Performance Issues using G3D & Valve Index

[cube001]

So I got VorpX when it was in beta back in 2016 after the first vive was released. I don’t remember using it much, but that would be true for VR in general at the time.

Anyways, I moved to a bigger place recently and decided to get myself a Valve Index to enjoy VR content… I was not amused by most of the VR games available, except for a few… I was looking for other ways to enjoy VR, and I rediscovered VorpX and remembered that I had already purchased it 4 years ago.

AND WOW! Suddenly my valve index purchase is justified! This software alone makes it worth it. Amazing work that I have to commend you for… Thank you!

Sorry for the long introduction but I really believe that you have done a great job growing this into the excellent piece of essential VR software that it is today.

I’m enjoying so many of the games that I have on my steam library in 3d, I was a big fan of Nvidia 3d vision and VorpX is what i have always wished for playing nvidia 3d vision games.

My issue is with performance though, I’m running a watercooled 2080 ti that is heavily overclocked. and running games on G3D while using the default VorpX setting for Steam VR results in almost 100% gpu utilization on most games i play even at resolution of 1440p with frame rates varying between 15 to 30 fps.

I understand that Vorpx renders two full instances of 1440p screens but the frame rate is just too low. I can run the same games on 4K res with much higher than double the fps (which is still a few thousands pixels higher than 1440pX2)…

So searching for answers, I stumbled upon the thread that was made back in May suggesting to try the generic VR mode by disabling direct VR… and to my surprise it actually made my fps much better, within what i would expect given the number of pixels being rendered. I understand that I shouldn’t see more than 10% improvement using this method, but I believe that my performance is being tanked when selecting the steam VR option.

I have confirmed that I was using the same in game settings in both tests with G3D selected. The game where I did most of the testing was Monster Hunter World… and oh my god it looks amazing in VorpX.

I would really appreciate any help with this issue. I can also provide all the information required to assess the situation.

Thank you again for this amazing software. It’s totally worth the $40 and even more.

[Ralf]

Thanks for the kind words! A lot has changed since 2016 when you bought vorpX originally.

There is some additional overhead involved for rendering to the headset compared to using vorpX in generic (desktop) mode. Typically that should be in the range of 10-15% on top of the G3D performance hit, but there are cases where it can even be more than that.

Incidentally there will be a new faster headset sync option in the next vorpX that can help with the matter. Typically it will yield about 10% or so, largely eliminating the aforementioned overhead. To my own surprise I saw even larger increases occasionally during testing, there were a handful of 20-30% cases. That’s not something to expect in general though, the typical increase will about 10%. If the GPU is already maxed out there may also be no change at all. Also your mileage may vary, a lot depends on the game and individual settings. So hope for the best, but don’t expect anything.

I may decide to leave the old method the default for a couple of reasons, in that case I’ll add instructions how to enable the new one in the release notes for the next update (second half of next week).

As far as Monster Hunter World is concerned: that’s a tough one performance wise. If currently you don’t have more than 15% difference between ‘Generic Headset’ and SteamVR all is well. With the new sync method that difference should largely disappear.

[cube001]

Thank you Ralf for the prompt answer. That is exciting news!

I’m willing to test your recent builds as I haven’t been this excited to play games since I was a teen. I’m dedicating this weekend to playing around with many games using VorpX.

So if you want a beta tester, I have already shot you an email to your support mailing address with some details. Let me know if you’re interested.

[cube001]

BTW, the difference in performance between generic and steamvr is closer to 70%. Knowing how the game performs usually on my setup, and taking into account the 10% overhead, I feel that the performance i’m getting using steamVR is much lower than what it should be, while the generic VR performance is more inline with what I would expect.

MHW is doing 15 – 30 fps on SteamVR while the frame rate jumps to 50 – 60 fps range when generic VR is selected. same in game settings at 1440p resolution. I get a locked 60 fps when playing the game normally (no VR) on 2160p res with similar settings.

[Ralf]

We already had a beta for this feature in particular, which is closed now, sorry. Just have a little more patience. In week or so the next release will be out.

Edit:

70% is definitely not right. Just checked the game here and had the expected ~15% difference between Generic and SteamVR using the original method. If you want, please run the game in both modes an then send me a trouble shoot data archive, which you can create in the config app, to support |at| vorpx com. No promises, but I’ll take a look at it.

Edit 2:

Same result with the current release build, just to be sure. Tested in the first hub/village/whatever with a big ship after the introduction.

[cube001]

So I reset all settings to start with a clean slate for testing and send you a cleaner troubleshooting file with only 2 runs of MHW… and now i can’t replicate the exact performance. It’s much better in steamVR and worse in Generic, however, the difference is still more like 30 to 35 %, not 10% but way better than 70%. I sent the file to the support email address.

Steam VR: 25 – 35 fps
Generic VR 35 – 50 fps

I tested the hub then jumped to the forest area first camp and just walked straight to the open area for both runs.

[Author]

Posts