Let me describe the level of this “not that straight forward”. The GPU spends around 11ms building a frame to be displayed. The CPU simultaneously prepares what work changes for the next frame. They synchronize during a window, perhaps 10µs wide. This synchronization is affected by CPU performance, on the order of around 4ns or so, but far more by bus clocks, possible switch latencies, and more than anything power states. A CPU that is actively looking for the event will react far better than one that was asleep. So CPU tuning helps (which is why we have e.g. game mode), but as far as VR timing goes, the GPU performance is the deciding factor for at least a hundred times as much time as the CPU is. CPU tuning can’t get you more than a percent of improvement.
There are workloads that behave differently, of course. Those are the ones that have such malfunctioning CPU loads they cannot perform decently on any VR system (nor, arguably, non-VR - it’s the “decently” line that shifts, not the performance). Apparently quite a few sims fit in that bracket. At the level of simulations they do, this is downright embarrassing. Simulations that actually are heavy workloads, by contrast, are run on GPUs and rarely in real time. This is because they’re also a hundred times or more faster at such work than CPUs.