Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Never heard of Project Lambda, but Half-Life 2 Update should work. At least it did when I tried it a year ago or so. Let me know if it doesn’t anymore.
ALT+C. PLS
Can be changed in the config app if you prefer something else.
Use only if necessary, in most cases vorpX should be able to determine automatically when to display the cursor and when not.
@ dborosov
No worries, I won’t go away. I mainly will be more careful what I say and how I say it. For the most part I won’t go into technical details anymore whenever I get the impression that might not end well. Trying to explain stuff in detail too often had the opposite effect of what I had intended and instead of clarifying something lead to lengthy discussions. That doesn’t help anyone and just costs too much energy in the long run that is better spent elsewhere.
Yes, of course. nVidia’s engineers are fools or maybe they wanted to personally annoy you and your friends with this ‘3 core bug’ that they never fixed for years, who knows. Apologies again for doubting that might be the case.
Serioisly, one last try:
If a game is CPU limited, one thread, typically the main render thread, always saturates a core. That’s why the game is CPU limited in the first place. Now when you further raise the load on that thread, like 3D-Vision does, your framerate sinks and secondary threads have to do less work than before since now less frames are rendered. Hence you see the overall CPU usage going down. That’s what my example was about. If a game happens to be GPU limited, the same applies, just now not even the main thread fully occupies one core.
The opposite of your conclusion is true: adding more cores doesn’t change anything beyond the point where the CPU isn’t used 100% anymore (leaving out unlikely edge cases here). If for example a hypothetical game is programmed to have three threads, there will be no difference between running this game on a 4-core CPU or a 10-core CPU. This is perfectly normal behavior.
What might make this a bit confusing is that the OS’s scheduler potentially can shift around a program’s threads between physical cores at will, which can skew the impression you get when you look at your task manager. Maybe that tricked you or whoever observed this ‘bug’ first into thinking no thread is maxed out although in fact it is. Just a guess.
Whether you want to believe me or not is up to you obviously, and I honestly don’t care. I can just try to explain from the perspective of someone who deals with this stuff regularly. Maybe nVidia should have done that before a considerable amount of people convinced themselves that there is some weird ‘3 core bug’ in 3D-Vision. Now it’s obviously too late.
The logo fades away after a minute or so, is only shown in the desktop mirror window (not in the headset) and fairly useful as an injection indicator, so there isn’t really any reason to remove it.
If you still feel offended by it for some reason, you can find the vorpx.ini in C:\ProgramData\Animation Labs\vorpX.
The ProgramData folder is hidden per default. If you can’t see it, enable ‘Show hidden files’ in your Windows Explorer options.
The OP apparently originally overlooked the one instruction (shown in the headset) that is required in regard to Bioshock, which is running the DirectVR scanner. That is done by a simple button press after loading a level. The DirectVR scanner scans fully automatically through the game memory and finds the locations for FOV (OP’s ‘zoomed in’ issue) as well camera rotation for better head tracking.
Not for all games things are that simple, but for Bioshock it actually is. Not trying to convince you though. If you made up your mind, no problem. Maybe just not the best idea to make up your mind from a post describing an issue someone has without reading the replies.
Listen, I tried to answer your question by providing you an example that makes it as easy as possible to understand what actually happens technically in a multithreaded game when you raise the load on the main thread. That apparently wasn’t what you wanted to hear, so I apologize for that.
People believe all sorts of imaginary crap, half the internet is full of it. If you want to believe in a ‘3 core bug’ in nVidia’s 3D-Vision driver, I have zero problem with that. I mean why trust a reasonable explanation when you can also believe in some conspiracy theory that involves nVidia willingly hampering 3D-Vision performance by not fixing some odd ‘3 core bug’ for several years.
I had a gut feeling that it might be better to just ignore your post right away, should better have listened to it.
I’m still not entirely sure what you mean. You start the game and press a button to run the DirectVR scanner after loading a level. That’s as plug and play as it gets. The only potential manual adjustment would be the game resolution, just like you may want to adjust it when you play a game on your monitor.
Can you explain what you mean? the OP of this thread obviously didn’t do things right originally. In Bioshock vorpX can not only adjust the FOV (‘zoomed in’) automatically, like in about 150 other games, but also provides perfect 1:1 head tracking at the touch of the button. With the original Bioshock you even get basic room scale capabilities if you want.
Bioshock (original preferred over remastered) is pretty much plug and play, the only thing you might want to adjust manually is possibly the resolution for better image quality.
I don’t have anything to add. If the boiled down example doesn’t make it understandable for you, I don’t know what could. And honestly I have better things to do than arguing with you. Like I said, I obviously have no reason to defend nVidia, there just is no “three core bug” in 3D-Vision. May sound counter-intuitive to you, but even with the GPU left out of the equation reduced overall CPU usage simply is the logical consequence of a reduced framerate in a multithreaded game running on multiple cores.
That explains a lot. Guess I don’t have to wonder anymore how that myth arised. Considering the author of that post all I’ll say is that half-baked superficial knowledge combined with strong opinions and the drive to share one’s ‘wisdom’ with the world is probably the most dangerous thing developed by mankind besides maybe the hydrogen bomb. Luckily in this case the only harm done was causing confusion among a stereo 3D community. ;)
I have no reason to defend nVidia, but imagine the following simplified scenario: a CPU with two cores and a game using two threads, one for rendering, one for physics. In mono both threads each fully utilize ‘their’ core, overall CPU usage 100%. Now, again for the sake of simplicity, let’s say stereo rendering doubles the CPU workload of the render thread, causing the framerate to drop to half purely due to the higher CPU workload. The first thread (rendering) would still fully utilize its core, but the second thread (physics) now would only have to utilize 50% of its core since only half the frames need physics calculated compared to before. Result: instead of 100% CPU usage mono you get 75% CPU usage with stereo.
No mysterious ‘3 core bug’ anywhere, everything working as expected. The ‘culprit’ is the added stereo workload on the render thread, as simple as that. The numbers will differ in a real world example and vary from game to game, but I hope you get the idea.
With Geometry 3D vorpX, just like 3D-Vision, has to submit twice as many draw calls to the GPU, one for each eye, which essentially doubles the workload for the GPU and also implies substantially more work on the CPU side. That’s not a bug though, neither in 3D-Vision nor in vorpX. I’m not sure why among members of the 3D-Vision community this frequently gets called “3 core bug”. One of those odd urban legends where you seriously wonder how they could ever have come into existence.
The actual fact of the matter is that submitting work to the GPU in most current game engines is still largely a serial task. It doesn’t automatically get parallelized just because a CPU has more cores. Now if one core gets maxed out by the main render thread, the whole game is limited at that point, no matter how many cores are left doing nothing. That’s not a bug, that’s just how things work. The only ones who can change that are the game devs by making better use of multithreading in their rendering code (as far as possible, there are limits to that).
If it worked originally but then stopped to work suddenly, please try a full factory reset in the config app (trouble shooting page). Just in case you made any configuration changes that made it stop working.
IIRC the game has a 60fps cap per default which you can change in its options menu (unless I’m mistaken that is, I’m not 100% sure).
In general: You can run games at any resolution, the higher the resolution, the better the image quality. You can even add resolutions to your PC that it does not support otherwise, which can help to improve things a lot. More detailed information including a step-by-step guide in the ‘Custom Resolutions’ section of the vorpX help.
For Resident Evil 7 it’s even simpler since the game has an option to raise the internal render resolution in its options menu. Can’t remember what it was called, but should be easy enough to spot in the graphics/video options. vorpX automatically sets it to 1.3x the game resolution, but you can go higher if that doesn’t hurt performance too much.
Touch controllers normally aren’t used by vorpX unless you pick them up and press a button. Before the first button press they are ignored by vorpX, so I’m not sure whether I understand your issue correctly. If you want to disable them completely for some reason, removing the batteries is probably your best bet.