• 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.

PlayStation VR's external processor revealed.

B

Blanquito

Member
vpance said:
Sub sub Vita level sales year one must be considered a bomb, $300+ or not. I think that would be a near Nvidia Shield kind of failure.
Click to expand...

You're comparing significantly different products for significantly different prices in significantly different markets. In addition to being a completely new type of device.

Sure, in comparison to to other devices VR will look like a bomba. It's not even selling close to what iPhones are selling now, right? Bomba.

(Also, note: the first iPhone was a bomba too, it only sold around 6 million total. What a joke, right? Certainly nothing good came from a solid foundation, first gen device that sold so poorly)
 
K

kyser73

Member
Pif said:
Source?

How can dev costs be justified for VR only titles with those kind of numbers?
Click to expand...

Interview with Andrew House. Am on mobile and stuck on 3G so I might as well be sending smoke signals when searching.

I agree that it's a very low estimate, but if it's something Sony have accepted internally as being reasonable it would appear they're serious about it being a long term deal
 
B

Bsigg12

Member
Mikey Jr. said:
Wait, isn't the camera mandatory? It is, right?
Click to expand...

For positional tracking yes. I can't see them allowing the headset without a camera at any given point though since everything is probably being developed with a camera, headset and at least a DS4 in mind.
 
S

Sniffynose

Member
I'm more surprised that some sort of gpu assistance is being routed via usb 3.0, latency and bandwidth could handle more than just a video stream, but how are they combining this or is the box just a usb to hdmi adapter of sorts with power for the headset?

The magic box is what is making me curious, since gpu to usb isn't really a thing maybe for usb C and thunderbolt has examples of that.
 
N

Neuromancer

Member
Mikey Jr. said:
.......

This thing is going to be $399, isn't it?
Click to expand...
More than the system it runs on? I doubt it.

Sniffynose said:
Well the PS4 shits the bed with 30fps games so unless we are aiming for virtual boy level graphics something be helping offload some work?
Click to expand...
The PS4 is capable of more than 30fps. It's just that a lot of devs would rather have super fancy graphics at 30. With VR, that won't even be an option. The good news is good VR is not dependent on mind blowing graphics. Just being in the world is the mind blowing part.
 
Z

zackmorris

Member
serversurfer said:
Probably more like $499, maybe even a bit more.

I assume you're including $299 for the PS4 itself, right? Then yeah, that'll probably put you over $500. Possibly close to $600, but that seems like a lot.
Click to expand...
No it will be that without a PS4. The headset plus external unit is going to be pricy.
 
N

Nafai1123

Banned
I would love to see a theoretical BOM that makes a headset with a display/sensors/optics/no processor and a breakout box with an audio chip cost $549. Comparatively, a Vita with an OLED display, GPU/CPU/RAM/Touch sensors/etc cost $249 at launch.
 
K

Krejlooc

Banned
I think the PSVR will be between $299 and $349 at launch. It only has one screen, and it's a lower resolution screen than other devices. It's not high end. That price range is already accepted among the two VR dev kits. That's the sweet spot and what they'll likely target.
 
S

serversurfer

Member
Krejlooc said:
I think the PSVR will be between $299 and $349 at launch. It only has one screen, and it's a lower resolution screen than other devices. It's not high end. That price range is already accepted among the two VR dev kits. That's the sweet spot and what they'll likely target.
Click to expand...
What do you think they'll be spending all of the rest of the money on? Gold plating? Or do you not believe they'll be selling it for cost as they've claimed?
 
iceatcs

iceatcs

Junior Member
It seem that lot of here thought it will be expensive, I feel it won't be that a lot since fixed system hardware with cheap mobile screen.

Could because of high end TV engines (TV chip) are also expensive.
 
K

Krejlooc

Banned
serversurfer said:
What do you think they'll be spending all of the rest of the money on? Gold plating? Or do you not believe they'll be selling it for cost as they've claimed?
Click to expand...

Uh, no. I believe that is the costs associated with this style of headset while running a very thin profit margin. This is the price the DK2 launched at, and the PSVR is not radically different. The DK2 was basically sold at-cost upon release, but that was over a year ago.
 
C

cakefoo

Member
Mushroomer25 said:
I don't think PSVR will be a worthwhile product until the PS5, to be honest. That'll be the point they can design hardware for the increased load of VR, rather than try to use an already underpowered device to fit the bill. PSVR on PS4 is going to be a novelty product, since the software library will simply never be big enough to justify the inevitable $300+ investment. But that's not a terrible thing. All VR is going to be a novelty for the first few years.
Click to expand...
VR graphics will always be inferior to traditional TV console games due to the increased processing load of higher framerates, multiple camera views and potentially higher resolutions. If your dissatisfaction is based on how the visuals compare to traditional 30fps eye candy, you'll always think console hardware is too underpowered for VR. Once you see what PS5 can do at 30fps, you'll be moaning about what it can't do in VR.

Because these additional demands are exclusive to VR, the only way to achieve parity with traditional games is to create a GPU/CPU/RAM add-on. Gamers might as well get a PC if they're entertaining that idea.
 
S

Sniffynose

Member
Bear Force One said:
This isn't a reflection on the hardware but the developer choices. You should know that.
Click to expand...

Oh I know, but the PS4 and 120fps don't seem like something that would work without the magic black box, which is why I am curious if/what it is doing to assist the PS4 apu


I honestly feel like it's just an hdmi to usb adapter with power brick for the helmet though, and of course handles input and output of the helmet sensors.

I'm excited about seeing what makes it work, and how it interfaces with everything.
 
S

Sniffynose

Member
Krejlooc said:
it's not doing anything to assist with the PS4 APU.
Click to expand...

So it's just an hdmi to usb passthrough for social screen, and an input and output device for the helmet along with power since usb couldn't handle those screens on it's own?

I was hoping for some secret sauce at least =(

Kind of a turn off if it's expensive unless it will work on a PS5 for example or have a PC SDK
 
S

serversurfer

Member
Krejlooc said:
Uh, no. I believe that is the costs associated with this style of headset while running a very thin profit margin. This is the price the DK2 launched at, and the PSVR is not radically different. The DK2 was basically sold at-cost upon release, but that was over a year ago.
Click to expand...
Not only was it over a year ago, you have to remember that Oculus was little more than a Kickstarter at that point. They were basically hand-building the DK2 with whatever parts they could find or make, and they were making like tens of thousands.

Sony are a huge CE company throwing their full weight behind this, and they'll be building hundreds of thousands. Don't look at what it cost a bunch of enthusiasts to hand-build their headset from OTS parts two years ago. Look at how much it actually costs Sony to build things. Do you really imagine PSVR to be more complex and expensive to build than even a Vita, much less a PS4? You know as well as I do all they need is a display, lens, motion sensor, camera, and a couple of DSPs for the audio and Social Screen. The display will certainly cost less than $100; I've never seen a smartphone display that cost more than like $70, and that include the touch sensors and Gorilla Glass. I've seen the Camera retailing for $40, so I doubt it costs them more than that to build. I'd be amazed if the DSPs cost them more than $10. The lenses can be injection molded, so they won't cost more than a couple of bucks.

So how can they possibly spend $350 on those components? Can you show me some BOMs that would indicate these kinds of costs for manufacturing at this scale?
 
K

Krejlooc

Banned
serversurfer said:
Not only was it over a year ago, you have to remember that Oculus was little more than a Kickstarter at that point. They were basically hand-building the DK2 with whatever parts they could find or make, and they were making like tens of thousands.

Sony are a huge CE company throwing their full weight behind this, and they'll be building hundreds of thousands. Don't look at what it cost a bunch of enthusiasts to hand-build their headset from OTS parts two years ago. Look at how much it actually costs Sony to build things. Do you really imagine PSVR to be more complex and expensive to build than even a Vita, much less a PS4? You know as well as I do all they need is a display, lens, motion sensor, camera, and a couple of DSPs for the audio and Social Screen. The display will certainly cost less than $100; I've never seen a smartphone display that cost more than like $70, and that include the touch sensors and Gorilla Glass. I've seen the Camera retailing for $40, so I doubt it costs them more than that to build. I'd be amazed if the DSPs cost them more than $10. The lenses can be injection molded, so they won't cost more than a couple of bucks.

So how can they possibly spend $350 on those components? Can you show me some BOMs that would indicate these kinds of costs for manufacturing at this scale?
Click to expand...


Yes, I do. You list the expensive components and hand wave them off in the very same sentence. What will they spend that money on? Lenses, high end IMUs, screens, etc.

There is no public BOM for the DK2, but there is for the DK1.

Feel free to research yourself: https://github.com/OculusVR/RiftDK1
 
B

Bsigg12

Member
Deasnutz said:
It's NOT doing 120fps.

It's 60fps with frame interpolation on the headset. That might be processed on the box.
Click to expand...

Huh? The screen they're using can run at a native 120hz and that's an option supported by the system at a game level not that we'll really see many utilize that.
 
K

Krejlooc

Banned
Bsigg12 said:
Huh? The screen they're using can run at a native 120hz and that's an option supported by the system at a game level.
Click to expand...

Frame rate is not the same as refresh rate.

I very much doubt you'll see many 120 fps applications on PSVR. The entire reason they have chosen a 120 hz panel is because 24 fps, 30 fps, and 60 fps can display on a 120 hz screen without wonky pulldown ratios.
 
S

serversurfer

Member
Shin-Ra said:
No idea, I haven't read anything on the specs for the social screen feed even.
Click to expand...
Ah, right on.


Krejlooc said:
it's not doing anything to assist with the PS4 APU.
Click to expand...
Well, it sorta does, but not in the way people think. It processes the 3D audio, which they had been doing on the GPU previously, now freeing up more time on the GPU for rendering and other jobs.


Krejlooc said:
Yes, I do. You list the expensive components and hand wave them off in the very same sentence. What will they spend that money on? Lenses, high end IMUs, screens, etc.
Click to expand...
Except, that stuff doesn't cost that much. You accuse me of hand-waving, but I've posted actual costs of these types of components, lots of times. All I really get from you in response is, "Dude, you don't know what you're talking about; it's super expensive." After I present the actual numbers I've found, you dismiss me with a self-referential appeal to authority, so I don't think I'm the one hand-having here. All due respect, of course. <3

There is no public BOM for the DK2, but there is for the DK1.

Feel free to research yourself: https://github.com/OculusVR/RiftDK1
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I can't find the BOM there. I'm actually not entirely sure what I'm even looking at. I glanced around, but it sorta looked like a bunch of instructions. Did you post the wrong link?

I don't know how the BOM of DK1 or even DK2 would be relevant here anyway. Again, you need to look at how much it costs companies like Sony, Samsung, and HTC to build this stuff, not a bunch of well-funded hobbyists.


Deasnutz said:
It's NOT doing 120fps.

It's 60fps with frame interpolation on the headset. That might be processed on the box.
Click to expand...
This is completely wrong.


Krejlooc said:
Frame rate is not the same as refresh rate.

I very much doubt you'll see many 120 fps applications on PSVR. The entire reason they have chosen a 120 hz panel is because 24 fps, 30 fps, and 60 fps can display on a 120 hz screen without wonky pulldown ratios.
Click to expand...
Err, they're not going to be doing anything at 24 or 30 fps… =/

Yes, because they're at 120 Hz, they can handle 60 fps native content, or 90 fps native like Rift and Vive can, or 120 fps native. Reprojection is mandatory at 60 fps, and optional-but-very-cheap-and-highly-encouraged at 90 and 120 fps. Games are being developed for PSVR at all three frame rates. Unsurprisingly, the target frame rate is dictated by the demands of the game in question.
 
vpance

vpance

Member
Blanquito said:
You're comparing significantly different products for significantly different prices in significantly different markets. In addition to being a completely new type of device.

Sure, in comparison to to other devices VR will look like a bomba. It's not even selling close to what iPhones are selling now, right? Bomba.

(Also, note: the first iPhone was a bomba too, it only sold around 6 million total. What a joke, right? Certainly nothing good came from a solid foundation, first gen device that sold so poorly)
Click to expand...

I don't think the Vita comparison is all that unwarranted. Of course the product function is different but user wise not really. We know the majority of Vita owners were core PS3 owners (basically all Gaf users), and a large portion of initial buyers of PSVR will likely be same market too, as in core PS owners willing to outlay $500+ for PS hardware within a generation. Add in the far greater possibility of the mainstream market showing interest to this number and all of a sudden PSVR only selling less than half of what Vita did year one sounds a bit ridiculous.
 
F

foolishoptimist

Member
serversurfer said:
Well, it sorta does, but not in the way people think. It processes the 3D audio, which they had been doing on the GPU previously, now freeing up more time on the GPU for rendering and other jobs.
Click to expand...

The black box is also apparently doing some pre-processing on the sensor data from the headset, before sending that onto the PS4.
 
K

Krejlooc

Banned
serversurfer said:
Except, that stuff doesn't cost that much. You accuse me of hand-waving, but I've posted actual costs of these types of components, lots of times. All I really get from you in response is, "Dude, you don't know what you're talking about; it's super expensive." After I present the actual numbers I've found, you dismiss me with a self-referential appeal to authority, so I don't think I'm the one hand-having here. All due respect, of course. <3
Click to expand...

Then we shall wait and see. You seem to think "BOM" is simply the cost of parts. What about the cost of manufacturing? What about the cost of shipping? The cost of advertising? These are all parts of "cost."

I don't know how the BOM of DK1 or even DK2 would be relevant here anyway. Again, you need to look at how much it costs companies like Sony, Samsung, and HTC to build this stuff, not a bunch of well-funded hobbyists.
Click to expand...

Then perhaps you should listen to what companies like Sony, Samsung, and HTC have said in relation to cost.

Err, they're not going to be doing anything at 24 or 30 fps… =/
Click to expand...

They will definitely be showing videos in a virtual cinema. The world around will be 60 or 120 fps, and the video displayed on the virtual screen will be a multiple to lock the native framerate of the video into the world without inducing jutter within the virtual screen.

It already happens.
 
S

serversurfer

Member
foolishoptimist said:
The black box is also apparently doing some pre-processing on the sensor data from the headset, before sending that onto the PS4.
Click to expand...
No more than the DS4 "processes" motion data for transmission over USB/BT. So in that sense, the chip in the PSVR is much simpler, since it only needs to collect the motion data and not data from the trackpad, analog sticks, etc., and only preps it for USB, not BT too.

So when Rick says it's processing the sensor data, he means, "It also has a tiny chunk of the motherboard you'd find in a DS4."
 
F

foolishoptimist

Member
serversurfer said:
No more than the DS4 "processes" motion data for transmission over USB/BT. So in that sense, the chip in the PSVR is much simpler, since it only needs to collect the motion data and not data from the trackpad, analog sticks, etc., and only preps it for USB, not BT too.

So when Rick says it's processing the sensor data, he means, "It also has a tiny chunk of the motherboard you'd find in a DS4."
Click to expand...

That sounds like the kindof thing that wouldn't be at all worth mentioning, and yet he mentioned it.
 
EventHorizon

EventHorizon

Member
plainr_ said:
The increase in size doesn't make sense for what is essentially a glorified hdmi splitter. Has to do more or be able to do other tasks now.

I'm just gonna take a guess and say the external box is now capable enough to render a 3d environment for non-VR games like a theater room.



It's obvious that the PS4 can't do this by itself.
Click to expand...

Damn I thought ai was going to be so clever to mention this. Now I am just going to be less clever by agreeing with you. The PSVR becomes a lot more marketable if it can also be billed as a general purpose display device. Then the price starts to be compared to that of a TV instead of a peripheral.
 
K

kyser73

Member
Sniffynose said:
Oh I know, but the PS4 and 120fps don't seem like something that would work without the magic black box, which is why I am curious if/what it is doing to assist the PS4 apu


I honestly feel like it's just an hdmi to usb adapter with power brick for the helmet though, and of course handles input and output of the helmet sensors.

I'm excited about seeing what makes it work, and how it interfaces with everything.
Click to expand...

There have been multiple threads and a plethora of PSVR coverage that pretty much renders all your commentary in this thread null, especially your hyperbole about Virtusl Boy @ frame rates.

But hey, I know bothering to acquaint yourself with actual information can be hard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

IGN: A Year Since Its Release, Sony Seems to Have Abandoned PlayStation VR2
4 5 6 7 8
355
20K
CamHostage replied
Valve Hints At Its Wireless VR Headset Plans In Steam Deck OLED Interview
Opinion Game Dev VR
16
2K
mrcroket replied
PlayStation 6 Is Planned to Be the Most Powerful Console of Its Generation; Sony Is Only Considering AMD
Rumor Hardware 2 3 4
157
13K
Mexen replied
Coming soon to PS VR2 – Zombie Army VR, Little Cities: Bigger!, Wanderer: The Fragments of Fate, The Wizards – Dark Times: Brotherhood, and more
News Platform
7
716
darthvargi replied
Black Friday week in the UK was the biggest sales week for PS5 outside of its launch week. It was the No.3 biggest week for Xbox Series S and X, too.
2
78
6K
xiskza replied
Top Bottom