Jump to content

Valve Index Hands On


aileron

Recommended Posts

Yeah Oculus chose 80 Hz to keep performance close to the CV1, and it did good at that.

For myself I really can not discern a difference between the two regarding refresh rate, and I have compared them both pretty good that last week or so.

Don B

EVGA Z390 Dark MB | i9 9900k CPU @ 5.1 GHz | Gigabyte 4090 OC | 64 GB Corsair Vengeance 3200 MHz CL16 | Corsair H150i Pro Cooler |Virpil CM3 Stick w/ Alpha Prime Grip 200mm ext| Virpil CM3 Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Base w/ Alpha-L Grip| Point Control V2|Varjo Aero|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@Nagilem

in one of the video reviews ( I don´t remember which one ), someone mentioned, that he´s running the Reverb fine at 60Hz.

The Reverb runs at 90Hz natively, but there is the option in windows under the settings for windows mixed reality to set the WMR headset at 60Hz, so I thought, this setting was mentioned.

 

I´m also not sure, if you could directly compare the performance needed to process a supersampled image with res. 1600 x 1440 to a not supersampled image with res. 2160 x 2160.

Guess we have to wait and see results from practice, doesn´t help anything until someone does it for real.

 

Oh, another thing just to mention is, that there´s a significant difference in performance between the P51 Mustang ( like it was shown in one of the review videos ) and the F14 Tomcat or more bigger difference performancewise with the MiG21.

At least I´m hoping for the spring update for the MiG to get a better performance with it.

F-14b Tomcat   /   AV-8B Harrier   /   F-16C Viper  /   KA-50 Black Shark   /   Mi-24 Hind   /   MiG-21bis   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Voight - Ya I saw that with CMDR Exigeous or whatever his name is....

I tried 60hz on my O+ and the panels flickered bad and were MUCH dimmer, so no go on my headset.

 

I guess we have to wait and see :)

:pilotfly: Specs: I9-9900k; ROG Strix RTX 2080ti; Valve Index HMD; 32GB DDR4 3200 Ram; Samsung 970 EVO 1TB SSD; TM Warthog with pedals, 3 TM MFDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah Oculus chose 80 Hz to keep performance close to the CV1, and it did good at that.

For myself I really can not discern a difference between the two regarding refresh rate, and I have compared them both pretty good that last week or so.

 

I have heard that it can make a difference in fast combat. Saw it tested on YT in milsims, but as it was not possible to see the difference, only have it verbally described by the tester, it's hard to know if it would be noticable in flight sims as we can't see how fast a movement has to be (in that video), before it starts to be affected by the refresh rate.

Kneeboard Guides

Rig: Asus B650-GAMING PLUS; Ryzen 7800X3D ; 64GB DDR5 5600; RTX 4080; VPC T50 CM2 HOTAS; SN-1 Pedals; VR = Pico 4 over VD Wireless + Index; Point Control v2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PSVR is 120hz

 

You are correct, I have modified my original comment. After digging into this deeper I see why I was thinking it was 60Hz. It was because some games were locked at 60FPS and I made a faulty assumption that this was also the max refresh rate.

A-10C, AV-8B, F-16C, F/A-18C, KA-50, Mi-8, UH-1H, FC3, CA, WWII, NTTR, Normandy, Persian Gulf

 

Gaming Rig: I7 7700k @5GHz, Corsair H115i Water Cooling, 32GB G.Skill TridentZ RGB 3600MHz DDR4 SDRAM, Aorus GeForce GTX 1080Ti, 2 x Samsung 960 Pro M.2 1TB NVMe SSD's, Warthog HOTAS w/ Slew mod, MFG Crosswind Pedals, 2 x TM Cougar MFD's, Oculus Rift-S, TrackIR 5, Asus ROG PG3480 34" GSync Monitor @3440x1440-100Hz, Asus 27" Monitor @1920x1080-144Hz, Windows 10 x64

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So judging by reviews picture clarity in Index still not comparable to monitor. That's unfortunate

 

The GPU to render as many pixels as would be required to achieve that does not exist by a long shot. At this point in time this is simply not a reasonable standard to hold VR HMDs against.

| i9 12900K |  64GB DDR5-6000 | STRIX RTX 4090 OC | LG 38GN950 38" |

| Hanns-G HT225HPB | TIR 5 & Varjo Aero | Virpil Throttle & Stick | TM TPRs |

You don't stop playing because you grow old, you grow old because you stop playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. Problem is not GPU power, problem are lenses. As soon as someone comes up with solution that will not require lenses to magnify imagine we won't need these crazy resolutions anymore. Right now everyone is choosing easy mode increasing pixel count. Just like car makers in 1980ies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. Problem is not GPU power, problem are lenses. As soon as someone comes up with solution that will not require lenses to magnify imagine we won't need these crazy resolutions anymore. Right now everyone is choosing easy mode increasing pixel count. Just like car makers in 1980ies

 

Wat? No!

 

Problem is exactly GPU power as what you want requires more pixels, magnification or not - no ifs, ands or buts.

 

Unless you want a 40ish deg FoV (20 vertical), then you can absolutely have what you want. We can do that no probs.


Edited by p1t1o
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am typing this on a 17 inch (43cm) 1080p laptop screen. Sitting away approx 60cm from it. So that makes for a screen width of approx 37.5cm. Which means horizontally it fills approx 35 degrees of my FOV as I am typing. So if I were to scale that up to mediocre headsets with approx 110° FOV, we are looking at a horizontal resolution in the ballpark of 3x. Vertically the same. So basically I'd have to triple the size of that screen in both dimensions and keep pixel density the same, so it scales with resolution. That means we are looking at 5760x3240 pixels to roughly match the density of the screen I am currently typing on. Per eye that is.

 

So even if you had the horsepower to render that many pixels, you wouldn't get them over to the HMD at a refresh rate that is a good fit for VR. And I am not even using a particularly good monitor here, once you go to resolutions that are considered "Retina", things get way worse.

 

Michael Abrash of Oculus fame previously stated that reach the point where display quality would start to approach the limits of human visual perception, we'd be looking at around 8K res per eye. And I have no problem believing that in the slightest.

 

Not requiring lenses? The means by which you achieve the image in the eye is not that relevant, what it boils down to is the amount of pixels per degree of FOV, lenses or not. And given the humans FOV of around 210 horizontally and 150 vertically, we are looking at a crapton of pixels to render here.

 

Sure, you can achieve pretty good clarity with no supersampling required (XTAL does this), but even the most expensive of headsets are nowhere near the pixel per degree density a monitor offers (mostly because monitors cover such a small part of our FOVs).

 

If you're waiting for VR to match angular resolution of current day monitors, all I can say is good luck with that for the next fear years. Don't expect that in a consumer product anytime soon.

| i9 12900K |  64GB DDR5-6000 | STRIX RTX 4090 OC | LG 38GN950 38" |

| Hanns-G HT225HPB | TIR 5 & Varjo Aero | Virpil Throttle & Stick | TM TPRs |

You don't stop playing because you grow old, you grow old because you stop playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am typing this on a 17 inch (43cm) 1080p laptop screen. Sitting away approx 60cm from it. So that makes for a screen width of approx 37.5cm. Which means horizontally it fills approx 35 degrees of my FOV as I am typing. So if I were to scale that up to mediocre headsets with approx 110° FOV, we are looking at a horizontal resolution in the ballpark of 3x. Vertically the same. So basically I'd have to triple the size of that screen in both dimensions and keep pixel density the same, so it scales with resolution. That means we are looking at 5760x3240 pixels to roughly match the density of the screen I am currently typing on. Per eye that is.

 

So even if you had the horsepower to render that many pixels, you wouldn't get them over to the HMD at a refresh rate that is a good fit for VR. And I am not even using a particularly good monitor here, once you go to resolutions that are considered "Retina", things get way worse.

 

Michael Abrash of Oculus fame previously stated that reach the point where display quality would start to approach the limits of human visual perception, we'd be looking at around 8K res per eye. And I have no problem believing that in the slightest.

 

Not requiring lenses? The means by which you achieve the image in the eye is not that relevant, what it boils down to is the amount of pixels per degree of FOV, lenses or not. And given the humans FOV of around 210 horizontally and 150 vertically, we are looking at a crapton of pixels to render here.

 

Sure, you can achieve pretty good clarity with no supersampling required (XTAL does this), but even the most expensive of headsets are nowhere near the pixel per degree density a monitor offers (mostly because monitors cover such a small part of our FOVs).

 

If you're waiting for VR to match angular resolution of current day monitors, all I can say is good luck with that for the next fear years. Don't expect that in a consumer product anytime soon.

 

A decent looking image will be about 30ppd, retinal res is about 70ppd. The reverb is coming in the mid to high 20's ppd wise. All previous headsets are below 20, save for the pimax 8k, which is in the low 20's but it upscales with all those issues.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Nagilem

in one of the video reviews ( I don´t remember which one ), someone mentioned, that he´s running the Reverb fine at 60Hz.

The Reverb runs at 90Hz natively, but there is the option in windows under the settings for windows mixed reality to set the WMR headset at 60Hz, so I thought, this setting was mentioned.

 

I´m also not sure, if you could directly compare the performance needed to process a supersampled image with res. 1600 x 1440 to a not supersampled image with res. 2160 x 2160.

Guess we have to wait and see results from practice, doesn´t help anything until someone does it for real.

 

Oh, another thing just to mention is, that there´s a significant difference in performance between the P51 Mustang ( like it was shown in one of the review videos ) and the F14 Tomcat or more bigger difference performancewise with the MiG21.

At least I´m hoping for the spring update for the MiG to get a better performance with it.

 

60 vs 90hz is a big difference in terms of frames to be drawn, about 67% less. So I can see it helping alot from the perspecitve of GFX cards. Subjectively I've run crappy systems which were at 30fps with ASW and it was "ok". But you will want to try to run it at 60fps if you can.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once I´ve tested the 60Hz mode of the Odyssey just for fun, but it wasn´t. It felt uncomfortable to the eyes.

It´s very interesting, that Valve is coming up with higher display frequences, than the 90Hz standard.

When 1st gen VR headsets were introduced, it has been said, that 90Hz is minimum you would need to not feel nausea in VR. But there already is a connection from the display frequency to the FPS the graphics card delivers, so saying that 90Hz is the minimum display frequency could also mean or more specific mean, that 90 FPS is needed to not feel nausea or uncomfortable in VR.

 

So, you can´t get 90FPS ( with or without ASW ) being displayed on displays with less than 90Hz. But, with Valve´s Index in backmind, you can get 90 FPS displayed on a 120 or 144hz display, I would think.

 

I don´t think, refering to your post in the other thread, that the increased Hz of the Index is only marketing, instead I would expect the 120Hz to create a more calm image, a less nervous looking image, as for now and since the 1st gen was introduced could be observed with every VR headset.

 

In DCS the "nervous" image could be also observed in a distance of estimated 5 NM, things get blurry and jaggy, like the pixels in the distance are constantly in kind of nervous movement, maybe or hopefully a higher refresh rate of the displays could countervail this perception.

I got a benQ Monitor with 144Hz and when I switch the desktop from 60hz to 144Hz the perception of the desktop image instantly gets completely calm even I didn´t feel the 60Hz before were uncomfortable, with 144Hz looking on to the desktop feels more like looking into a book or magazine... I think that was meant, when Norman from the Tested guys mentioned, he felt much more in VR with the higher Hz mode of the Index.

 

In opposite to that, I think the wider FOV the Index is promoting is more or less marketing, because you only perceive it as wider as closer you move the displays to the eyes, but the rendered image of the displays ( and of the viewports ) remain with the same FOV, means the wider FOV you could reach with the Index is not translated into a wider FOV, more to see on the left and right, in the image.

 

You know, I think the more we´re reaching kind of betterment, the more we tend to complain.

With all the individual impressions we get with different VR headsets, there should be also taken into account, that the eye is individually inert and different, so maybe, what one feels an absolute inconvinience in VR, another did not bother.

 

Me am very excited to know how the Reverb and the Index is performing in DCS finally.

F-14b Tomcat   /   AV-8B Harrier   /   F-16C Viper  /   KA-50 Black Shark   /   Mi-24 Hind   /   MiG-21bis   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might be right on the 120 and displaying 60 fps or whatnot with ASW looking ok. I can only comment on my rift, which is fixed 90hz, and aside from ASW ghosting of fast moving objects (planes) it looked fine down to the 30's FPS wise. With ASW interpolating every other frame. Also, another thing I'll point out is that there is huge personal variability with "refresh" rate. I have a coworker that claims its painful for him to use normal monitors and that he can indeed easily tell the difference beween a 120 or 60hz refresh rate. For me, I can't.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the problem with the 120Hz is, that you do need to get 60 real FPS for optimum smoothness as reprojection need the 60FPS to work properly in 120Hz mode.

 

Ach, we´ll see ...


Edited by - Voight -

F-14b Tomcat   /   AV-8B Harrier   /   F-16C Viper  /   KA-50 Black Shark   /   Mi-24 Hind   /   MiG-21bis   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A decent looking image will be about 30ppd, retinal res is about 70ppd. The reverb is coming in the mid to high 20's ppd wise. All previous headsets are below 20, save for the pimax 8k, which is in the low 20's but it upscales with all those issues.

 

Yes, I know all that, I was trying to demonstrate to this gentleman that to even match the pixel density of my notebook screen for a Rift S style FOV, we'd have to be in the mid 50 PPD ballpark. We are nowhere near close to reaching that in the consumer space. Given the obvious lack of knowledge on the subject matter, I thought it might be a good idea to start at the very basics.

| i9 12900K |  64GB DDR5-6000 | STRIX RTX 4090 OC | LG 38GN950 38" |

| Hanns-G HT225HPB | TIR 5 & Varjo Aero | Virpil Throttle & Stick | TM TPRs |

You don't stop playing because you grow old, you grow old because you stop playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think i need a new gfx card. Prices are rumoured to drop for the rtx.

 

amd announced the Radeon™ Pro Vega II Duo @ 28 teraflops. should do it.

Win 10 64//4.5g i7 Kaby Lake//gtx Titan x pascal//16gb 3200ram//Asus Maximux Hero IX//Oculus Rift//

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we'd have to be in the mid 50 PPD ballpark. We are nowhere near close to reaching that in the consumer space..

 

 

Valve have patented 10,000x10,000 VR displays :D

 

Whilst we may not see them anytime soon, like, at all, at least we know they are heading int he right direction!

 

Gonna need at least an order of magnitude increase in GPU capability before we get that far though, and thats not a trivial thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw a post on Reddit where someone said their Index was due to be sent on the 14th - so we should have some initial opinions in a couple of weeks.

 

Mine's not due until end of August, anyway, so I'm not in a rush to find out, nice as it will be to read reports on it.

Kneeboard Guides

Rig: Asus B650-GAMING PLUS; Ryzen 7800X3D ; 64GB DDR5 5600; RTX 4080; VPC T50 CM2 HOTAS; SN-1 Pedals; VR = Pico 4 over VD Wireless + Index; Point Control v2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had an email that says i need to update my address by the 14th so expect delivers not long after that.

 

I think PPD is not reduced by the extra FOV in the case of the index.

Win 10 64//4.5g i7 Kaby Lake//gtx Titan x pascal//16gb 3200ram//Asus Maximux Hero IX//Oculus Rift//

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...