I'm using a Track IR 5 since many years and there is a frustrating subject that comes often over the internet and I experienced too : the refresh rate difference between Track IR and the rendered game.
Track IR have a refresh rate of 120 Hz, which is very nice.
I always found that 60 Hz (gaming insdustry "standard") is not enough in term of reactivity time, and having a nervous FPS game like Quake 3, recents Doom etc. running at 100 Hz or more is really a game changer.
As reactivity is a key point for head tracking to avoid motion sickness and headhaches, 120 Hz capability for the Track IR is a very good point.
The thing is, something is happening when a game (like DCS or MSFS) is running at a different multiple of the frequency and makes big jittering in the head movements in the game. So, simple example :
- A flight sims runs between 105 - 115 fps
- Track IR runs at 120 Hz constant
THE current "solution" that all people seems to agree and works is to cap the rendering game fps to a multiple of 120 and make sure you NEVER go below. Like 20, 30, 40, 60 and... 120.
It works, and really, DCS capped at 60 fps with a Track IR "feels" clearly smoother than capped at 115 fps. However, 60 Hz is... quite low in term of reactivity/input lag between head movements and render in games.
I made another experiment and lowered all DCS settings and lowered the resolution from UHD to FHD, and then I capped the sim at 120 Hz. Result was the best experience I ever had in term of input lag. You really have the feeling that all your head moves are instantaneously rendered in the game.
As many years ago, most of flat screens used to be capped at 60 Hz so it wasn't a problem, but today, as we have quite powerful computers and powerful screens (UHD 120 Hz...), it's quite a shame and frustrating to cap DCS at 60 fps while I know my computer can render it at ~105 fps at lowest.
It would be so great that you could add an option to also cap the Track IR refresh rate to something between 60 and 120 (huge interval...). Even only one option at 90 Hz would be a huge improvement. Providing multiple options to adapt to modern monitor and harware like 72 Hz (144/2), 75 Hz, 90 Hz, 100 Hz would be so nice, and the holy graal would be something tied to the screen current refresh rate (for gsync / vsync screens).
But frankly, already few cap refresh rate options would be enough. As a developper, I'm pretty sure adding a small "wait" inside the main loop of Track IR is not a big deal at all. I'm pretty sure there is already a wait line of code to keep the steady 120 Hz updates in Windows.
