Sony VR Headset/Project Morpheus/PlayStation VR

[Rurouni]

I love how Sony managed to start this counting subpixels thing years ago (when they started saying their TVs had 6million subpixels and therefore better than other 1080p TVs, something that's completely false), and that now we're still counting subpixels.

Gotta hand it to them, they're pretty genius.

For TV and phone, I don't really noticed the subpixel because I can't even discern a single pixel reliably on normal viewing distance. But when I use Google cardboard with my 1080p (rgb lcd) phone, yes, I noticed the subpixel. It isn't jarring, but definitely could use a boost in resolution. It is easy to imagine a display with pentile arrangement would look worse in the same situation.

 

[chris1515]

Yes Pentile is not very good for VR. Each VR hanset have some strong point and weakness. I think the Morpheus is a good choice coupled with PS4 limited power.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Mild correction - Pentile is perfectly suitable if the resolution is high enough. A 5" 4k Pentile screen displaying a 1080p image would probably look a lot better than a 1080p RGB display showing the same. As ever with resolution, it depends on the angular size of the (sub)pixels, which of course is greatly exacerbated with displays inches from one's face!

 

[chris1515]

Mild correction - Pentile is perfectly suitable if the resolution is high enough. A 5" 4k Pentile screen displaying a 1080p image would probably look a lot better than a 1080p RGB display showing the same. As ever with resolution, it depends on the angular size of the (sub)pixels, which of course is greatly exacerbated with displays inches from one's face!

But there is not 4k pentile OLED screen in current VR display. But on PC they will update the VR set more often and in two or three years it will maybe be a reality. Sony need to wait PS5 to do it.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

There isn't. I'm just correcting the absolute statements - by all means use relative ones. But a 1440p Pentile might well look better displaying a 1080p image than a 1080p RGB. I imagine the differences slight enough to be highly subjective.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Only the hardware rendering the image of a 1440p image is higher. So therefore a 1080p RGB screen is better since the rendering load is lower for a comparable IQ.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Obviously the ideal situation is having both a high resolution and an RGB screen.

 

[Gradthrawn]

EDIT: Already posted.

Tested interview with Richard Marks:

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Only the hardware rendering the image of a 1440p image is higher.

Render at 1080p, display on 1440p. Or another example - which is better, a 4k RGB matrix or a 1080p one? A 4k display will show a 1080p render at the same pixel fidelity (each discrete image value occupies the same angular FOV) but with 4x the pixel density and far reduced subpixel issues.

4k Pentile will look better than 1080p RGB (showing the same 1080p image). At 1080p, RGB looks better than Pentile. At 1440p, Pentile may look better in a VR headset. It may be highly subjective with some folk preferring one display over the other.

The assertion that Pentile is a bad choice for VR is erroneous. A high-enough resolution is a valid option.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

According to this link:

http://www.nouvoyance.com/technology.html

PenTile® technology renders the same resolution as RGB stripe with 33% fewer subpixels
The human eye perceives the resolution of the PenTile RGBW™ panel as the same as an equivalent RGB stripe panel, yet the PenTile® panel uses one-third fewer subpixels.

So presumably some pentile displays (of which there appear to be several), only have two subpixels. Which is fine for displays that are held a ft or more away, but for one that's against your face? I'd argue that your ability to determine those sub-pixels jump considerably when inches to your eyes and magnified with lenses.

If we consider the Morpheus as having 3 sub-pixels, then the total sub-pixels/frame is still less than the OR, until you consider the hz, by which time you're actually viewing more (sub)pixels/second.

Morpheus: 1920x1080, 120hz, total pixels = 2073600, total pixels/second = 248,832,000, total sub-pixels/frame = 6,220,800, total sub-pixels/second = 746,496,000

Oculus Rift: 2560x1440, 90hz, total pixels = 3,686,400, total pixels/second = 331,776,000, total sub-pixels/frame = 7,372,800, total sub-pixels/second = 663,552,000

Valve Vive: 2400x1080, 90hz, total pixels = 2,592,000, total pixels/second = 233,280,000, total sub-pixels/frame = 5,184,000, total sub-pixels/second = 466,560,000

So you could consider that in stills the OR is superior, but the Morpheus is better in motion and has a lower rendering load (esp. if you consider the interpolation - drastically so).

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Render at 1080p, display on 1440p. Or another example - which is better, a 4k RGB matrix or a 1080p one? A 4k display will show a 1080p render at the same pixel fidelity (each discrete image value occupies the same angular FOV) but with 4x the pixel density and far reduced subpixel issues.

4k Pentile will look better than 1080p RGB (showing the same 1080p image). At 1080p, RGB looks better than Pentile. At 1440p, Pentile may look better in a VR headset. It may be highly subjective with some folk preferring one display over the other.

The assertion that Pentile is a bad choice for VR is erroneous. A high-enough resolution is a valid option.

I'd argue that RGB > pentile at the same resolution. Possibly that a slightly higher resolution pentile is still< than RGB. I think the manufacturers should be aiming for RGB across the board.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

The number of subpixels really tells you nothing unless you know how many diamagnetic shifts the electrons undergo in generating the image

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'd argue that RGB > pentile at the same resolution.

That's not an argument because I said as much.

Possibly that a slightly higher resolution pentile is still< than RGB.

Right. I said this is probably subjective.

So you could consider that in stills the OR is superior, but the Morpheus is better in motion and has a lower rendering load (esp. if you consider the interpolation - drastically so).

This is getting into very silly comparison territory. What does subpixels/second have to do with pixel visibility? And what's stopping other people implementing frame interpolation in software, same as Morpheus?

One number that is meaningful is (sub)pixels per degree angular view. At 90 degrees horizontal FOV, 1080p RGB provides 64 subpixels per degree, 21 pixels per degree (each pixel is 30 arc minutes in size). At 90 degrees horizontal FOV, 1440p Pentile provides 57 subpixels per degree, yet 28 pixels per degree (each pixel is ~20 arc minutes in size). Ergo, 1440p clearly provides more overall image resolution, but the subpixels will be more obvious. This is also most notable with pure colours, where the distance between such pixels is doubled. Red is drawn every other pixel, so effectively 1280x720p resolution with lots of space between pixels on a pure red display.

Ultimately, the numbers tell us little.

 

[onQ]

From what I understand, every third sub-pixel on a pentile display is shared. So wouldn't you take the total pixels and multiply by 2.5 rather then by 2? The Morpheus device would simply be multiplied by 3, once for each sub-pixel.

6,480,000 for Vive instead of 5,184,000?

Edit: clarity.

No it's still 2 sub-pixels in each pixel. Pixel1 , Pixel2 , Pixel3

I love how Sony managed to start this counting subpixels thing years ago (when they started saying their TVs had 6million subpixels and therefore better than other 1080p TVs, something that's completely false), and that now we're still counting subpixels.

Gotta hand it to them, they're pretty genius.

Oh so it was just Sony Marketing huh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMOLED#Super_AMOLED_Plus

Super AMOLED Plus

The Samsung Galaxy S II, with a Super AMOLED Plus screen
Super AMOLED Plus, first introduced with the Samsung Galaxy S II and Samsung Droid Charge smartphones, is a branding from Samsung where the PenTile RGBG pixel matrix (2 subpixels) used in Super AMOLED displays has been replaced with a traditional RGB RGB (3 subpixels) arrangement typically used in LC displays. This variant of AMOLED is brighter and therefore more energy efficient than Super AMOLED displays[26] and produces a sharper, less grainy image because of the increased number of subpixels. In comparison to AMOLED and Super AMOLED displays, the Super AMOLED Plus displays are even more energy efficient and brighter. However, Samsung cited screen life and costs by not using Plus on the Galaxy S II's successor, the Samsung Galaxy S III.[18]

 

[Deleted member 86764]

This is getting into very silly comparison territory. What does subpixels/second have to do with pixel visibility?

I can't help but think Sony have thought very carefully about this and have implemented an elegant solution that has lower rendering requirements. hz and pixel arrangement are clearly important.

And what's stopping other people implementing frame interpolation in software, same as Morpheus?

Well, they'd need to change the screen to 120hz (ideally RGB too). Other than that - nothing.

 

[Scott_Arm]

It's on wikipedia, so it must be true.

 

[London Geezer]

No it's still 2 sub-pixels in each pixel. Pixel1 , Pixel2 , Pixel3



Oh so it was just Sony Marketing huh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMOLED#Super_AMOLED_Plus

Super AMOLED Plus

The Samsung Galaxy S II, with a Super AMOLED Plus screen
Super AMOLED Plus, first introduced with the Samsung Galaxy S II and Samsung Droid Charge smartphones, is a branding from Samsung where the PenTile RGBG pixel matrix (2 subpixels) used in Super AMOLED displays has been replaced with a traditional RGB RGB (3 subpixels) arrangement typically used in LC displays. This variant of AMOLED is brighter and therefore more energy efficient than Super AMOLED displays[26] and produces a sharper, less grainy image because of the increased number of subpixels. In comparison to AMOLED and Super AMOLED displays, the Super AMOLED Plus displays are even more energy efficient and brighter. However, Samsung cited screen life and costs by not using Plus on the Galaxy S II's successor, the Samsung Galaxy S III.[18]

Problem is that Sony (and I'm sure others too after them) were touting the 6 megapixels story on their 1080p LCD TVs, implying they would have more resolution. So yeah, it was all a bit of embellishment to say the least.

 

[onQ]

It's on wikipedia, so it must be true.

No I was showing him that Samsung said it & it wasn't just something that Sony was using for marketing.


1080P RGB has 2,073,600 Red , Green & Blue pixels while 1080P pentile RGBG has 2,073,600 Green & 1,036,800 Red & Blue.

It's not a marketing trick

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I can't help but think Sony have thought very carefully about this and have implemented an elegant solution that has lower rendering requirements.

And the others in this field haven't? They just grabbed components at random? While, again, the rendering requirements are decoupled from the display resolution. You don't have to render native res. A 1440p RGB display would be better for Sony to display a 1080p game render than 1080p RGB.

 

[orangpelupa]

but we dont know its better or not (rendering non native 1080p on 1440p vs native 1080p on 1080p). What im afraid is something like what happen with nintendo games that looks horrid in non native screen although in the same physical dimension. Try playing NDS games on 3DS.