Playstation 5 [PS5] [Release November 12 2020]

[Deleted member 13524]

I haven't seen Cerny or anyone else talk up what the PS5 design means for PSVR at all, no mention of "and now all existing PSVR titles get AA" or something along those lines.

They don't want to overwhelm people with too many new hardware choices at once, so they'll talk about PSVR2 after the PS5 has settled in.

They did the same in 2016 when the PS4 Pro launched so close to PSVR1.

 

[anexanhume]

The first promotes the feature better than the second.

So they should take a hit on every console sold on the chance it convinces someone to buy a VR headset? Why not just take a loss on the VR headset instead?

 

[Strange]

Why not put the 60 Ghz chip on a USB device that's sold with the PSVR2?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Why not put the 60 Ghz chip on a USB device that's sold with the PSVR2?

You'd want a larger antenna for 60Ghz, this is much easier to accommodate in the already-gigantic PS5 than any PSVR2 breakout box.

 

[Barrabas]

You'd want a larger antenna for 60Ghz, this is much easier to accommodate in the already-gigantic PS5 than any PSVR2 breakout box.

The higher the frequency the shorter antenna needed because of shorter wavelength.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

So they should take a hit on every console sold on the chance it convinces someone to buy a VR headset? Why not just take a loss on the VR headset instead?

What do you define as "taking a loss"?
Not every game will be using the haptic trigger features and higher precision rumble of the dual sense, not every game will be using raytracing, or make use of the full IO effective bandwidth. I bet very few games will even use or require the USB port, and I bet very few people will make use of the M.2 SSD slot.
All of these cost money to implement, so you could interpret them as taking a hit.

New console designs are also based on how hard the console makers want to push new features. It's not just a bean-counter approach on how many people used the old features on the old consoles.

At some point they draw the line on what comes integrated and what doesn't. A 60GHz radio for better wireless VR headset integration apparently didn't cross that line, but it's not that obvious to me that it shouldn't have, especially considering we don't know prices for anything.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

The higher the frequency the shorter antenna needed because of shorter wavelength.

This is absolutely true but EHF had relatively poor physical propogration and FOV remains an issue. Whilst you would expect it to be fine within the confine of a room, given the distance/orientation of the antenna relative to the position of PSVR2 headset, you'd want this to be as large as possible if the you see degree of mobility while wearing a VR headset - which is a limiting factor of the tethered PSVR. It's also an assumption that this band would only be used for communication and to also assisting positioning - which is traditionally where it's been used (e.g. radar).

 

[Strange]

This is absolutely true but EHF had relatively poor physical propogration and FOV remains an issue. Whilst you would expect it to be fine within the confine of a room, given the distance/orientation of the antenna relative to the position of PSVR2 headset, you'd want this to be as large as possible if the you see degree of mobility while wearing a VR headset - which is a limiting factor of the tethered PSVR. It's also an assumption that this band would only be used for communication and to also assisting positioning - which is traditionally where it's been used (e.g. radar).

Considering 60 Ghz has a wavelength of only 5mm, a 2 cm antenna would be more than sufficient. if you want better reception then up the power.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Considering 60 Ghz has a wavelength of only 5mm, a 2 cm antenna would be more than sufficient. if you want better reception then up the power.

A 2cm antenna to communicate at high bandwidth with a theoretical PSVR2 headset at 4-6m range at 180 FOV? What material is your antenna, how much does it cost, how is it orientated? what is the power usage? and how are you ensuring the device the antenna is in is optically orientated?

And how much more power do you calculate to is required to compensate for the deficiencies for variety of issues of any of the above? Where is this power coming form. Finally, what's is your effective predicted FOV for the antenna?

 

[Lalaland]

True but if I stuff my PS5 antenna in a media centre lying horizontally under my tv between my PVR and myriad other metal lumps isn't my signal knackered anyway? My understanding is that these mm band frequencies are a fairly strict LoS only kind of thing, if it's on the end of a cord that is a lot easier to handle (especially for more unusual set ups like projectors et al)

 

[London Geezer]

True but if I stuff my PS5 antenna in a media centre lying horizontally under my tv between my PVR and myriad other metal lumps isn't my signal knackered anyway? My understanding is that these mm band frequencies are a fairly strict LoS only kind of thing, if it's on the end of a cord that is a lot easier to handle (especially for more unusual set ups like projectors et al)

Look at the size of it, you can probably pick up signals from far away galaxies.

 

[orangpelupa]

I hope it's not build in to PS5, and just use standard USB cables or USB dongle.

Then I'll be able to use PSVR2 on PS5 and PC.

Currently it's a total pain to properly setup psvr on pc

 

[orangpelupa]

True but if I stuff my PS5 antenna in a media centre lying horizontally under my tv between my PVR and myriad other metal lumps isn't my signal knackered anyway? My understanding is that these mm band frequencies are a fairly strict LoS only kind of thing, if it's on the end of a cord that is a lot easier to handle (especially for more unusual set ups like projectors et al)

Maybe it can pass thru woods, plastics, etc just fine?

Like with 5ghz wifi, it's abysmal in passing thru walls. But it pass thru woods, glass, etc just fine.

But with higher frequency, it'll be harder to pass thru more materials...

 

[Strange]

A 2cm antenna to communicate at high bandwidth with a theoretical PSVR2 headset at 4-6m range at 180 FOV? What material is your antenna, how much does it cost, how is it orientated? what is the power usage? and how are you ensuring the device the antenna is in is optically orientated?

And how much more power do you calculate to is required to compensate for the deficiencies for variety of issues of any of the above? Where is this power coming form. Finally, what's is your effective predicted FOV for the antenna?

You do know that the size of the antenna only has to be 1/2 the wavelength to be be effective, right? The other stuff are in the white paper.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

You do know that the size of the antenna only has to be 1/2 the wavelength to be be effective, right? The other stuff are in the white paper.

I'll be interested to read if this white paper is predicated on optimum environment - which white papers usual are - or is based on real world environments. I'm conscious you didn't answer any of the five questions I raised in my previous post. They are quite important.

 

[Barrabas]

To widen the 60 Ghz direction there are solutions like this

https://www.everythingrf.com/news/details/5358-New-Omni-Directional-Antenna-for-60-GHz-Applications

 

[anexanhume]

What do you define as "taking a loss"?
Not every game will be using the haptic trigger features and higher precision rumble of the dual sense, not every game will be using raytracing, or make use of the full IO effective bandwidth. I bet very few games will even use or require the USB port, and I bet very few people will make use of the M.2 SSD slot.
All of these cost money to implement, so you could interpret them as taking a hit.

New console designs are also based on how hard the console makers want to push new features. It's not just a bean-counter approach on how many people used the old features on the old consoles.

At some point they draw the line on what comes integrated and what doesn't. A 60GHz radio for better wireless VR headset integration apparently didn't cross that line, but it's not that obvious to me that it shouldn't have, especially considering we don't know prices for anything.

This kind of thinking leads to feature bloat. We had that console. It was called the PS3.

 

[Lalaland]

Maybe it can pass thru woods, plastics, etc just fine?

Like with 5ghz wifi, it's abysmal in passing thru walls. But it pass thru woods, glass, etc just fine.

But with higher frequency, it'll be harder to pass thru more materials...

Yeah to my understanding you can attenuate 60 Ghz pretty badly with sheets of paper. IIRC there was a picture of the side panels for the PS5 and they seemed like fairly normal plastic. 60 Ghz was I believe proposed for wireless HDMI at one point so perhaps it's OK with media centres over short ranges? Then again wireless HDMI isn't a thing so perhaps they couldn't overcome the challenges (which are different to its use in wireless VR to be fair).

 

[Deleted member 11852]

To widen the 60 Ghz direction there are solutions like this

There are always engineering solutions if you're willing to pay for them! I'd hazard that costs more than the PS5, though.

Like with 5ghz wifi, it's abysmal in passing thru walls. But it pass thru woods, glass, etc just fine.

60Ghz has very poor attenuation through wood, glass and most composits.

 

[Pete]

The camera by definition has line of sight to the headset. Isn’t that the ideal place for the antenna? What would be the drawbacks? Packaging (size of the camera box)? Latency? Surely not power draw, even if the 60GHz chip would be in the camera box and not a breakout box, right? The headset is wireless and thus doesn’t need an HDMI pass-through, so all that’s left for a breakout box is any potential extra processing that, like the 60GHz chip and camera, you wouldn’t really want to saddle every PS5 with if the expected attach rate is low.