Wow! This is intense. At first it didn’t play properly (way too fast). I fixed it by changing my video driver settings to “Use the 3D app setting”, instead of “Fast”. It had been running at 604 fps and was about 10 times too quick. (Instructions would flash by, so fast you couldn’t read them.)
2 Likes
“More Tea Vicar?” 
1 Like
Minotaur Rescue VR is a free dl on their site too if you were interested 
http://minotaurproject.co.uk/Minotaur/lsvr.php
1 Like
A good way to look at it is to think about what a thread is actually doing. It basically uses the resources of a core to run a program. If you have 8-cores/8-threads, then it means that each thread has its own core. If you have 8-cores/16-threads, then it means that each core is being shared by two threads. Having more threads is mainly useful if you aren’t fully utilizing the cores as-is and is (to a degree) like having twice as many small cores.
However, having more threads (or cores for that matter) is only useful if the program you are running supports multi-threaded workloads. Support is getting better but generally games will run better on CPUs with better single-core performance. That is why Intel is still used for high-tier gaming rigs… even though Threadripper blows them out of the water for multi-threaded applications.
1 Like
Although very informative, I’m not sure if its helped me as I still feel lost :-s 
So just loads of cores and loads of threads would be best then? in the above scenario neither fits well into that so still difficult to decide…
6-cores and 12-threads or 8-cores and 8-threads?
I’m guessing still then 8-cores and 8-threads as its more cores?
IMHO what is important for VR is the overall system performance like:
- for PSU - stable voltage supply, more rails are always better, x 2 - 2.5 wattage more than overall system requirements (CPU +GF +HDDs+ cooling + anything extra);
- for mainboard - number of PCI-E lines and their performance (for graphic card OC), processor OC capabilities (how fast the cores can run), memory OC capabilities, stable power, so the higher chipset level plus good extra OC options (by the manufacturer) are the must;
- for CPU - single core performance plus large cache size are most important , OC to 4.7 - 4.9 GHz should be doable depending on cooling options, INTEL i7 or RYZEN 7 or even 5 series have more than enough cores for comfortable gaming;
- for memory - 16 Gb DDR dual channel is enough, quad channel (like LGA2011) is not proven to improve VR performance, memory clocks and OC capabilities are most important (higher memory clocks like 3200 - 3600 is a must);
- for storage - M.2 (NVMe) disks are better than SSD, SSD are better than hybrid HDDs, so M.2 (NVMe) for system data plus SSD or hybrid for other data depending on your budget, or only M.2 for everything if you have money to burn, though you have to be careful with second etc M.2 because of it can slow down PCI-E bus depending on the mainboard;
- for graphics - 1080Ti (11Gb) or 2080 (8GB) or 2080Ti (11Gb) based on your choice, 4K or 5K+ VR gaming can get close to 6-8Gb memory utilisation, 1080Ti in 4K gaming is on par with 2080 and 10 - 15 % slower than 2080Ti, but 2080 and 2080Ti maybe will have some advantage over 1080Ti in future due to the new features (not implemented in games or used by Pimax yet, but potentially can lower the overall graphics card load in fixed FOV scenarios, ray tracing etc);
- cooling - water cooling is better, but more expensive, for me closed systems looks better, like Corsair i80 for CPU plus EK 140mm radiator + graphic card waterblock, or EK MLC AIO with 360mm radiator with CPU and graphic card waterblocks;
6 Likes
Hard to disagree with anything you said.
2 Likes
I agree with your list, but it’s important to distinguish between the two M.2 protocols. NVMe is MUCH faster (~6x) than SATA and M.2 comes in both “flavors”. NVMe is more expensive, but worth it, imo.
3 Likes
I would add that if you aren’t having a burning need to upgrade, might be a decent idea to wait until summer to see what AMD puts out as the Ryzen 3k series.
The keynote seemed to demonstrate their IPC as being quite a bit improved.
It’s what I’m doing anyway.
3 Likes
Indeed the R5 3000 series seems to have increased speed & has the threads of the r7 2700.
Thank you! Edited the post.
2 Likes
I’m still liking the speculation/rumors of a 12/16 core myself. If the 16 core could break 4.5Ghz I’d be quite impressed.
2 Likes
Isn’t it the R 5 3000 said to be 8 core 16 threads & the r7 3000 12 core 24 threads?
But yeah should be interesting to see if the leak hype is legit or not. 
Yup, the scope of it is that the arrangement of the die(s) on the R5 sample they used in the keynote leaves space for another 8 core die on the chip. AMD’s CEO was pretty coy about it when asked. I just want them to take my 
1 Like