Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Frontier reveals Elite: Dangerous VR minimum system specs

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    28,815
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,864 times in 637 posts

    Frontier reveals Elite: Dangerous VR minimum system specs

    Plus: DICE is building a VR development team, and Google launches Cardboard Camera app.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    144
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    15 times in 12 posts

    Re: Frontier reveals Elite: Dangerous VR minimum system specs

    It's worth noting that ED currently only supports the 0.5 SDK (you can get it working with 0.6 though).

    Also of note os that the VIVE / Steam VR is supported in the Horizons Beta while the Oculus has not seen an update for most of year

  3. #3
    Senior Member cptwhite_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,703
    Thanks
    430
    Thanked
    428 times in 310 posts
    • cptwhite_uk's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-Z77Z-UD3H
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5 3570k @ 4.2Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 16Gb DDR3 Corsair Vengeance LP 1600Mhz
      • Storage:
      • SanDisk Ultra II 960Gb SSD / 750Gb Samsung F1
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI Gaming X GTX1080 8Gb
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 550W VX
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design R4
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Home
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2713HM (2560x1440 IPS Panel)
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 200Mbps

    Re: Frontier reveals Elite: Dangerous VR minimum system specs

    I think Frontier are being overly cautious with the specifications. It's only a 1920x1200 resolution both the Rift and Vive are using. With all the bells and whistles turned up (no AA) I'm pulling way above 100fps @ 1440p on my GTX970 (more like 130-140fps, but comfortably above the the baseline 92fps for the Rift at all times, and that's pushing 60% more pixels per frame as well). I'd expect around 170-200fps at the resolution the Rift/Vive are using, factor in some AA and I suspect I'd still be well north of 100fps.

    Can't really see a GTX980 being baseline for Elite. Not sure about planetary landing however, probably more taxing but you can always lower quality settings and remove AA to give any necessary boost if needed.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Kingdom O Fife
    Posts
    264
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    14 times in 12 posts
    • zaph0d's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Rampage II Extreme
      • CPU:
      • Socket 1366 2.66GHz Xeon 5650 Hex-Core @ 4 GHz - Speedstep Enabled - Custom Liquid Cooled
      • Memory:
      • 48GB - 6x 8GB @ 1600MHz
      • Storage:
      • 2x240 GB SSD's inmRaid 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • AMD R9 380 2Gb
      • PSU:
      • 1000W Coolermaster
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-343B (Original Model)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Toshiba 49" 4K tv
      • Internet:
      • 76MBit TalkTalk Fibre - Actually get the full 76MBit too :P

    Re: Frontier reveals Elite: Dangerous VR minimum system specs

    Ah but Cptwhite_uk, you have to remember that it's not just 1920x1200, you've got to factor in that it's effectively rendering 2 960*1200 frames from different perspectives.
    It's got to calculate all the shadows, lights, fog, depth-of-field etc etc twice.
    So yes it's 56% less pixels but it's also twice the back-end complexity.
    Playing at 1920x1200 in vr is probably about the same as 2560x1440 out of vr, performance wise at least.

  5. #5
    Senior Member cptwhite_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,703
    Thanks
    430
    Thanked
    428 times in 310 posts
    • cptwhite_uk's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-Z77Z-UD3H
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5 3570k @ 4.2Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 16Gb DDR3 Corsair Vengeance LP 1600Mhz
      • Storage:
      • SanDisk Ultra II 960Gb SSD / 750Gb Samsung F1
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI Gaming X GTX1080 8Gb
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 550W VX
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design R4
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Home
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2713HM (2560x1440 IPS Panel)
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 200Mbps

    Re: Frontier reveals Elite: Dangerous VR minimum system specs

    Hadn't really thought of it like that Zaphod, but seems obvious now you mention it! Still an overclocked GTX970 is akin to a stock GTX980 anyway

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    144
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    15 times in 12 posts

    Re: Frontier reveals Elite: Dangerous VR minimum system specs

    Quote Originally Posted by zaph0d View Post
    Ah but Cptwhite_uk, you have to remember that it's not just 1920x1200, you've got to factor in that it's effectively rendering 2 960*1200 frames from different perspectives.
    It's got to calculate all the shadows, lights, fog, depth-of-field etc etc twice.
    So yes it's 56% less pixels but it's also twice the back-end complexity.
    Playing at 1920x1200 in vr is probably about the same as 2560x1440 out of vr, performance wise at least.

    Aye, this is what all these new techniques that NVIDIA and co are doing is all about.. Where they only render the area actually visible to each eye rather than the whole scene and then only the centre at high fidelity etc.

    I think it's going to be exponential once the various CV's hit the shelves. The more people that have them the more efficient the GPU guys will want to be so they can claim the crown and so more people will buy... rinse repeat.

    It's going to be like the early days of 3D cards all over again IMHO

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    179
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    7 times in 5 posts
    • Ironbuket's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASRock AMD X470 Taichi
      • CPU:
      • AMD 2700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB (2x8GB) T-Force Dark Pro
      • Storage:
      • 1TB 970EVO M.2, 1TB 850EVO + many others
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte GTX970
      • PSU:
      • Be Quiet Straight Power 750W
      • Case:
      • Silverstone Fortress FT02B
      • Operating System:
      • Win10x64 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Hyundai W240D v2 + Dell (both @1920x1200)
      • Internet:
      • Zen

    Re: Frontier reveals Elite: Dangerous VR minimum system specs

    New VR cardboard camera? That ap came out months ago?
    2700X,X470 Taichi,Silverstone Fortress 2,16GB RAM, SSDx3, HDDx4,GTX970 G1 Gaming,24"x2(1xIPS,1xTFT),W10x64Pro
    HTPC: AthlonX2 5050e,M4A78-EM,AntecFusion,8GB RAM,ATi3200,32"Sony TV,W7x64Pre

  8. #8
    Theoretical Element Spud1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    North West
    Posts
    6,937
    Thanks
    246
    Thanked
    250 times in 195 posts
    • Spud1's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Mac Pro
      • CPU:
      • 2x 2.8ghz Quad Core Xeons (octo-core)
      • Memory:
      • 4gb DDR2 FB-Dimm
      • Storage:
      • 1x1TB, 1x320gb, 2x500gb, 1x250gb, 120GB SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Nvidia Geforce 560Ti
      • PSU:
      • Mac pro PSU
      • Case:
      • Mac Pro Case
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 8
      • Monitor(s):
      • 1x22" LG 3D TFT 1x 19" ViewSonic
      • Internet:
      • 80mb BT Infinity

    Re: Frontier reveals Elite: Dangerous VR minimum system specs

    I'll stick with my DKII for the moment then

    Happily able to play elite on that with a couple of ageing 3ghz Gainestown CPUs and a GTX960. I am pushing the boundaries there though so I can easily see why they will be suggesting a GTX980 for the full experience on a consumer rift, the step up in resolution is huge. I have already resolved to buy a new PC when that comes out, as much as it pains me

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •