1. OCAU Merchandise now available! Check out our 20th Anniversary Mugs, Classic Logo Shirts and much more! Discussion here.
    Dismiss Notice

Which VR headset?

Discussion in 'Video Cards & Monitors' started by summoner, Jul 9, 2018.

  1. Nethiuz

    Nethiuz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2019
    Messages:
    2,472
    Location:
    QLD
    Always up for wireless, i mostly sim seated but the cable is annoying.
    Batteries are the problem and i think might be for decades, if they could create better battery technology i can guarantee they would (some conspiracy people think it's burried), nobody is happy about their phone needing charging daily it's been the most lagging behind tech in the world of gadgets and is just not even close to up to spec.
     
  2. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Location:
    Brisbane
    This is a poor way to look at it in my opinion.

    Inside out tracking is flawed, but good enough for cheap VR. Inside out tracking will never take over in its current form, its possible they will think of a better implementation without those flaws.

    My guess is that they will find an easier way to have base stations or just have a hybrid solution.

    Tethered VR is going to be around for a long long time, at least until we have a displayport cable that can handle 12k @ 200hz.


    The mistake everyone makes is they look at current gen VR and think, that can be wireless with X tech, so VR will be wireless in X years.

    The problem with this assumption is that VR tech is moving much faster then wireless tech, its moving faster then displayport/HDMI tech.

    Because of this, you will never find anything close to current gen VR in your headset, right now a 2080ti is not powerful enough.


    I'll also mention that VR can be a bad experience when not run at very high refresh rates, or it can look disappointing in low resolution. I think VR tech is always going to be pushing forward very heavily due to current limitations.
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2020
  3. Sciflyer

    Sciflyer Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2002
    Messages:
    5,073
    Location:
    Perf
    I suspect anyone thinking this has never actually used a Rift S for any length of time. The additional cost, complexity and inflexibility of basestation systems for that extra 0.1% of coverage doesnt add up and if youre making the assumption that because the current high-end headsets use basestations that means inside-out is not good enough you need to consider that 1) The Vive Pro predates inside-out tracking tech, and 2) Valve was tied to the basestation path with its legacy HTC links for the Index. Neither can be construed as a sign that basestation systems are the future path for VR.

    The overwhelming feeling from Oculus Quest owners (who have sampled tethered VR before) is that the lack of cables is really a big deal and a bit of a gamechanger. Likewise Rift S (and probably Cosmos owners, if you can find one ;) all say that being base station-free is a big plus.

    I game from a laptop, the ability to run VR sessions anywhere in the house withut having to move any fixed hardware is a huge plus for me rather than being tied to a cramped office/study. I would never go back to a base station system.
    What sort of grunt does the most powerful NUC have these days? Just need a way to power one of those for a reasonable length of time, strap it to your head and youre good to go :)
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2020
  4. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Location:
    Brisbane
    The valve index uses base stations and is also the recent mainstream headset available.

    Of course but this is not because of base stations, its wireless. But on the other hand I would bet money they would use tethered if they had the Pimax 8k X for example, but its also a lot more expensive.

    All I'm saying is that there is a huge difference in the headsets, and a huge difference to how real everything feels.

    Not sure if you are joking :wired:

    The most expensive intel Nuc which is much larger then a regular NUC is miles away from being able to power any modern VR headset. It can barely power a 1080p game.

    We just won't see a comparable product within this decade, VR is advancing too quickly.

    At 12k 200hz our eyes have diminishing returns if you go further, thats where it might start to catch up.

    I'll also mention that I'm not saying everyone should go out and buy an expensive setup, I'm just saying that the proper VR experience is hindered by cost, and it will be for a long time because they don't currently make the 12k 200hz screens they need.
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2020
  5. proffesso

    proffesso Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2002
    Messages:
    9,104
    Location:
    Watsonia, Melbourne
    ive used a hololens2 with the cloud rendering service over 5g...it was really interesting, and the Pico Neo 2 eye that I am working with at the moment has 5G streaming from PC, so tetherless can be done for most applications. offload the heavy backend rendering to much higher end machines, but keep the UI and lightweight stuff local...very interesting solution.

    the varjo on our Sim rig has dual display cables (4 displays internal) and requires a beast to run...but that's extremely special case, that'll

    while I was at zero latency, we looked at a bunch of wi-gig solutions too (I still have a vive pro eye wireless here we don't use anymore) and it was just too spotty at the time to deploy for 8+ users

    12k, 200hz...isn't as hard as what it seems, since you can only make out detail in a concentrated area, then foveated rendering (UE5's new rendering engine will be very handy here) has massive impact. so your only really rendering 2-4k worth of meaningful pixels
     
    Duff Man, Nethiuz and PabloEscobar like this.
  6. Sciflyer

    Sciflyer Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2002
    Messages:
    5,073
    Location:
    Perf
    sorry i was forgetting about the wireless streaming to headset option - that looks like a good way forward for now, agreed.
     
  7. Nethiuz

    Nethiuz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2019
    Messages:
    2,472
    Location:
    QLD
    If they can work foveated rendering with eye tracking (I'd hate to look around and see blurry as i tend to instead of turn head so much) then it would help greatly. Keen as to give it a try in future gens.
     
  8. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Its a great idea in theory but I think people also forget that we can see a lot of detail with our eyes, and we have a large field of vision.

    Any implementation that doesn't have huge visual downsides would have to be very conservative and will also rely on the game implementation to react fast enough.

    I don't know about you guys but if I move my eyes and see a blurry low resolution picture that morphs into a high resolution image, that is unsatisfactory for me unless i'm in something like Google Earth (Where this basically happens anyway when you move your head)

    And if its conservative then we won't save much GPU power anyway and we'll see need our Nvidia 5080 Ti's
     
    Nethiuz likes this.
  9. proffesso

    proffesso Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2002
    Messages:
    9,104
    Location:
    Watsonia, Melbourne
    ideally it'll driver level based, not game. since its essentially a new type of display.



    and you don't see a lot of detail with your eyes, your peripheral vision is pretty poor. you can even test this on a desktop monitor.

    VRSS is another tech coming into play now that can also make use of eyetracking, so combine that with foveated rendering and you have a pretty damn good combo. another great example would be attracting....concentrating rays around the area of interest

    I've used foveated rendering, im using it more or less now with the Varjo headset, just as a brute-force static hardware solution. small, fine pitch panel in the middle, larger panel outside for peripheral. if you don't go outside the "sweet spot" you cant tell.
     
    Nethiuz likes this.
  10. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Location:
    Brisbane
    The problem is that while we don't see a lot of detail, that doesn't mean that things are not noticeable in our peripheral vision.

    The quality reduction would have to be small enough that its not noticeable, and it would have to be a very smooth transition, especially for some games with less movement.

    I definitely think medium graphics in the peripheral vision with ultra high in the middle would work, but that has to be game based. Doing it resolution based, which you could do driver based is going to have some really bad results in some situations, aliasing looks horrible in certain games and situations that you would notice it in peripheral vision, for example a fence.

    I definitely think its a solution I just don't think its going to bring benefits so large that we can increase the resolution/refresh rate that much, and really the only headset so far tha really benefits is the Pimax, the FoV on other headsets is too small.

    I'll also mention that matching the refresh rate can often be limited by the CPU which foveated rendering/eye tracking doesn't generally help with.
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2020
  11. Nethiuz

    Nethiuz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2019
    Messages:
    2,472
    Location:
    QLD
    Fully agree that is has to be not noticeable, i am a nut for perfection when it comes to image quality, (hence the rage about amazon prime not having 4k on PC in other thread).
    If done right i am keen for any amount of extra FPS, i struggle to keep simulators locked to 45FPS (AWS for index?) for smooth gameplay, sometimes i just need 3 FPS more. and turning down settings is like someone dying, i can't have that loss.

    As far as 5080 Ti goes by the time that comes around VR will be 50k with 300 FOV and the GPU won't run it :p
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2020
    bart5986 likes this.
  12. walker_2003

    walker_2003 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Messages:
    12,566
    Location:
    Canberra
  13. proffesso

    proffesso Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2002
    Messages:
    9,104
    Location:
    Watsonia, Melbourne
    guaranteed you wouldn't notice.

    I've run quite a few people through testing at the office...who specialise in graphics and vr, who were blown away with how little they actually noticed detail.

    Here's some more info on it -

    https://developer.nvidia.com/gtc/2020/video/s22029



     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2020
    Nethiuz and bart5986 like this.
  14. Nethiuz

    Nethiuz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2019
    Messages:
    2,472
    Location:
    QLD
    Way too much $$ for 110 FOV, i can't believe most manufacturers are pushing res so hard but not the most needed thing Larger FOV. Hats off to Pimax for pushing it and hopefully that forces others to do the same.
     
    bart5986 likes this.
  15. walker_2003

    walker_2003 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Messages:
    12,566
    Location:
    Canberra
    But are the pimax any good? I heard overall better off with the big guys? Might have been regarding software and tracking not so great?
     
  16. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Location:
    Brisbane
    The software has more bugs then Valve Index, which is expected.

    The more important question is if you want to spend money on a headset that is vastly inferior to the Pimax?

    Its not like a monitor where a 1080p screen is good enough for everything and anything higher is a luxury.

    The minimum headset I would buy today is the Pimax 8k X which is very expensive.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2020
  17. Nethiuz

    Nethiuz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2019
    Messages:
    2,472
    Location:
    QLD
    No idea Bart has one so he can speak for it. ^

    I would love to get Pimax FOV into another brands quality software and hardware, i can imagine 180+ FOV would be impressive, i am in awe at Index 130 over my rifts 110, going back is like putting on binoculars.
    I've seen around the interwebs plenty of people having their Pimax physically crack and there was some black dot issue?
     
  18. walker_2003

    walker_2003 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Messages:
    12,566
    Location:
    Canberra
    Humm the 5k seems to put even the index to shame which is regarded as the benchmark. The 8k is pricey but my concern is good luck getting playable frames on 8k res.
     
  19. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Thats not how VR works exactly.

    Once you have something like an Nvidia 1080, it doesn't matter what resolution the headset is, you'll get huge benefits from lack of screen door effect, and you can run your 12k headset at 5k.

    The 1080 is powerful enough that you won't suffer from terrible aliasing, but obviously a 2080ti or even an imaginary 5080ti is going to be better, but not necessary to enjoy a high resolution headset.

    Also a huge reason why high resolution headsets are important are for VR... "Videos". Honestly if you've never used a super high resolution headset with a 6k resolution "video", then you are seriously missing out, its seriously one of the most amazing things ever.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2020
    Nethiuz likes this.
  20. Nethiuz

    Nethiuz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2019
    Messages:
    2,472
    Location:
    QLD
    I have to admit the specs on the 5k and 8k are amazing, i seriously considered one but a lot of poor reviews and minor issues kinda kept me away. I am sure i would still be pretty happy with either. The Index just keeps getting such good raps and i actually really like the speakers on it. I thought i would hate them.
    The only downside i can personally find with the Index is it can get a bit hot on your face, however it is extremely comfortable and has a great adjustment system. If i lived somewhere cold i might even call that issue a blessing but not the case.

    Some StarVR i was reading is apparently the Pimax 8K specs (or better) and super duper quality but it's $3,700 USD.
    https://www.starvr.com/ - 210-degree horizontal FOV, 130-degree vertical FOV
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2020

Share This Page

Advertisement: