[Kev608]

I've been playing Forza 7 and it's decent, but I feel like there must be better games out there. It just doesn't feel as real as it could. I've got the logitech G920. What is everyone playing?

[antych]

There's project cars 2 and assetto corsa for xbox. Both will be better than forza in terms of realism and simulation.

[Kev608]

I'll try them out. Looks like they're available through Steam as well. Would they run better on PC?

[Conissah]

If you want a great sim with tons of active players, iRacing is amazing. It can be a bit costly, but it's very very realistic in terms of car physics and feel. A lot of NASCAR drivers use it to practice on, or just race in it to pass the time.

At work, our multi-million dollar racing sim is running on rFactor 2. While I have never played rFactor from my home PC or using my personal wheel, in our sim it was extremely good.

[antych]

Depends on your PC. I play them on PC and in VR, which is the best experience you can have. If you already have a PC there are even more to choose from, like assetto corsa competizione (which is currently the most realistic GT3 sim) and some more professional sims like iRacing, rFactor etc.

You can check out my nordschleife run in vr in assetto corsa. They did a really good job on the M4.

[Kev608]

Originally Posted by antych

Depends on your PC. I play them on PC and in VR, which is the best experience you can have. If you already have a PC there are even more to choose from, like assetto corsa competizione (which is currently the most realistic GT3 sim) and some more professional sims like iRacing, rFactor etc.

You can check out my nordschleife run in vr in assetto corsa. They did a really good job on the M4.

My graphics card alone was more expensive than the Xbox One X, so I feel like it will do better at full 4K res.

That VR thing looks amazing! Def gonna look into that.

I have the Extreme Simracing cockpit with Logitech G920 Wheel, pedal, and shifter combo.

[antych]

VR is very demanding, it's even going to make 2080ti sweat. Get yourself an HP Reverb, it's 2160x2160 per eye at 90fps. That's more demanding than 4k@60. It's the best head mounted display for sim racing that doesn't cost $$$$.

As for those games, they all have pros and cons.

PC2 is well polished with decent career modes, best weather/surface simulation, good VR support.

AC is a bit older with weaker graphics, but will run better in VR at something like 6K@90fps giving you a really crisp image. It has insane mod support, with great community, so you can load it with additional cars and tracks.

ACC is an official blancpain gt game, with brand new engine, looks and sounds great, but quite demanding. One of the best looking and realistic games, but limited to one series and still work in progress.

There's also Dirt Rally 2.0 which is pretty good if you want try rallying.

[charlieb]

For competition, realism and a steep learning curve - iRacing.
For cheap and very good realism - Assetto corsa.
Latest and greatest AC - Assetto corsa competition.

[charlieb]

Highly suggest VR for any of the above titles.

Assetto Corsa is great because it’s cheap, has tons of tracks and is quite realistic. Can be played offline or online and there is a rather large community supporting it with cars and tracks.

[Kev608]

iRacing looks pretty sick! Also, membership is half off right now.

[Kev608]

Originally Posted by antych

VR is very demanding, it's even going to make 2080ti sweat. Get yourself an HP Reverb, it's 2160x2160 per eye at 90fps. That's more demanding than 4k@60. It's the best head mounted display for sim racing that doesn't cost $$$$.

As for those games, they all have pros and cons.

PC2 is well polished with decent career modes, best weather/surface simulation, good VR support.

AC is a bit older with weaker graphics, but will run better in VR at something like 6K@90fps giving you a really crisp image. It has insane mod support, with great community, so you can load it with additional cars and tracks.

ACC is an official blancpain gt game, with brand new engine, looks and sounds great, but quite demanding. One of the best looking and realistic games, but limited to one series and still work in progress.

There's also Dirt Rally 2.0 which is pretty good if you want try rallying.

That HP Reverb has pretty terrible reviews?

This one especially concerns me:

I have tried the Valve Index and now the HP Reverb, and I'm sad to say that VR is not there yet. I have a brand new PC with an I7 & 2080 Ti with the latest drivers, and the games that I'm expecting to see run decently (Assetto Corsa, Project Cars 2), are just not optimized for VR yet.

"Even though it's advertised as a 2K screen, the quality is just not there yet when compared to my monitor or OLED screen. I'm not by any means trying to compare the two as my expectations were set that this was going to be a much lower resolution and it's sacrificed against the VR immersion, but half of the time the guy would not even run correctly and had to be reset. "

I should also point out that my Xbox and PC are connected to my 77" LG OLED TV. So, VR probably wouldn't give me the same graphics performance?

[charlieb]

I’m running a lowly i5-2500k @ 4.2ghz with an R9-390 and am able to enjoy any of the decent sims in VR (rift).

Been sim racing since papyrus nascar racing so if you have any questions, hit me up.

[antych]

Originally Posted by Kev608

That HP Reverb has pretty terrible reviews?

This one especially concerns me:

I have tried the Valve Index and now the HP Reverb, and I'm sad to say that VR is not there yet. I have a brand new PC with an I7 & 2080 Ti with the latest drivers, and the games that I'm expecting to see run decently (Assetto Corsa, Project Cars 2), are just not optimized for VR yet.

"Even though it's advertised as a 2K screen, the quality is just not there yet when compared to my monitor or OLED screen. I'm not by any means trying to compare the two as my expectations were set that this was going to be a much lower resolution and it's sacrificed against the VR immersion, but half of the time the guy would not even run correctly and had to be reset. "

I should also point out that my Xbox and PC are connected to my 77" LG OLED TV. So, VR probably wouldn't give me the same graphics performance?

Those comments are true for VR in general, not the Reverb, which is actually one of the highest resolution HMDs.

There's no way you can get monitor/tv quality graphics in VR. The field of view is so big that you would need 8k per eye or something like that and there's no PC that can handle that.

That person seems a bit overcritical of VR and a bit clueless/naive. It's a trade off. You sacrifice image clarity for immersion. One isn't necessarily better than the other. Sitting on your couch in front of an OLED tv is more comfortable and the image is better. But you're driving while looking through a window, everything is off, field of view, all the references aren't like real life. VR makes you feel like you're actually sitting in the car, it's much easier to put good times in, because you can judge distances better, look to apex etc. It's an experience on a completely different level.

It depends what you care more about. If it's realism and immersion, nothing beats VR, even though you lose a lot of the image fidelity.

I used to have Oculus Rift and after using it for a while, I actually preferred to play those games on my OLED TV, because Rift was a first gen product, and had really low resolution. It was just borderline acceptable for me, so most of the time I didn't bother.

Since I have Reverb, if I'm serious about racing and realism, I will use that instead. It's a lot better, to a point where it's a lot more acceptable. Although a lot of people are happy with the lower resolution headsets like rift and vive. It really depends on the person.

Your 77" tv is still 4k, size doesn't matter, just the resolution. If you can run 4k at 60fps, then you can VR. You can always adjust the amount of super sampling, so you can run something like AC at higher resolution, but with ACC you will have to lower it, losing some clarity to get 90fps.

[Kev608]

I think I will order the Pimax 8K. It has the widest FOV and the highest resolution (double that of the Reverb).

[antych]

Pimax isn't really 8K, it's BS marketing. It's only 2560×1440 per eye, upscaled to 4K. 4K per eye = 8K according to Pimax, but because it's upscaled and stretched over wider fov it will probably look much worse than Reverb. It's a niche product, so you're risking more in terms of support and compatibility. There isn't really anything better than Reverb, and even if it was, the most powerful GPU on the market wouldn't be able to run it. ACC can runs fairly well on 2080Ti in 4K 60fps, but 8K is actually 4 times that resolution (pixel count) and VR is usually 90fps, that's 6x times the processing power required. There's no hardware in existence that can run it, and we won't see true 8K VR in many years to come, as GPUs tend to improve by about 50% each cycle which typically lasts 2 years.

[antych]

Originally Posted by Kev608

I think I will order the Pimax 8K. It has the widest FOV and the highest resolution (double that of the Reverb).

So that's Pimax 8K *X*, not the regular Pimax 8K. That's still not real 8K, but half of that resolution, but it could be better than Reverb, at double the price. Might be worth trying out if you don't mind the cost. You will still run into GPU limitations, but it might produce crisper image.

[Kev608]

Originally Posted by antych

Pimax isn't really 8K, it's BS marketing. It's only 2560×1440 per eye, upscaled to 4K. 4K per eye = 8K according to Pimax, but because it's upscaled and stretched over wider fov it will probably look much worse than Reverb. It's a niche product, so you're risking more in terms of support and compatibility. There isn't really anything better than Reverb, and even if it was, the most powerful GPU on the market wouldn't be able to run it. ACC can runs fairly well on 2080Ti in 4K 60fps, but 8K is actually 4 times that resolution (pixel count) and VR is usually 90fps, that's 6x times the processing power required. There's no hardware in existence that can run it, and we won't see true 8K VR in many years to come, as GPUs tend to improve by about 50% each cycle which typically lasts 2 years.

I am not sure you are correct there. Perhaps my computer is not currently capable of outputting max resolution, but I can't see how it would not do a better job of displaying the same res as the HP Reverb. I would also be able to upgrade in the future when PC hardware starts to catch up?

https://store.pimaxvr.com/shop/produ...vr-headset-384

[antych]

Originally Posted by Kev608

I am not sure you are correct there. Perhaps my computer is not currently capable of outputting max resolution, but I can't see how it would not do a better job of displaying the same res as the HP Reverb. I would also be able to upgrade in the future when PC hardware starts to catch up?

https://store.pimaxvr.com/shop/produ...vr-headset-384

The Reverb is 2160x2160 per eye, that's combined resolution of 4320x2160. UHD which your TV is using is 3840x2160.

That's 9,331,200 pixels in Reverb vs 8,294,400 in your TV, but VR tends to be 90fps vs 60 of tv, so you need about 68% more GPU power to sustain Reverb's native resolution.

Pimax 8KX is 7680x2160, that's 16,588,800‬ pixels at 90fps, so you need 200% more GPU power compared what you typically use on a TV.

That's sort of performance is not coming anytime soon, but you can always run it at lower resolution. There's a benefit of having a high resolution screen, even if the image is upscaled.

Because of the extra fov, the Pimax's resolution is so massive, even though it's vertically the same as Reverb. You may have to sacrifice clarity for field of view to keep the performance acceptable. It's hard to tell which one is better, I haven't used Pimax myself.

Nvidia will probably release a new series of GPUs next year, but the current gen will struggle with those numbers. Asetto Corsa is probably the only game you will be able to run at Pimax 8KX native resolution.

Good thing about VR is that you can just adjust internal resolution to whatever your PC can handle, so you don't have to worry about it. You can buy the highest resolution HMD money can buy, and wait for the GPUs to catch up, and then just adjust the resolution when you upgrade.

[Kev608]

Originally Posted by antych

The Reverb is 2160x2160 per eye, that's combined resolution of 4320x2160. UHD which your TV is using is 3840x2160.

That's 9,331,200 pixels in Reverb vs 8,294,400 in your TV, but VR tends to be 90fps vs 60 of tv, so you need about 68% more GPU power to sustain Reverb's native resolution.

Pimax 8KX is 7680x2160, that's 16,588,800‬ pixels at 90fps, so you need 300% more GPU power compared what you typically use on a TV.

That's sort of performance is not coming anytime soon, but you can always run it at lower resolution. There's a benefit of having a high resolution screen, even if the image is upscaled.

Because of the extra fov, the Pimax's resolution is so massive, even though it's vertically the same as Reverb. You may have to sacrifice clarity for field of view to keep the performance acceptable. It's hard to tell which one is better, I haven't used Pimax myself.

Nvidia will probably release a new series of GPUs next year, but the current gen will struggle with those numbers. Asetto Corsa is probably the only game you will be able to run at Pimax 8KX native resolution.

Good thing about VR is that you can just adjust internal resolution to whatever your PC can handle, so you don't have to worry about it. You can buy the highest resolution HMD money can buy, and wait for the GPUs to catch up, and then just adjust the resolution when you upgrade.

The Pimax 5K Plus can do 120hz with a wider FOV and is half the price. Price is about the same as HP. Maybe that's a better solution?

[antych]

I just checked Pimax 8KX specs, it does 3840×2160 at 75Hz, and at 90Hz when it's upscaled. That lowers the requirements slightly and 75fps may still be acceptable for most people (lower refresh rate may lead to motion sickness, so general 90+ is the goal). Unfortunately that's still double of what best GPUs can do in most demanding games like ACC.

Pimax 5K+ has a lower resolution than Reverb, but wider field of view, so it's a trade off. More immersion, less image clarity.

I think for racing fov is less important. In reality you wear a helmet when racing, and seats obscure your peripheral vision. But it's important to have a clear image to pick up braking points etc.

[DieselDiner]

Could you handicap why these guys prefer the Valve Index: https://www.ign.com/articles/best-vr-headset

[antych]

Originally Posted by DieselDiner

Could you handicap why these guys prefer the Valve Index: https://www.ign.com/articles/best-vr-headset

Index is overall best VR if you judge the whole package, controllers, tracking, software support, etc. It's good if you care about "room scale" VR, ie. walking around your living room, picking stuff up, shooting guns.

None of that matters in sim racing. So you're better off buying something with crap controllers but higher resolution like Reverb.

Index is good, but not $1k good. Unless you don't care about cost and buy it for room scale type of games. Otherwise you buy Quest which is wireless and costs 1/3 as much.