Sony VR Headset/Project Morpheus/PlayStation VR
One year of mass production before release? I'd very much doubt that.
esp since the breakout box changed multiple times since then.
Already got mine in...just hope I don't have to cancel it due to the price :|
well if i'm right and its $350ish and launches in the fall you have like 6 months you can put $25 or $50 away a month.
I went to Disney for Halloween the last few years and got these free Halloween party cards that I've been selling on ebay for $50 a pop. Apparently they are hard to get since you had to pay to go to the event (although the event is held like 2 or 3 times a week for a month) So that will help me afford the rift without the better half getting mad at me for dropping $600 our of no where
If the 1.4x render target recommendation is accurate, it means we can assume the optics are also 1.4x magnification in the center. So there would be no advantages from the optics profile.
The efficiency advantages can only be optimizations exclusively possible with PSVR, excluding anything that can be done everywhere, like fixed foveation, hidden mesh area, etc..:
1. External audio processing, unified memory, and low level API would free up the CPU a bit.
2. +25% from lower resolution, but still better IQ compared to pentile 1200p.
3. +50% for most games that are 60->120 (compared to 90 native)
4. +30%??? from fixed hardware and low-level optimization advantages, no idea what this number should be.
-> some say it's 0%
-> Richard Marks reported 60% from middleware devs (context was just "don't assume it's like-for-like")
-> Phil Spencer said XB1 is as fast as a $700 GPU at the same resolution, so that would be +300% for Xbox. (he probably misspoke, bad messaging is the norm for MS)
-> if there's a consensus for some more reasonable number, I'm all ears
That would be around 2.4x for most games (with caveats), and the rest would be 1.6x if they need native 90fps.
Is this making sense?
The efficiency advantages can only be optimizations exclusively possible with PSVR, excluding anything that can be done everywhere, like fixed foveation, hidden mesh area, etc..:
1. External audio processing, unified memory, and low level API would free up the CPU a bit.
2. +25% from lower resolution, but still better IQ compared to pentile 1200p.
3. +50% for most games that are 60->120 (compared to 90 native)
4. +30%??? from fixed hardware and low-level optimization advantages, no idea what this number should be.
-> some say it's 0%
-> Richard Marks reported 60% from middleware devs (context was just "don't assume it's like-for-like")
-> Phil Spencer said XB1 is as fast as a $700 GPU at the same resolution, so that would be +300% for Xbox. (he probably misspoke, bad messaging is the norm for MS)
-> if there's a consensus for some more reasonable number, I'm all ears
That would be around 2.4x for most games (with caveats), and the rest would be 1.6x if they need native 90fps.
Is this making sense?
I'm not sure why that's presented as a given. From what I've read the general consensus is that PSVR will deliver lower image quality than OR/Vive. e.g.
http://www.gizmag.com/playstation-vr-review-hands-on-2016/41286/
Yeah he later retracted the statement on Twitter admitting that he was wrong.
"The team spent time iterating on the headset’s comfort, testing "goggle" prototypes that strapped most of the weight to a player’s face before settling on the current "visor" design that places more weight on the player’s forehead, with additional weight in the back to counterbalance the unit. Takahashi says that adding this weight in the back makes the headset feel lighter overall, because the player doesn’t notice a strain in any one area."
Nice article:
http://www.polygon.com/2016/3/9/11174194/the-making-of-playstation-vr
Nice article:
http://www.polygon.com/2016/3/9/11174194/the-making-of-playstation-vr
Carmack, who works for Oculus as a designer, and who was hired for PR purposes as well, has this to say:
https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/702561430151639040
he prefers
(2560*1440=)
3686400 RGB pixels, to (4096*2160=)8847360 pentile pixels
So John Carmack himself, prefers RGB pixels, even if the amount is 58% less than the 4K pentile alternative.
Now lets do the math for the upcoming VR devices:
PSVR (1920*1080) 2073600, Vive/Rift (2160*1200=) 2592000. In the PSVR case, the amount of pixels is only 20% less...
So while people might claim a lot of things on the internet, which is their right, i agree, ask yourself:
What would John Carmack prefer?
I think the better IQ compared to pentile 1200p is a given at this point, yes. Behind the scenes, Carmack got in trouble for stating the obvious, but he is a strong man, and he can take it
There's no doubt RGB stripes are ideal. But unless there's been some recent development, real RGB stripes are not possible anymore with oled at high pixel pitch. There's some major limitations with the area required around each emitting dot, (something about the mask used to apply the oled stuff by deposition?). Whatever RGB structure they used is probably a weird one on an orthogonal pattern like samsung's diamond etc... I made some drawings of ideas a few months ago.
Also if sony targeted a lower price point from the start (which was explained in the interview that Andrew House himself gave them a low price target to avoid a repetition of the PS3's launch), why would they have access to an RGB structure while the higher priced heasets wouldn't? In theory the playfield should be equal, as neither is making their own panel, they have to source them, with a contract for custom specs.
Also if sony targeted a lower price point from the start (which was explained in the interview that Andrew House himself gave them a low price target to avoid a repetition of the PS3's launch), why would they have access to an RGB structure while the higher priced heasets wouldn't? In theory the playfield should be equal, as neither is making their own panel, they have to source them, with a contract for custom specs.
Those are on silicon, not glass, it's very expensive and the maximum size of the display is limited to... (wait for it) 0.7 inch.
D
Deleted member 86764
Guest
Check this thread from around post 890ish onwards. We discussed sub pixels and pentile displays and whether they'd make VR headsets worse.
When they're all released I hope that we can get a totally non-biased view on the display and optics, because there's definitely an argument to say that the pentile displays aren't a great idea due to both the rendering requirements and the lower perceived resolution following magnification. And possibly some of the artifacting that you have referred to.
I do worry a little about DigitalFoundry doing it since they have a strong PC bias.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Stripes are so last season. Polka dots are hot right now.
Ah yes...the sub-1000 posts early days, that was so long ago, you can see I was all happy and naive about specs and magical features.
And oculus was going to be 4K for $300, launching in 2015.
Last edited:
Similar threads
