• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Pimax "8k" 200° FoV VR HMD KS page up (not live yet)

D

Durante

Member
The KS reached almost 1.7 million by bow, looks like there is a pretty decent chance they will reach 2 million.

I backed the early bird 5k tier for now -- it has the same rendered resolution (and therefore detail) as the 8k non-X, and given that screen door doesn't bother me too much on the Vive and that the 5k has a bit higher PPD and a full RGB subpixel layout it should be prety good for me in that regard.

And with a price of $350 I can still justify buying some other HMD if something amazing shows up later in 2018.
 
D

Durante

Member
PIMAX did a reddit AMA here.

Here's the truly new information I extracted from it.

About FoV:
Monocular horizontal FOV is no less than 150degree, and we are still optimize now. Vertical FOV is 120degree.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much in the middle of the range I expected. (And 150° also means that rectilinear projection works, but not efficiently)

About new prototypes (including controllers):
The new prototype will be ready on 20th-24th this month, and we will update the information.
Click to expand...

About the cable:
"Will the cable be a single round one like the Rift and the new Vive, or will it be a ribbon like the old Vive?"
Current shape of the cable is ribbon, but the final design has not been fixed.
Click to expand...

About sensors:
We will eventually use TS4231 for all 8K. For users who plan to use vive tracking with 8K, and want to get 8K faster, they can request to get 8K with TS3633 chip and get the units faster.
"What about 5K? Will the kickstarter units come standard with TS4231?"
yes
Click to expand...

Also, from multiple replies, it seems like they've decided to create a breakout box, but it won't be ready for the first KS shipments.

And of course, the most important information:
Pimax is made of "Pi" and "Max", Pi is an endless number, we want to use an endless number and the Max to stand for that we want our company to have the power of the sustainable innovations. Pimax:Endless Innovations
Click to expand...
 
S

spyshagg

Should not be allowed to breed
I am going to need one. It seems god rays are a non-issue, which is by far my biggest issue with the current rift.
 
M

Mascot

Member
As someone who uses VR (a Rift) exclusively for sim racing, the thought of higher definition and a wider FoV has me very excited.

Are there any through-lens comparison images of the Rift vs the PiMax?
 
D

Durante

Member
They don't really need their own version, reprojection is done by SteamVR.

Also, the actual per-eye input resolution of the 8k (non-X) is 2560x1440 per eye, so not quite 4k.
 
S

SimplexPL

Member
Durante said:
They don't really need their own version, reprojection is done by SteamVR.

Also, the actual per-eye input resolution of the 8k (non-X) is 2560x1440 per eye, so not quite 4k.
Click to expand...

yeah 2x1440p is actually less pixels than 1x2160p (4K) - its 7372800 vs 8294400
 
S

spyshagg

Should not be allowed to breed
Durante said:
They don't really need their own version, reprojection is done by SteamVR.

Also, the actual per-eye input resolution of the 8k (non-X) is 2560x1440 per eye, so not quite 4k.
Click to expand...

I could have swear that the non-X has the same screens as the X but with an upscaled image instead of a native image (hence the need for 2 display ports).

I'm trying to find where I saw this.


Edit: I misunderstood your quote. You said "input", which is correct for the normal 8K. I was referring to the performance needed for the 8K X.
 
Z

Zojirushi

Member
Seems like devices (and screens in general for that matter) are way ahead in terms of resolution of what mass market GPUs can power these days. It's frustrating.
 
I

Ionic

Member
DisizDream said:
You might want to read this before ordering one :

http://www.vudream.com/fact-checking-hype-behind-pimax-8k-vr-headset-virtual-reality/
Click to expand...

I'll have to look in to some of the claims, but he really goes hard to downplay the importance of an increased FOV, dedicating only a sentence to its virtues and spending the rest of the discussion about it on how since it doesn't use lens' like older 1000 dollar headsets it can't be any good. His twice over insinuation that the company being Chinese is a warning sign about the quality of the product doesn't make me too enthused by his case either.

Edit: Oh geeze, it's a copy paste from a Heaney thread on /r/oculus. This actually clarifies a lot.
 
D

dragn

Member
didnt order one because 40€ shipping cost and import/tax on top. but will await impressions. 8k and 200fov is just lying tho
 
D

Durante

Member
dragn said:
didnt order one because 40€ shipping cost and import/tax on top. but will await impressions. 8k and 200fov is just lying tho
Click to expand...
8k is a bit of a suspect claim, especially given the input resolution. That said, I've alwys disliked the whole "k" resolution metric anyway.

200° FoV is perfectly legitimate though from all we have heard (from demonstrations) and seen. What's wrong with that claim?

DisizDream said:
You might want to read this before ordering one
Click to expand...
No, you should rather not misinform yourself by reading anything written by Heaney.
 
C

chaosblade

Unconfirmed Member
Durante said:
8k is a bit of a suspect claim, especially given the input resolution. That said, I've alwys disliked the whole "k" resolution metric anyway.
Click to expand...

I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way. I swear it's just a marketing thing because 1080p -> "4K" gives the impression of a bigger upgrade than 1080p -> 2160p.
 
D

Dreamwriter

Member
Durante said:
8k is a bit of a suspect claim, especially given the input resolution. That said, I've alwys disliked the whole "k" resolution metric anyway.
Click to expand...
I’d call the 8k misinformation, not just a “suspect claim”. Two 4k screens is not 8k, even if the device were capable of accepting the full detail of each screen (which it is not without a special limited-edition version of the device). The actual 8k resolution is 7680×4320, this device’s resolution is 3840x2160 per screen, combined is half the detail of 8k (and I’ve always disliked combining the two screens for VR headsets to come up with a resolution anyways, that’s *really* misleading).

chaosblade said:
I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way. I swear it's just a marketing thing because 1080p -> "4K" gives the impression of a bigger upgrade than 1080p -> 2160p.
Click to expand...
My problem with using “1080p” or “2160p” is that only talks about vertical resolution, when the horizontal resolution is just as much a part of it. And many companies call something “1080p” when its horizontal resolution is nowhere near 1920 pixels. Using the “p” notation made sense with analogue CRT displays where the horizontal resolution wasn’t fixed; that’s no longer the case.
 
D

Durante

Member
chaosblade said:
I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way. I swear it's just a marketing thing because 1080p -> "4K" gives the impression of a bigger upgrade than 1080p -> 2160p.
Click to expand...
And worse than that, when "4k" was initially used, it meant a very specific resolution with 4096 pixels across -- and now it means something different.

Generally, I just don't understand the obsession with reducing resolution to a single number. Just use 2 and you'll have all the information.
 
D

Dreamwriter

Member
I just Kickstarted for a 5k unit - I was gonna get the 8k version, but when I realized that the input resolution is the exact native resolution of the 5k version, that decided me. I don’t notice the SDE on my Rift or work Vive unless I’m actually looking for it, and the 5k Pimax has less SDE than Rift anyways. So I’d rather have the extra sharpness of exact native resolution than the more solid but smoothed out upscaled picture, and save some $$$ while I’m at it.

Most of my VR games are Oculus Home games, though, which kinda sucks since unlike OpenVR they probably won’t natively support wider FOV anytime soon.
 
S

spyshagg

Should not be allowed to breed
Dreamwriter said:
I just Kickstarted for a 5k unit - I was gonna get the 8k version, but when I realized that the input resolution is the exact native resolution of the 5k version, that decided me. I don’t notice the SDE on my Rift or work Vive unless I’m actually looking for it, and the 5k Pimax has less SDE than Rift anyways. So I’d rather have the extra sharpness of exact native resolution than the more solid but smoothed out upscaled picture, and save some $$$ while I’m at it.

Most of my VR games are Oculus Home games, though, which kinda sucks since unlike OpenVR they probably won’t natively support wider FOV anytime soon.
Click to expand...

For me, the god ray smudge and SDE are ever present. Cars 200 meters away from me look like 8-bit art.
 
M

Mascot

Member
I'm looking forward to hearing impressions of the Pimax from GAFers early next year.
Are any backers here into sim racing?
 
G

GhostTrick

Banned
D

Durante

Member
GhostTrick said:
This looks amazing ! My only complaint though would be the motion controllers...
I wished headsets had interchangeable motion controllers.
Click to expand...
You can use other controllers with OpenVR. E.g. you could use the Vive controllers, or the upcoming knuckles controllers with the PIMAX HMD.
 
G

GhostTrick

Banned
Durante said:
You can use other controllers with OpenVR. E.g. you could use the Vive controllers, or the upcoming knuckles controllers with the PIMAX HMD.
Click to expand...



Well, I'd want to use Oculus Touch controllers on the Pimax for exemple, but I guess it's not happening ?
As for the Vive controllers, while they're neat, I'm not too fond of the "touchpad only" stuff.
 
A

Aztechnology

Member
GhostTrick said:
Well, I'd want to use Oculus Touch controllers on the Pimax for exemple, but I guess it's not happening ?
As for the Vive controllers, while they're neat, I'm not too fond of the "touchpad only" stuff.
Click to expand...

The issue is the Oculus touch controllers rely on the onboard IMU's in the Rift for tracking, and for connecting with your PC. So, it's really just not going to happen. As soon as knuckles are released, I'll make the jump though. I agree with you that the Touch controllers are the best controllers currently available.
 
G

GhostTrick

Banned
Aztechnology said:
The issue is the Oculus touch controllers rely on the onboard IMU's in the Rift for tracking, and for connecting with your PC. So, it's really just not going to happen. As soon as knuckles are released, I'll make the jump though. I agree with you that the Touch controllers are the best controllers currently available.
Click to expand...




Yup, that's what I understood. The knuckles looks amazing but I wish it had a stick for some games I'd want to play in VR.
 
D

Dreamwriter

Member
Note that according to Pimax, the actual controllers that will ship with the Kickstarter kits are going to be similar to the Vive knuckle controllers; the prototypes they’ve been showing off are an old design and were made before Valve announced the knuckles. And while I too prefer the analogue sticks of the Rift controller, most people are going to be playing SteamVR games on the PiMax, since it requires an extra tool to run Oculus games and depending on the game those ones may not natively support the wider FOV, and SteamVR games are built around a touchpad.

Also, something I found interesting, Oculus themselves are replacing the analogue sticks with touchpads with Project Santa Cruz...
 
I

Ionic

Member
Dreamwriter said:
Also, something I found interesting, Oculus themselves are replacing the analogue sticks with touchpads with Project Santa Cruz...
Click to expand...

I think hardware devs are starting to come to grips with the idea that you can do more with touchpads than with analog sticks. I wouldn't mind some kind of part that could be interchanged but that'd just be a mess to implement. I'm not worried about it though. Somebody will make SteamVR controllers that have analog sticks and it probably won't be a huge hassle to switch between knuckles and those for games that call for it. That's the beauty of gaming on PC.
 
D

Durante

Member
Ionic said:
I think hardware devs are starting to come to grips with the idea that you can do more with touchpads than with analog sticks. I wouldn't mind some kind of part that could be interchanged but that'd just be a mess to implement. I'm not worried about it though. Somebody will make SteamVR controllers that have analog sticks and it probably won't be a huge hassle to switch between knuckles and those for games that call for it. That's the beauty of gaming on PC.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
Unless you're gaming in an ecosystem where someone wants to bind software to a specific peripheral of course...
 
A

Aztechnology

Member
Ughhh, It's killing me. There's a 5k early bird special that I was hovering my finger over, had all my info plugged in, but held off. Not sure if I can justify the $649. Even if I grabbed a $349 set I'd have to find controllers and lighthouse units, and I don't see myself finding a good deal on those as it's probably effectively impossible to find them separate from a headset and the lighthouse and controllers from Valve are very expensive.
 
D

DavidDesu

Member
Field of view is the area I think VR really needs to tackle, before resolution even. My only experience with VR is owning a Gear VR and PSVR by the way.

In the PSVR games I’ve played I’ve always felt FOV was more of a detracting factor than the resolution. It just prevents me from really feeling immersed and it makes the whole experience feel quite panicked cos you’re having to use your head more than you really should since you pretty much can only see what’s straight ahead to know what’s going on in your game. I’d enjoy the games far more if they took up a much wider field of vision, even at the current low resolutions.

Of course do both FOV and resolution, and I hope we get there for the second gen of PSVR presumably for PS5. I don’t think I’ll get another VR headset until FOV is much wider.
 
D

Durante

Member
Well, the Vive had the largest FoV of the consumer HMDs so far, but the difference wasn't particularly huge. (I made this picture to compare it back around launch)

On the other hand, judging from the 2D per-eye pre-distortion screenshots they posted a week or so ago, the FoV on the PIMAX is even larger than I had thought. It looks like even its vertical FoV is larger then the Vive (which has the largest so far), and of course the horizontal FoV is massive.
 
G

GhostTrick

Banned
Durante said:
Well, the Vive had the largest FoV of the consumer HMDs so far, but the difference wasn't particularly huge. (I made this picture to compare it back around launch)

On the other hand, judging from the 2D per-eye pre-distortion screenshots they posted a week or so ago, the FoV on the PIMAX is even larger than I had thought. It looks like even its vertical FoV is larger then the Vive (which has the largest so far), and of course the horizontal FoV is massive.
Click to expand...



I wonder something though. Would the games need to handle that FoV ? Or does OpenVR handles everything. I'm worried, with the kind of ports we end up getting sometimes, that the software may not all take advantage of it.
 
D

Durante

Member
GhostTrick said:
I wonder something though. Would the games need to handle that FoV ? Or does OpenVR handles everything. I'm worried, with the kind of ports we end up getting sometimes, that the software may not all take advantage of it.
Click to expand...
The VR API provides the per-eye projection matrices, so there's nothing to worry about there.

However, when you get to really large FoV the framebuffer usage becomes quite (maybe "very" is the better word) inefficient. That needs something like Nvidia lens-matched shading to tackle effectively.
 
G

GhostTrick

Banned
Durante said:
The VR API provides the per-eye projection matrices, so there's nothing to worry about there.

However, when you get to really large FoV the framebuffer usage becomes quite (maybe "very" is the better word) inefficient. That needs something like Nvidia lens-matched shading to tackle effectively.
Click to expand...



What do you mean by inefficient ? Like affecting image quality/experience ? Or is it related to performance ?
 
A

Aztechnology

Member
GhostTrick said:
What do you mean by inefficient ? Like affecting image quality/experience ? Or is it related to performance ?
Click to expand...

Performance, I don't really know a lot about how video cards function. But is it possible to supply extra RAM to the frame buffer on modern GPU's? Or is it... partitioned?
 
T

Thraktor

Member
GhostTrick said:
What do you mean by inefficient ? Like affecting image quality/experience ? Or is it related to performance ?
Click to expand...

I believe he's talking about over-allocating VRAM. That is, the larger the FoV, the greater the proportion of the framebuffer that isn't actually used, but still takes up space in VRAM. Not an issue if you've got VRAM to spare, but if you're hitting memory limits then it would impact performance.
 
D

Durante

Member
GhostTrick said:
What do you mean by inefficient ? Like affecting image quality/experience ? Or is it related to performance ?
Click to expand...
Thraktor said:
I believe he's talking about over-allocating VRAM. That is, the larger the FoV, the greater the proportion of the framebuffer that isn't actually used, but still takes up space in VRAM. Not an issue if you've got VRAM to spare, but if you're hitting memory limits then it would impact performance.
Click to expand...

No, it's not (just) about memory. Really, framebuffer size is basically irrelevant on modern GPUs. Even if you have a rather fat G-buffer a full 8k (that's twice the native res of the PIMAX 8k X!) framebuffer "only" takes around half a Gigabyte. And the GPUs you want to use with this thing have 8 GB at least, probably more.

No, it's about rendering efficiency. The actual rendered per-eye viewport for the PIMAX pre-distortion looks something like this:
Pimax8kScreenshot.jpg
Click to expand...
As you can see, you are spending a lot of performance rendering a lot of pixels that will only show up in the periphery of your view, which you should be rendering with a lot less detail.

This can mostly be fixed by lens-matched shading, but that needs engine integration. NV has some great figures on how that works.
 
G

GhostTrick

Banned
Thraktor said:
I believe he's talking about over-allocating VRAM. That is, the larger the FoV, the greater the proportion of the framebuffer that isn't actually used, but still takes up space in VRAM. Not an issue if you've got VRAM to spare, but if you're hitting memory limits then it would impact performance.
Click to expand...



Mmh I see. So I guess a good solution could be what was featured in Shadow Warriors 2, where only the center of the screen would be native resolution and other parts wouldnt be. And the extra FOV could be displayed at a lower resolution


Durante said:
No, it's not (just) about memory. Really, framebuffer size is basically irrelevant on modern GPUs. Even if you have a rather fat G-buffer a full 8k (that's twice the native res of the PIMAX 8k X!) framebuffer "only" takes around half a Gigabyte. And the GPUs you want to use with this thing have 8 GB at least, probably more.

No, it's about rendering efficiency. The actual rendered per-eye viewport for the PIMAX pre-distortion looks something like this:
As you can see, you are spending a lot of performance rendering a lot of pixels that will only show up in the periphery of your view, which you should be rendering with a lot less detail.
Click to expand...


Interesting. What would you think of the solution found in Shadow Warriors 2?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The High-end VR Discussion Thread (HTC Vive, Oculus Rift, Playstation VR)
162 163 164 165 166
8K
875K
Alexios replied
Top Bottom