I upgraded my 3080 to a 7900xtx with no regrets, the price was about half the cost of a 4090 and the my index and pico 4 run great. I wouldn't worry as much about AMD driver support for a fairly main stream hmd, but for something like a pimax or varjo NVIDIA is the obvious choice.
Yeah, sometimes I wish I could squeeze more performance out of something like MSFS or Cyberpunk in VR, but I don't feel too bad when I remember I saved about 700 dollars. If I splurged on the 4090 I'd probably feel like I need need to skip an extra generation of cards to get my money's worth too. AMD have a history of releasing first and optimizing later, so we'll probably get a little more performance out of this puppy before all is said and done.
For anyone wondering. I have Quest 2 and RX7800XT and a Rzyen 5600. I can run the sim at 47-55+fps (even more when my cpu is not bottlenecking topping 64ps), using the same settings that this channel put on the RTX4070 video that he was getting 33-37fps. Both using TAA / 90render scale / exact same settings and resolution. I can lock 36/40fps and let ASW kicks in to 72/80fps but with some ocasional tearing here and there.
Think I need to revisit the setting videos, I'm now running a Ryzen 7700X with a 3090 (32Mb RAM and a MSFS dedicated M.2) and getting nowhere near that with a Pico 4 :/ I had been considering swapping it out for a 7900XTX but sounds like I just need to do some tweaking
3090 should give you about the same performance with better quality due to better encoders and compatibility on Nvidia cards with Meta Software@@MavUK6666
I think you should do a video explaining DLAA (Directionally localised AA) vs DLSS:DLAA (Deep learning AA). Lots of confusion out there. Deep learning AA (better fps than TAA) is great and does not upscale if you don't want blurry screens in VR. Obviously only available in Nvidia.
I just found out this morning that AMD fluid motion frames works in VR if you run the sim full screen on your monitor. 7900xt, 5800x3d and reverb G2.. high preset, fsr2 quality locked at 90 fps. Maybe that's old news now. I haven't been following MSFS over the last month
I'm not sure what options there are for that in the reverb, I think there is only the one built into flight sim itself... I know with my rift s, I have to keep it off... The jello wings drive me crazy. With the AMD frame gen, it's done at the driver level (hopefully taking advantage of the RDNA3 architecture) but who knows .. the AMD tool shows that it's using frame gen and it's very smooth in VR... It's very possible that the extra frames are only getting displayed on the monitor and not getting to the headset. OpenVR tools show 45 fps, but AMD says that most tools don't show the proper fps... It feels good and looks good... So I do it. 😂
Well if your happy with, that's all that matters, generally you get alot of visual artifacts when using fsr3 or even dlss3 when the original FPS is under 60fps. Maybe it's actually not working, but if the placebo of it working is still saving money on buying new hardware, then it's definitely worth using it 😅
AMD 7900xtx. Only ever use amd cards now as they are so reliable I've found. I run a Pimax crystal and the performance is better in the crystal with the same specs than I got on the reverb g2.
@@VRFlightSimGuy yeah mate. It's absolutely fantastic. I pinch myself everytime I'm in VR at the clarity and get nearly 60fps in VR all the time. It's even smoother for recording in VR video than the g2 was. I'm sure the 4090 has the edge in some stuff but I'm impressed as with my 7900xtx.
@@simonclark7082 I also have the 7900xtx for MSFS and Pimax Crystal using OpenXR. It runs well, but it does not support DFR. And with FFR there are artifacts on the horizon occasionally. I kind of regret not forking out for a 4090 now.
Yeah AMD drivers not for VR, was my issue a year ago. Havent tried VR since but trust your word. As for performance, 7900xtx should be compared to rtx 4080 and 4070ti as thats which cards its priced between.
@@JohnCarlyle I use also a G2. No problems with an AMD CPU. And the new 3dx Cache runs pretty well at MSFS and DCS. But Intel built of curse very good CPUs which work very good. I love both labels and am happy that AMD is back in CPU business cause of the pricing policy from Intel as they had a monopoly. Competition is good for us as customers.
I Think 4090 and 7800X3D 7950X3D at the Moment absolute the best Combi. And i say this, i had the Combi 13900K and 4090. Not good Idea for Flightsimmers. You go to AMD x3d CPUs. I test ist all.
The biggest drawback to the tests that you are running is that you are not understanding Microsoft flight simulator is an extremely CPU intensive game you would actually get better results on a lower generation video card and a CPU built to handle it. The intel will not, you would need an X3D CPU. Time and time again the Ryzen X3D cpu outperforms intels offerings when ran on the same gpu. By a significant margin. You never did follow up with the Ryzen/Nvidia combination as a part 2. It would have been interesting to see your results.
Steve. May be this question not for this video, but i see that your clouds in msfs have smooth egdes. I don’t know where i need to charge settings, but i have clouds with sharp unrealistic edges.
I agree with the statement, Nvidia feels like the safe bet. But there is this reviewer guy that reviews VR, and he has noticeable performance difference between a meta environment, and the virtual desktop environment. Your statement about drivera might not be entirely accurate, and maybe we should be putting the blame on others, specifically in the ones who are not even trying to make the stuff work.. It is kind of annoying to have a "your system doesn't meet the requirements" when you spent 900 dollars in a graphics card.. But yeah if I had to spend 900 or 1000 I would try to get the most from it, and and is lacking inany areas.
Can I ask if you could do a comparison against wifi and direct headset connection, looking at fps performance please. I don’t own a headset yet, I would like to start with a lesser expensive set such as quest 3/pico 4 however I only have a 3090 gpu. In other videos you had suggested that these types require more processing than direct connection such as crystal, Aero, big screen beyond. So on a 3090, or less, is it worth getting the more expensive headset for the direct connection for better performance? Sorry for the rant. I have been watching your videos for over a year trying to work this out
Thanks for the video suggestion and indeed, for being here for over a year, your support is appreciated. The Crystal gives me better performance than the Quest 3, not by a lot, but eye tracking with foverated rendering helps with this and even if you lower the resolution in the OXTC, you'll get a much crisper and cleaner image. However, I'm glad to report the Quest 3 runs very well when scaled correctly to your GPU. Ideally, DP always wins. Cheers!
Hi Steve, what do you think the minimum spec is for MSFS, maybe via the Quest 3 wireless. As for long flights it would be great to do some more community ones.
I agree with Steve @@VRFlightSimGuy here it's a tough one to anwer in VR. Sometimes it seams the cheaper the headset the more powerful rig you need to compensate. In this case both the Pico 4 and Quest headsets are great in VR but being standalone you need a little bit of extra performance to get over the encryption which I noticed clearly from moving from a HP Reverb G2. I had a great time in my 2080 Ti powering my HP Reverb G2 for years and I would say for a Quest 3 it's fair that a 3070 Ti provide similar good performance 👍
My brother's second PC has a GTX 1070 and I tried the Quest 3 in MSFS in low detail. It was ok but I wouldn't want to hobby in it on a regular basis. The low detail as well, you really miss out on the charms MSFS has to offer. I'm not sure about DCS World. I would consider looking at titles like Aerofly FS 2 which has better VR performance if I had a rig which was less powerful than a RTX 3070 to be honest.
If you look at FPS per dollar, the RTX 4090 is not expensive at all compared to the RX 7900 XTX. Of course the final price is very high but it is just the price you pay for this number of FPS at the moment.
Of course Nvidia rules for vr at this time. That said, I have an AMD 7800x3d with a 7900xtx and it does very well in dcs for vr. It is a super fast combo for dcs 2d though.
My 4090FE although ridiculously expensive, has been incredible. Coupled with a 5800X3D and fully water cooled I under volt to 80% and lose very little performance. Today I set up quad views with DCS and WOW! Solid 90fps on my Crystal. It’s always been Nvidia for me, I have had several AMD GPU’s, but Nvidia is the clear winner in my opinion.
Yes as Steve has stated, I don't think anybody who has bought a 4090 has regretted paying that money. Although now I'm thinking about it, I do remember some MSFS forum users using desktop MSFS and couldn't get good frames in a 4090, but what can I say, some folks are beyond help! 😄
I think is a completely fair video, and now when somebody asks, you can say see this video. 😀 It's good AMD are getting into a better space with regards to being competitive with Intel and Nvidia and I think a lot of folks swear by the 7800x3d / 4090 combination which really does well in MSFS. I'm happy to be purchasing Intel / Nvidia products for now but I do wish another player would stir up the market. Intel's 14K release was just mediocrity and I can't help but think they were stalling so they could secure a better manufacturing process, what this will be who knows.
I'm surprised this question is even being asked. I thought it was well documented that Nvidia (GPUs) far outperform AMD in VR specifically. Also, DLSS and general stability
Has to be Nvidia (4090) for the Aero - so no choice if you really want to leave nothing on the table! If you’re shooting for budget, then there are possibly better options - but AMD will leave you without an upgrade route towards the Aero.
You are abolutely wrong about AMD GPU Drivers because they are much better and stable than Nvidia. I never had any issies with my G2 VR performance after upgrading AMD GPU Drivers. So there no drivers updates video about it because they just work and work good. Yes Nvidia RTX 4090 is top dog no doubt and discussion about that fact but is just too expensive and I'm can't or will never buy it at current price point. Yes price is key here in crazy GPU land and that proves latest sales numbers that AMD is killing Nvidia in mid and even high end GPU while not being the fastest and are also overpriced but not as crazy much as Nvidia. Nvidia stops all RTX 4070 / 4080 production to focus on the RTX 4070 / 4080 super that will be way overprices also I'm guessing but lets hope they learn from their mistakes if they want to keep selling GPU's and that's not only to VR peeps like you and me. I'm wishing and hoping the crazy GPU prices will change for the better. I'm a big optimist with lots of patience.
Sorry buddy, I knew this one would hurt. But it's my opinion based on using both GPUs. They are getting better though and I agree Nvidia GPUs are too expensive, which I also say in the video.
AMD or Nvidia? Which is it for you? Let me know in the comments below 👇👇👇
I upgraded my 3080 to a 7900xtx with no regrets, the price was about half the cost of a 4090 and the my index and pico 4 run great. I wouldn't worry as much about AMD driver support for a fairly main stream hmd, but for something like a pimax or varjo NVIDIA is the obvious choice.
Thanks for sharing your experiences and congrats on the XTX, I was really impressed by this GPU when I tested it earlier this year.
Yeah, sometimes I wish I could squeeze more performance out of something like MSFS or Cyberpunk in VR, but I don't feel too bad when I remember I saved about 700 dollars. If I splurged on the 4090 I'd probably feel like I need need to skip an extra generation of cards to get my money's worth too. AMD have a history of releasing first and optimizing later, so we'll probably get a little more performance out of this puppy before all is said and done.
Well, Nvidia's the only choice for Varjo.
Same setup here, 7900 XTX and PICO 4. No issues, they run like hell.
7800XT Here, and i'm getting 4070Ti performance for 400 dollars less@@W00PIE
For anyone wondering. I have Quest 2 and RX7800XT and a Rzyen 5600. I can run the sim at 47-55+fps (even more when my cpu is not bottlenecking topping 64ps), using the same settings that this channel put on the RTX4070 video that he was getting 33-37fps. Both using TAA / 90render scale / exact same settings and resolution. I can lock 36/40fps and let ASW kicks in to 72/80fps but with some ocasional tearing here and there.
I'm really glad my VR settings have helped 😊
Think I need to revisit the setting videos, I'm now running a Ryzen 7700X with a 3090 (32Mb RAM and a MSFS dedicated M.2) and getting nowhere near that with a Pico 4 :/ I had been considering swapping it out for a 7900XTX but sounds like I just need to do some tweaking
3090 should give you about the same performance with better quality due to better encoders and compatibility on Nvidia cards with Meta Software@@MavUK6666
Are these settings still working for you after the last couple of updates? About 2 updates ago mine has went to crap. I have a 5800x3D and TX7800XT
@@farmertech51 Ive sold my desktop so I can't answer you back
I think you should do a video explaining DLAA (Directionally localised AA) vs DLSS:DLAA (Deep learning AA). Lots of confusion out there. Deep learning AA (better fps than TAA) is great and does not upscale if you don't want blurry screens in VR. Obviously only available in Nvidia.
Running a 7900XT with a Pimax 8K-X and loving it in Il2 VR
Good purchase given the market pricing.
I just found out this morning that AMD fluid motion frames works in VR if you run the sim full screen on your monitor. 7900xt, 5800x3d and reverb G2.. high preset, fsr2 quality locked at 90 fps. Maybe that's old news now. I haven't been following MSFS over the last month
Does HP Reverb G2 not have an equivalent to asynchronous spacewarp?
I'm not sure what options there are for that in the reverb, I think there is only the one built into flight sim itself... I know with my rift s, I have to keep it off... The jello wings drive me crazy. With the AMD frame gen, it's done at the driver level (hopefully taking advantage of the RDNA3 architecture) but who knows .. the AMD tool shows that it's using frame gen and it's very smooth in VR... It's very possible that the extra frames are only getting displayed on the monitor and not getting to the headset. OpenVR tools show 45 fps, but AMD says that most tools don't show the proper fps... It feels good and looks good... So I do it. 😂
Well if your happy with, that's all that matters, generally you get alot of visual artifacts when using fsr3 or even dlss3 when the original FPS is under 60fps.
Maybe it's actually not working, but if the placebo of it working is still saving money on buying new hardware, then it's definitely worth using it 😅
AMD 7900xtx. Only ever use amd cards now as they are so reliable I've found. I run a Pimax crystal and the performance is better in the crystal with the same specs than I got on the reverb g2.
That's great, so the Crystal is working great for you now with an AMD GPU? That's a big up for the Pimax engineers.
@@VRFlightSimGuy yeah mate. It's absolutely fantastic. I pinch myself everytime I'm in VR at the clarity and get nearly 60fps in VR all the time. It's even smoother for recording in VR video than the g2 was. I'm sure the 4090 has the edge in some stuff but I'm impressed as with my 7900xtx.
@@simonclark7082 I also have the 7900xtx for MSFS and Pimax Crystal using OpenXR. It runs well, but it does not support DFR. And with FFR there are artifacts on the horizon occasionally. I kind of regret not forking out for a 4090 now.
Yeah AMD drivers not for VR, was my issue a year ago. Havent tried VR since but trust your word.
As for performance, 7900xtx should be compared to rtx 4080 and 4070ti as thats which cards its priced between.
CPU = AMD Ryzen 9 7950x3d
GPU = Nvidia RTX 4090
I'd agree with that, although I've found AMD CPUs to be less stable, especially during demanding video editing
CPU = Intel, I've gone off AMD CPUs since the hassle with the Reverb G2 connection issues.
@@JohnCarlyle I use also a G2. No problems with an AMD CPU. And the new 3dx Cache runs pretty well at MSFS and DCS. But Intel built of curse very good CPUs which work very good. I love both labels and am happy that AMD is back in CPU business cause of the pricing policy from Intel as they had a monopoly. Competition is good for us as customers.
TLDL which one is better for vr sim racing nvidia or amd?
I ordered a Pixax Light. I'm hoping my AMD 6800 xt will handle it.
I Think 4090 and 7800X3D 7950X3D at the Moment absolute the best Combi. And i say this, i had the Combi 13900K and 4090. Not good Idea for Flightsimmers. You go to AMD x3d CPUs. I test ist all.
The biggest drawback to the tests that you are running is that you are not understanding Microsoft flight simulator is an extremely CPU intensive game you would actually get better results on a lower generation video card and a CPU built to handle it. The intel will not, you would need an X3D CPU. Time and time again the Ryzen X3D cpu outperforms intels offerings when ran on the same gpu. By a significant margin. You never did follow up with the Ryzen/Nvidia combination as a part 2. It would have been interesting to see your results.
For me the best combo is 7900x3d or the 7800x3d if you don't do too much work with your pc and a 4090.
Did you test RTX 4080? The price and performance are quite similar to 7900XTX?
Unfortunately not, I may need to fix that in the future though
Try the 4070 Super TI!!
Awesome video. Very informative for quite a few people I think 👍👍
Thankyou buddy, I do get asked this question quite a lot (to put it mildly). I hope you are enjoying your weekend 🍻
I think it largely comes down to the memory bandwidth of the GPU, which is much higher on a 4090 vs 7900xtx
Hello, i want to buy an RX 7800 XT and a 5800X3D, will that run smoothly assetto corsa on my quest 2?
Yes. Assetto Corsa (1) is notoriously super easy to run in VR.
Simracing with -X3D processor is rock solid too. Have fun!
Steve. May be this question not for this video, but i see that your clouds in msfs have smooth egdes. I don’t know where i need to charge settings, but i have clouds with sharp unrealistic edges.
I agree with the statement, Nvidia feels like the safe bet. But there is this reviewer guy that reviews VR, and he has noticeable performance difference between a meta environment, and the virtual desktop environment. Your statement about drivera might not be entirely accurate, and maybe we should be putting the blame on others, specifically in the ones who are not even trying to make the stuff work..
It is kind of annoying to have a "your system doesn't meet the requirements" when you spent 900 dollars in a graphics card..
But yeah if I had to spend 900 or 1000 I would try to get the most from it, and and is lacking inany areas.
Can I ask if you could do a comparison against wifi and direct headset connection, looking at fps performance please. I don’t own a headset yet, I would like to start with a lesser expensive set such as quest 3/pico 4 however I only have a 3090 gpu. In other videos you had suggested that these types require more processing than direct connection such as crystal, Aero, big screen beyond. So on a 3090, or less, is it worth getting the more expensive headset for the direct connection for better performance? Sorry for the rant. I have been watching your videos for over a year trying to work this out
Thanks for the video suggestion and indeed, for being here for over a year, your support is appreciated. The Crystal gives me better performance than the Quest 3, not by a lot, but eye tracking with foverated rendering helps with this and even if you lower the resolution in the OXTC, you'll get a much crisper and cleaner image. However, I'm glad to report the Quest 3 runs very well when scaled correctly to your GPU. Ideally, DP always wins. Cheers!
Hi Steve, what do you think the minimum spec is for MSFS, maybe via the Quest 3 wireless. As for long flights it would be great to do some more community ones.
That's a tough one, I'm not sure sorry. Perhaps a 3070ti based GPU. I definitely want to arrange another community flight, it's certainly been a while
I agree with Steve @@VRFlightSimGuy here it's a tough one to anwer in VR. Sometimes it seams the cheaper the headset the more powerful rig you need to compensate. In this case both the Pico 4 and Quest headsets are great in VR but being standalone you need a little bit of extra performance to get over the encryption which I noticed clearly from moving from a HP Reverb G2. I had a great time in my 2080 Ti powering my HP Reverb G2 for years and I would say for a Quest 3 it's fair that a 3070 Ti provide similar good performance 👍
My brother's second PC has a GTX 1070 and I tried the Quest 3 in MSFS in low detail. It was ok but I wouldn't want to hobby in it on a regular basis. The low detail as well, you really miss out on the charms MSFS has to offer. I'm not sure about DCS World. I would consider looking at titles like Aerofly FS 2 which has better VR performance if I had a rig which was less powerful than a RTX 3070 to be honest.
My 4090 is incredible with the Crystal, and Nvidia updates their drivers about every two weeks, for years now! 👍
It is an astonishing GPU
If you look at FPS per dollar, the RTX 4090 is not expensive at all compared to the RX 7900 XTX. Of course the final price is very high but it is just the price you pay for this number of FPS at the moment.
Most flights simulators are very CPU intensive. Couple that 4090 to one of AMD's X 3D processors, And hang on to your butts.
I really like FSR2. I can see my digital dashboard clearly compared to DLSS.
Thanks for the update!!
No problem 👍
Of course Nvidia rules for vr at this time. That said, I have an AMD 7800x3d with a 7900xtx and it does very well in dcs for vr. It is a super fast combo for dcs 2d though.
My 4090FE although ridiculously expensive, has been incredible. Coupled with a 5800X3D and fully water cooled I under volt to 80% and lose very little performance.
Today I set up quad views with DCS and WOW! Solid 90fps on my Crystal.
It’s always been Nvidia for me, I have had several AMD GPU’s, but Nvidia is the clear winner in my opinion.
Yes as Steve has stated, I don't think anybody who has bought a 4090 has regretted paying that money. Although now I'm thinking about it, I do remember some MSFS forum users using desktop MSFS and couldn't get good frames in a 4090, but what can I say, some folks are beyond help! 😄
I think is a completely fair video, and now when somebody asks, you can say see this video. 😀 It's good AMD are getting into a better space with regards to being competitive with Intel and Nvidia and I think a lot of folks swear by the 7800x3d / 4090 combination which really does well in MSFS. I'm happy to be purchasing Intel / Nvidia products for now but I do wish another player would stir up the market. Intel's 14K release was just mediocrity and I can't help but think they were stalling so they could secure a better manufacturing process, what this will be who knows.
Thanks buddy, I couldn't agree more with your comments. Have a great weekend ☺️
What would you get if money was not a thing: AERO or Pimax Cristal ?
At this point, Crystal. Video explaining this out tomorrow
Having filled out this years flight sim survey and looking at the results from last year, I’d say it’s hands down Nvidia
NVida all the way with no doubt. I am currenty using a 4090 card. Best card I've ever owned.
I'm surprised this question is even being asked. I thought it was well documented that Nvidia (GPUs) far outperform AMD in VR specifically.
Also, DLSS and general stability
You'd be surprised how much I get asked, now, I can just direct them to this video ;)
If budget is not an issue, Nvidia. Low on budget, AMD.
hey man u on discord? i wanted to ask u how you record your vr gameplay.
Dude where are the Numbers ? facts not personal Feelings
Plenty of videos on the channel.
Has to be Nvidia (4090) for the Aero - so no choice if you really want to leave nothing on the table!
If you’re shooting for budget, then there are possibly better options - but AMD will leave you without an upgrade route towards the Aero.
For me both :0
You are abolutely wrong about AMD GPU Drivers because they are much better and stable than Nvidia. I never had any issies with my G2 VR performance after upgrading AMD GPU Drivers. So there no drivers updates video about it because they just work and work good. Yes Nvidia RTX 4090 is top dog no doubt and discussion about that fact but is just too expensive and I'm can't or will never buy it at current price point. Yes price is key here in crazy GPU land and that proves latest sales numbers that AMD is killing Nvidia in mid and even high end GPU while not being the fastest and are also overpriced but not as crazy much as Nvidia. Nvidia stops all RTX 4070 / 4080 production to focus on the RTX 4070 / 4080 super that will be way overprices also I'm guessing but lets hope they learn from their mistakes if they want to keep selling GPU's and that's not only to VR peeps like you and me. I'm wishing and hoping the crazy GPU prices will change for the better. I'm a big optimist with lots of patience.
Sorry buddy, I knew this one would hurt. But it's my opinion based on using both GPUs. They are getting better though and I agree Nvidia GPUs are too expensive, which I also say in the video.
@@VRFlightSimGuyyou poked the bear lol 👉🐻