet. It runs VPX (the Assetto Corsa of pinball) with about 100 real-life copies of pinball tables. I built it for my brother who kept buying the actual real pinball tables and I wanted to put an end to that by supplying him with this thing. (one pinball table can easily cost over 10k). Unfortunately he's not so tech-savy, so it ended up back here and I grew to love it. After the Race simulator easily the second most immersive piece of computer-art in my home.
 
Yes, i don't want to go to far off topic in this thread, but a quick reply doesn't hurt anyone. 😅 It's a wooden cabinet built to the exact dimensions of a real pinball table, but cut in half. It's an all-in-one solution, housing a PC with 10700k and 3080, and 2 amplifiers with 2 basshakers and 4 exciters for surround haptic feedback, which sort of works like Simxperience Simvibe, but a lot more refined. You can literally feel the ball roll across the table with pinpoint accuracy (and all the bumpers/ramps/flippers/etc) Than two controller boards, real pinball buttons (no click), real analog plunger, real lockbar and real pinball legs. Monitor and mouse trackpad are built into the lid. Only two cables come out the cabinet, power and ethernet. It runs VPX (the Assetto Corsa of pinball) with about 100 real-life copies of pinball tables. I built it for my brother who kept buying the actual real pinball tables and I wanted to put an end to that by supplying him with this thing. (one pinball table can easily cost over 10k). Unfortunately he's not so tech-savy, so it ended up back here and I grew to love it. After the Race simulator easily the second most immersive piece of computer-art in my home.
That's pretty damn incredible. Bet it was terrific fun to design and build too.
 
Question to the VR specialist in this thread.
Lately, I noticed that I get worst performance in single screen than in VR.
I have the latest csp with rain.
Practice today, 90 fps in VR, 35 FPS single.???.
Any idea?
In Assetto only.
 
Last edited:
I received my Quest3 VR Optician (Zeiss) prescription lenses and wauw , it does make a difference! (less glare , and more FOV since I can safely put the headset closer to my eyes now , without risk of damaging the lenses)

Recommend for anyone w prescription glasses (to see well further away) to get some good lens inserts in use them instead of using the headset over the regular glasses.
 
Back