Nvidia 3090 vs 4090 VR Benchmarks & Sim Comparisons | 8kx | Quest Pro | Quest 2 | Pico 3 | Pico 4

[@spandexunderwear3630]

The reason you got a 144% increase in the OpenVR benchmark with the Quest 2 with Link is because you ran the benchmark on the 4090 at a lower resolution. And you made the same mistake with the Quest Pro in Virtual Desktop where it was135% faster etc. If you look in the video you can see the "Render Resolution" and in a lot of the 4090 tests you showed you are running a much lower resolution than what you ran on the 3090 making the results of those benchmarks practically useless to compare.

[@AdamsSIMporium]

Yeah melikem1770 also pointed it out, not sure how that happened, but you're totally right!

[@spandexunderwear3630]

@@AdamsSIMporium my bad! I scrolled through the comments and couldn't find anyone pointing it out, but I guess I must've missed it.

[@AdamsSIMporium]

***UPDATE*** I didn't realize I had Parallel Projection turn on for ACC, which is obviously a huge performance drain and not needed for ACC. With it off and all settings on Epic, DLSS on quality, I can push the VR pixel density up to 120 and basically still keep to 75fps in the 8kx 99% of the time! As always, gameplay is much smoother in the headset than in the video.

[@cb4963]

where do i turn off the parallel projection ? in the vr client, openxr/steamvr or in den acc menu ? i cant find it :(

[@AdamsSIMporium]

@@cb4963 In PiTool or Pimax Client, it's a box you can check/uncheck. Only use it on games that NEED it as it's a big performance drain.

[@cb4963]

@@AdamsSIMporium thank you :) so the games will probably tell me when they need it, right ? and thanks again.

[@AdamsSIMporium]

@@cb4963 They will not tell you exactly, but you will know if you see culling at the edges or anything weird going on. For most games, check this spreadsheet: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11ljKyF0eMgY3qqZWjVVBvI0brfv9IxocXjroYtJyTlY/edit#gid=0

[@cb4963]

oh wow, thank you so much

[@bhumelti636]

yessss i’ve been lookin for 8kx benchmarks on 4090

[@Goryglory0209]

Missing the 4090 I have the exact build. This review is like what I was looking for., Although i pulled the plug on PSVR2 to play GT7 and not be bothered about tweaking quest 2 and PC for hours before playing

[@AdamsSIMporium]

I hear ya! VR Sim Racing is generally 60% settings faff, 20% rig faff, and 20% on track or so lol (not scientific but you get my point), but it's all part of the hobby. Being able to just hop in the PSVR2 and have a completely smooth and reliable experience, possibly graphically greater in VR than any PC sim currently, without any faff at all is awesome.

[@davidwalters6695]

Great review Adam.

[@melikem1770]

What 😳? By 4090 resolution is totally wrong and much less. By 3090 full resolution! Of course 4090 will faster. Quest 2 oculus link by 3090 - 2064x2096 Quest 2 oculus link by 4090 - 1824x1840 Resolution is different

[@AdamsSIMporium]

That's a good spot, but I have no explanation as to how or why. I hadn't changed anything, the only difference I can see it a later GPU driver on the 4090, but I can't see how that would have such an affect. It appears true for more than just the Quest 2 Link. Any ideas?

[@melikem1770]

@@AdamsSIMporium no any idea. Something mysterieus.

[@runerasmussen2193]

Yes, res means the world in this test - using the equivalent of SteamVR res 100% or 150% greatly affects the test. RTX 4090 is an unsupported gpu by Meta, maybe explaining why it may be defaulting to very low res. But great work, just make sure res is the same, or the results are no longer valid. Maybe easier just to lower res for the 3090 if the unsupported 4090 does not respond to certain settings. 2c.

[@Eduard_Kolesnikov]

Lol 😂

[@mulkmulkmulk]

good tests ty!

[@speedvr829]

Hi What quest pro link settings you using? I have a pro and 4090 with 10700k at 5G. Great videos. Bboy.

[@AdamsSIMporium]

Hey, well I think would of been default settings, if that helps lol. I've hardly used Link much at all tbh, always used Virtual Desktop with Quest 2 and Pro, even when sat down near PC most of the time.

[@kevinbrook7033]

Great video Adam, I've got a 13900k, 4090 system on its way from Stormforce next week so can't wait to try. Did the Quest Pro's excellent link performance in that VR benchmark translate to the games as well, specifically MSFS as that's what I've bought the 4090 system for? Ddi you return your Quest pro in the end? How does it compare to the Pico's and Pimax 8KX?

[@AdamsSIMporium]

This is going to sound crazy, but I haven't actually tried any games with the Pro on Link, I will now though you mention it lol!!! I will reply again once I have had a chance, or if it's worth it, make a little video. I will be returning the Pro and Pico 4, again I'm considering a video on them sharing my thoughts. The pixel inversion in the Pro is killer for me, I guess many people can't see it or do not have it, I can't stand it. It's a shame because the lenses are out of this world, I have never seen a clearer display. Moving your eyes from the real world across to in the Pro is like you are looking out a window, there is zero distortion or blurriness as you transition. The Pico 4 will be returned too. I just don't think I can accept the lower brightness and saturation from the Quests.

[@kevinbrook7033]

@@AdamsSIMporium I've been loving my Pro with PCVR link so far! I've tried to see the pixel inversion but not sure if I have it. I did notice some horizonal lines recently when looking at a ceiling that was a kind of brown colour. Moving my head slowly up and down I had some horizontal lines that appeared. My Reverb G2 has it much worse and visible more when looking at blue backgrounds, so bright skies. That's the only time I've even noticed it on the Quest Pro though and it didn't bother me at all so not sure if pixel inversion is something else?

[@sebastienman5659]

Any news about your Pico 4 ? 3rd one the good one ?

[@AdamsSIMporium]

Ah yes, well third one is certainly a lot better. No mura really, well maybe a little but you would have to look for it now, whereas before it was all too apparent. Tiny bit of pixel inversion, but again probably would usually go unnoticed by most people. So it is indeed infinitely better, and yet I shall be returning it lol. The lenses are pretty good, but not glare free, it's just different, and in some situations worse than Quest 2. Also I find it not as comfy, though tbf no doubt VR Cover will sort that out. The main issue is I find the image rather dull and lacklustre compared to the Quest 2. Plus my Quest has the Elite Battery strap so I already have a better battery life. So the Pico 4 isn't bad, I can understand people choosing it over the Quest 2, it's just not for me.

[@martinmccloskey4206]

what happened your areo man ? you sell it im still debating getting one .supposed to be great with 4090

[@justaguydoinstuff]

Wait for the Pimax Crystal coming out very soon. Higher PPD, built in headphones, interchangeable lenses and a wider field of view for less money...

[@AdamsSIMporium]

I was unlucky, I had three and each had issues, in the end I took the refund and am waiting on the 12k. I believe they were starting up a new system though where replacement units could be quality checked further to ensure it had no issues. Still an awesome headset and worth considering in a sale or second hand, but personally I will wait in the 12k. Even the Crystal looks like a better proposition right now thought too really.

[@AdamsSIMporium]

@@justaguydoinstuff Yeah, probably this.

[@justaguydoinstuff]

Oh and I forgot wireless and hot swap battery as well...if it's good, it's a no brainer over the Aero.

[@mike_33gt]

have you heard anything about latency with 4090 and simracing titles?

[@AdamsSIMporium]

No I haven't and I haven't experienced any myself.

[@mike_33gt]

@@AdamsSIMporium You tried it with Pico 4 as well? I cannot finde a slide for it? I wanted to buy Pico 4 but heard now that is has latency of around 50m.. that would be really bad with many cars around you in ACC or iracinng

[@mh7711]

​@@mike_33gt50ms latency? this would be very Bad, even 10ms additional latency is Bad, you will realise it directly.

[@mike_33gt]

How was your experience with 4090 and Pico 3 neo link via DP port?

[@mike_33gt]

Pico 3 neo link plus 4090? Good?

[@AdamsSIMporium]

Yes the Pico 3 with its DP connection is still very good and you can pick them up pretty cheap. Of course a 4090 benefits any headset, but as the Pico 3 isn't a crazy high resolution like the Crystal for example, you can really push the graphics settings up.

[@mike_33gt]

@@AdamsSIMporium graphic settings in the game right?

[@AdamsSIMporium]

@@mike_33gt Yes, and of course you could turn up super sampling in Steam. At this point in time thought it's probably best to wait for the Quest 3 release and see what all the reviews have to say.

[@johnmann7o2]

Lol quest 2 link crazy increase is due to the lower resolution. Check again. Suffice to say these tests are affected by their resolution. Informative test though!

[@AdamsSIMporium]

Good point, highest setting in VD Is higher resolution than Link. I think it's fair to compare them though as most people will opt for the highest setting in VD, and many (not everyone) will use Link as is. But you're right, cheers!

[@counterdebate]

This sounds stupid but I totally did not realise the Quest 2 is faster with a cable 🤦🏻‍♂️ now which cable to buy? 😍

[@AdamsSIMporium]

Lol yeah if you're playing seated it's absolutely worth it. As for cable, I don't know. I have a short suitable USB cable which is long enough to test stuff, but impossible to play with unless I am basically hunched over the PC. That said, as Kevin pointed out above, I need to try MSFS in the Pro with cable.

[@matthewscarborough4920]

Just tried this on a 2080ti, i91000k and low vr settings I’m lucky to get 33fps on track alone on ACC such a shame unless have got sone really bad settings ha