• 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.

PSVR2 full specs and details

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why do people judge PSVR's success this way? It's super stupid to do so. Nobody thinks VR headsets were going to be bought by the majority of PS4 owners. It'll be like judging PCVR based on the percentages of Steam users.
No, because Steam users have completely different Pcs and many are not beefy enough for VR. But all the ~120 million PS4 owners could use the PSVR, so it's logical to use percentages. You can judge success however you want, but in my book 5% is not very much.
 

Neo_game

Member
Why do people judge PSVR's success this way? It's super stupid to do so. Nobody thinks VR headsets were going to be bought by the majority of PS4 owners. It'll be like judging PCVR based on the percentages of Steam users.

I agree, VR is a niche and I think it is not going to cheap either. They really need awesome games for it
 

TLZ

Member
I didn't say fail, but it could have been more sucessful. As far as i remember not even 5% of the PS4 owners bought it although the price droped pretty fast. But fail or not, namechanging is a marketing tactic, look at Microsoft, Sega and Ninetndo consoles. I'm pretty sure Wii U would have been more succesful with another name.
I don't think that matters much here. PSVR was the start and 2 is the continuation. And hopefully a much better one. Plus it shows Sony's belief in their hardware.

MS name change is horrible.
Sega's and Nintendo's name change have nothing to do with how the previous hardware did.

Then you have Sony's own proof of simple numbering that works. Why change?
 

mckmas8808

Ah. Peace and quiet. #ADayWithoutAWoman
No, because Steam users have completely different Pcs and many are not beefy enough for VR. But all the ~120 million PS4 owners could use the PSVR, so it's logical to use percentages. You can judge success however you want, but in my book 5% is not very much.

But one number shouldn't be compared to the other. If the PS5 goes on to sell 120 million units, but the PSVR2 sells 10 million units........someone in the year 2026 will say it failed because it only sold 8% of all total PS5s. Now how silly will that sound?
 

TLZ

Member
No, because Steam users have completely different Pcs and many are not beefy enough for VR. But all the ~120 million PS4 owners could use the PSVR, so it's logical to use percentages. You can judge success however you want, but in my book 5% is not very much.
It's an accessory actually. And it's an experiment of sorts too. You have to start somewhere and improve the tech gradually. They believe it has potential to be the future of gaming maybe, so they can't just abandon it now, especially when VR's picked up and growing. In the end, it's up to society to decide whether they like this future or not.
 

Rudius

Member
Higher specs than the index? Definitely not the case at all from the leaks. Inside out tracking alone is a huge step backwards. Audio will be inferior. Pretty sure the same thing with controllers as well. It's a downgrade compared to my index, even if it has PC compatibility.
By inferior audio I refer to the built in hardware solution Index has, noting you can't match with good headphones. The audio processing of PS5 is the best in the market.

As for the display, Index is LCD, PSVR2 will be Oled; Index is 1440x1600 per eye, PSVR2 is 2000x2040 per eye; Index is SDR, PSVR2 is HDR. FoV remains to be seen, but will probably be close.

In controllers Index wins in some aspects: tracking (probably) and finger tracking, but looses in others: hepatic motors and adaptive triggers.

And there is the biggest advantage of all: eye tracking with dynamic foveated rendering. This exists already on PC, but PSVR2 will make use of it in games.
 
Last edited:

Tripolygon

Member
Higher specs than the index? Definitely not the case at all from the leaks. Inside out tracking alone is a huge step backwards. Audio will be inferior. Pretty sure the same thing with controllers as well. It's a downgrade compared to my index, even if it has PC compatibility.

Headset
Valve IndexPSVR2 HMD Rumor
Screen / Resolution / RefreshLCD 1440 x 1600 120HzOLED 2000 x 2040 120Hz
Pixel Density598 PPI653+PPI if 6.1in - 6.9in screen
FOV114, "effective" 120110+
HDRNoYes
Eye TrackingNoYes
LensDouble ElementFresnel
HapticsNoHD Haptics
IPDHardware AdjustableUnknown

Inside-out tracking is not a step backward. It can be just as accurate as outside-in tracking depending on implementation and sensor coverage just like outside-in. PSVR 1 is outside-in tracking and is definitely not a step ahead of oculus inside-out tracking for example.

Audio should be comparable even if they adopt a use your own headset strategy as before. Plugin whatever excellent headset into the HMD or plugin USB headset into PS5 directly and get excellent 3D audio. Would be better if they integrated built-in audio hardware as that would remove the extra pressure of added bulk over the ears, but we'll see.

Controls

Valve KnucklesPSVR 2
Buttons and Analog SticksYesYes
Capacitive finger trackingYes for all fingersYes for 3 fingers
Hand tracking without controllerNot possiblePossible with inside out tracking
HapticsHD HapticsHD Haptics
Adaptive triggersNoYes

There is nothing that should be "inferior" about the next-gen VR experience on PS5 in terms of hardware compared to the Valve Index, they are very comparable.
 
Last edited:

MrFunSocks

Banned
It's an accessory actually. And it's an experiment of sorts too. You have to start somewhere and improve the tech gradually. They believe it has potential to be the future of gaming maybe, so they can't just abandon it now, especially when VR's picked up and growing. In the end, it's up to society to decide whether they like this future or not.
Just like 3D, remember that? Sony dedicated an entire E3 show to it, then abandoned it.

Wired is a deal breaker.
 
Last edited:

Tripolygon

Member
Just like 3D, remember that? Sony dedicated an entire E3 show to it, then abandoned it.

Wired is a deal breaker.
VR is the culmination of AR, Motion controllers, and 3D all put together into a singular product.

Wired is a necessity and I'm almost certain the wireless version is in the works too. I still strongly believe that they went with Wifi 6 for the same reason they put a USB C port in the front.
 

Susurrus

Member
I'm kind of confused about people saying the PSVR has a mess of cables. Are they talking about the control box having a bit of a setup? I guess that's kind of annoying but once it is setup you leave it and forget, the box is just there when you want to use VR.

The headset itself only has 1 cable. Well, maybe 2 combined into 1 since there's 2 plugs but it functions as 1.
 

MrFunSocks

Banned
VR is the culmination of AR, Motion controllers, and 3D all put together into a singular product.

Wired is a necessity and I'm almost certain the wireless version is in the works too. I still strongly believe that they went with Wifi 6 for the same reason they put a USB C port in the front.
Why is wired a necessity?
 

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
By inferior audio I refer to the built in hardware solution Index has, noting you can't match with good headphones. The audio processing of PS5 is the best in the market.

As for the display, Index is LCD, PSVR2 will be Oled; Index is 1440x1600 per eye, PSVR2 is 2000x2040 per eye; Index is SDR, PSVR2 is HDR. FoV remains to be seen, but will probably be close.

In controllers Index wins in some aspects: tracking (probably) and finger tracking, but looses in others: hepatic motors and adaptive triggers.

And there is the biggest advantage of all: eye tracking with dynamic foveated rendering. This exists already on PC, but PSVR2 will make use of it in games.
When it comes to audio, the index will not be beaten by the psvr2. The audio processing of the ps5 is inferior to my PC, by miles and miles.

As far as resolution, what does it matter if it can have a "higher" resolution, if it won't be rendering native resolution half the time? DLSS kills that immediately. There's no answer to DLSS at all, which beats native resolution with image clarity and sharpness.

When the index was made, it literally uses the lowest latency LCD panels in the market, specifically for this reason. I can guarantee my index will have much lower latency than the psvr2, and higher framerates.

Inside out tracking is definitely inferior to having dedicated sensors. It's literally millimeter precision vs whatever. You just can't beat that at all when it comes to accuracy, precision, and speed.
Headset
Valve IndexPSVR2 HMD Rumor
Screen / Resolution / RefreshLCD 1440 x 1600 120HzOLED 2000 x 2040 120Hz
Pixel Density598 PPI653+PPI if 6.1in - 6.9in screen
FOV114, "effective" 120110+
HDRNoYes
Eye TrackingNoYes
LensDouble ElementFresnel
HapticsNoHD Haptics
IPDHardware AdjustableUnknown

Inside-out tracking is not a step backward. It can be just as accurate as outside-in tracking depending on implementation and sensor coverage just like outside-in. PSVR 1 is outside-in tracking and is definitely not a step ahead of oculus inside-out tracking for example.

Audio should be comparable even if they adopt a use your own headset strategy as before. Plugin whatever excellent headset into the HMD or plugin USB headset into PS5 directly and get excellent 3D audio. Would be better if they integrated built-in audio hardware as that would remove the extra pressure of added bulk over the ears, but we'll see.

Controls

Valve KnucklesPSVR 2
Buttons and Analog SticksYesYes
Capacitive finger trackingYes for all fingersYes for 3 fingers
Hand tracking without controllerNot possiblePossible with inside out tracking
HapticsHD HapticsHD Haptics
Adaptive triggersNoYes

There is nothing that should be "inferior" about the next-gen VR experience on PS5 in terms of hardware compared to the Valve Index, they are very comparable.
Read my comment above.
 
Last edited:
As far as resolution, what does it matter if it can have a "higher" resolution, if it won't be rendering native resolution half the time?

I can guarantee my index will have much lower latency than the psvr2, and higher framerates.
We haven't yet seen the benefits of foveated rendering allowing higher frames and resolution. Sony will show the way. Let's hope the benefits will cascade to PC eventually once eye tracking becomes more common to pcvr.
 

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
We haven't yet seen the benefits of foveated rendering allowing higher frames and resolution. Sony will show the way. Let's hope the benefits will cascade to PC eventually once eye tracking becomes more common to pcvr.
There is already eye tracking on PC. It's just not widespread, as it's in it's infancy. But the index is definitely the better headset. I'll upgrade when index 2 releases.

Lower latency in VR is key to immersion, especially with 144hz refresh rate.
 
Inside out tracking is definitely inferior to having dedicated sensors. It's literally millimeter precision vs whatever.

VS 'whatever' huh? Strong argument. :messenger_tears_of_joy:

The Index is a nice paperweight once you finish Alyx for the 10th time. Or you can play the multitudes of garbage PC-exclusive VR shovelware on the Steam Store. Or you can play some of the decent multiplatform games that only exist because they were designed for Oculus hardware and ported over.

We'll see what you have to say about inside-out tracking once Valve releases their next headset with inside-out tracking...
 

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
VS 'whatever' huh? Strong argument. :messenger_tears_of_joy:

The Index is a nice paperweight once you finish Alyx for the 10th time. Or you can play the multitudes of garbage PC-exclusive VR shovelware on the Steam Store. Or you can play some of the decent multiplatform games that only exist because they were designed for Oculus hardware and ported over.

We'll see what you have to say about inside-out tracking once Valve releases their next headset with inside-out tracking...
Index a paper weight? Why do you think psvr2 can hold a candle to it? I can't name one game on psvr that competes with any of the "shovelware" on PC? Alyx wipes the floor with every single psvr game ever made, in existence. Not sure why you brought that up, when you have no room to argue. Lol 🤣😆.


Again, my sensors allows more precision than the psvr2 will ever have. You just can't beat that at all, ever. You can't defy physics.
 
Last edited:
Index a paper weight? Why do you think psvr2 can hold a candle to it? I can't name one game on psvr that competes with any of the "shovelware" on PC? Alyx wipes the floor with every single psvr game ever made, in existence. Not sure why you brought that up, when you have no room to argue. Lol 🤣😆.


Again, my sensors allows more precision than the psvr2 will ever have. You just can't beat that at all, ever. You can't defy physics.

PCVR in general is pathetic, and shows no signs of getting better. It's all because there is NO quality VR software development on the PCVR side.

I say this as someone with a PCVR setup since 2017, and also a Quest 2. And I can assure you, you really can't tell the difference with Quest 2's inside-out tracking except in very rare circumstances where you happen to occlude your controller at a specific angle. But as far as "accuracy" goes, you can't tell the difference.

I also HATE using wired VR now. Wireless is just that much better.

Maybe I'll re-evaluate when we get a decent PCVR software library. I think I'll be waiting a while.

EDIT: And PSVR2 will probably have a bigger/better VR software library than PCVR on the first day of launch, which says a lot about PCVR's slim pickings.
 
Last edited:

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
But it's not prevalent so nobody makes games for pcvr with that in mind.

But once devs develop for psvr2 with foveated rendering, you will see the same implementation cascade to pcvr games. Sony will show the way.
If it's already on PC, how will Sony show the way? Maybe like apple, it will follow and copy what's already available, and make it more mainstream. That's about it though. Didn't happen with psvr1 though.
PCVR in general is pathetic, and shows no signs of getting better. It's all because there is NO quality VR software development on the PCVR side.

I say this as someone with a PCVR setup since 2017, and also a Quest 2. And I can assure you, you really can't tell the difference with Quest 2's inside-out tracking except in very rare circumstances where you happen to occlude your controller at a specific angle. But as far as "accuracy" goes, you can't tell the difference.

I also HATE using wired VR now. Wireless is just that much better.

Maybe I'll re-evaluate when we get a decent PCVR software library. I think I'll be waiting a while.

EDIT: And PSVR2 will probably have a bigger/better VR software library than PCVR on the first day of launch, which says a lot about PCVR's slim pickings.
How can you say that, yet PC has way better hardware and software than Sony ever has? Are you delusional or living in your own imagination? Can someone wake you up to smell the coffee? Please show me better software on Sony hardware. I'll literally wait.

If wireless is better, wouldn't psvr2 be a downgrade, being that it's completely wired?? Bad argument?


I'll wait for you to provide some examples of software. It's like you are harping on and on about these non-existent games coming to psvr. Do you know something we don't know? Cause there's nothing on the radar to even showcase psvr in a better light than what's currently available on PC. Again, I'll wait for your supposed examples.
 
If it's already on PC, how will Sony show the way? Maybe like apple, it will follow and copy what's already available, and make it more mainstream. That's about it though. Didn't happen with psvr1 though.

How can you say that, yet PC has way better hardware and software than Sony ever has? Are you delusional or living in your own imagination? Can someone wake you up to smell the coffee? Please show me better software on Sony hardware. I'll literally wait.

If wireless is better, wouldn't psvr2 be a downgrade, being that it's completely wired?? Bad argument?


I'll wait for you to provide some examples of software. It's like you are harping on and on about these non-existent games coming to psvr. Do you know something we don't know? Cause there's nothing on the radar to even showcase psvr in a better light than what's currently available on PC. Again, I'll wait for your supposed examples.

How about you give me some examples of AAA PCVR software that actually uses more than 2% of the power of my 3080?

Alyx was impressive, and exactly the kind of thing I expect (although it was a bit repetitive gameplay-wise). Unfortunately, that's about all there is.

Look at the top PCVR sellers on the Steam Store:
Alyx (OK)
Beat Saber (lol)
Cooking Simulator VR (lol)
Pavlov VR (fine, but nothing that impressive)
Boneworks (looks super dated and is janky as hell)
Elder Scrolls (lol... could run on an Xbox).

The list goes on and on. What's the point of having next-gen PC hardware for VR when all you can play is dumbed down garbage that looks like a game from 6 years ago?
 

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
How about you give me some examples of AAA PCVR software that actually uses more than 2% of the power of my 3080?

Alyx was impressive, and exactly the kind of thing I expect (although it was a bit repetitive gameplay-wise). Unfortunately, that's about all there is.

Look at the top PCVR sellers on the Steam Store:
Alyx (OK)
Beat Saber (lol)
Cooking Simulator VR (lol)
Pavlov VR (fine, but nothing that impressive)
Boneworks (looks super dated and is janky as hell)
Elder Scrolls (lol... could run on an Xbox).

The list goes on and on. What's the point of having next-gen PC hardware for VR when all you can play is dumbed down garbage that looks like a game from 6 years ago?
All of those run better than it would on a ps5. I don't get your point? What's better on a ps5? I'm still waiting on your supposed examples, which I keep asking for. So if you are gonna reply, please state some better software, with better visuals and elements of gameplay. Oh yeah, and make sure you mention AAA titles, since you keep harping on about em. And again ... I'll wait. Time is ticking my brother.
 
All of those run better than it would on a ps5. I don't get your point? What's better on a ps5? I'm still waiting on your supposed examples, which I keep asking for. So if you are gonna reply, please state some better software, with better visuals and elements of gameplay. Oh yeah, and make sure you mention AAA titles, since you keep harping on about em. And again ... I'll wait. Time is ticking my brother.

What are you going on about. I made my point very clearly.

How much processing power do you think it takes to render Beat Saber or Cooking Simulator?

My point is that your Index and PC together are capable of running amazing software that DOESNT EXIST and shows no sign of existing anytime soon. It's a waste. By the time there are enough AAA games to make it worthwhile, it's going to be severely obsolete.

If Sony makes PSVR2, they will have AAA experiences lined up for it, I guarantee it.
 

Tripolygon

Member
When it comes to audio, the index will not be beaten by the psvr2. The audio processing of the ps5 is inferior to my PC, by miles and miles.
The audio processing hardware built into motherboards of most PCs is serviceable but not as capable compared to what is built into these console's SoCs. Moreover, most of the audio processing is done by your CPU in games anyway and is literally the same experience using the same middlewares. Valves 3d audio api are not "better" than Oculus or Sony etc.
As far as resolution, what does it matter if it can have a "higher" resolution, if it won't be rendering native resolution half the time? DLSS kills that immediately. There's no answer to DLSS at all, which beats native resolution with image clarity and sharpness.
Higher resolution means higher PPI which reduces the perceived screendoor effect and also improves perceived sharpness. VR games are one of the places where native resolution does not really matter as the periphery is always rendered at a lower resolution and with eye-tracking aided foveated rendering it becomes even better.

When the index was made, it literally uses the lowest latency LCD panels in the market, specifically for this reason. I can guarantee my index will have much lower latency than the psvr2, and higher framerates.
OLEDs generally have lower pixel response times compared to LCD and exhibit less ghosting. Your valve index will not have lower latency than PSVR 2 rumored OLED screen. In terms of refresh rate both support 120Hz but the index does support a 144Hz mode as well.
Inside out tracking is definitely inferior to having dedicated sensors. It's literally millimeter precision vs whatever. You just can't beat that at all when it comes to accuracy, precision, and speed.
Inside-out tracking is not inferior to outside-in tracking. I just told you PSVR1 has outside-in tracking and is definitely inferior to oculus inside-out tracking. It is all about implementation. Both can be equally accurate if you use high-precision IMUs and sensors.
 
Last edited:

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
What are you going on about. I made my point very clearly.

How much processing power do you think it takes to render Beat Saber or Cooking Simulator?

My point is that your Index and PC together are capable of running amazing software that DOESNT EXIST and shows no sign of existing anytime soon. It's a waste. By the time there are enough AAA games to make it worthwhile, it's going to be severely obsolete.

If Sony makes PSVR2, they will have AAA experiences lined up for it, I guarantee it.
So.... Nothing? You literally are coming at me, yet have absolutely no examples to refute my statements? I don't get it bro, it's kinda weird. Just imagine arguing about something you have no evidence or examples to support?
The audio processing hardware built into motherboards of most PCs is serviceable but not as capable compared to what is built into these console's SoCs. Moreover, most of the audio processing is done by your CPU in games anyway and is literally the same experience using the same middlewares. Valves 3d audio api are not "better" than Oculus or Sony etc.

Higher resolution means higher PPI which reduces the perceived screendoor effect and also improves perceived sharpness. VR games are one of the places where native resolution does not really matter as the periphery is always rendered at a lower resolution and with eye-tracking aided foveated rendering it becomes even better.


OLEDs generally have lower pixel response times compared to LCD and exhibit less ghosting. Your valve index will not have lower latency than PSVR 2 rumored OLED screen. In terms of refresh rate both support 120Hz but the index does support a 144Hz mode as well.

Inside-out tracking is not inferior to outside-in tracking. I just told you PSVR1 has outside-in tracking and is definitely inferior to oculus inside-out tracking. It is all about implementation. Both can be equally accurate if you use high-precision IMUs and sensors.
Not as capable? Would you like to provide proof on that? If you know anything about me, audio is my realm of expertise. You can literally go through my post history and see it. The soc in ps5 is nothing special compared to any built in audio on motherboards. I'm not sure why people believe this, I guess marketing is to blame? And you are it's prime customer, as you fell for it.


What makes you think the ps5 can run native resolution, per eye, consistently, when it can't do it for pancake games (2D)? Siii you think VR games will somehow have magical performance out of the blue? Literally 2x screens being rendered, when it doesn't have the performance to run a single screen half the time?


Higher resolution means nothing, when you gotta rely on CB rendering. That is not the move, when you have DLSS. This simply can't be argued. It's proven time and time again.

Valve specifically choose the lowest latency panels. So it's 144hz will have better response time of the pavr2 oled at it's interpolated 60hz/120hz. We all know ps5 isn't going to run full resolution x 2 screens, at full resolution, when it can't achieve that on a single screen in most games. Please correct me if I'm wrong (which I'm not).


I specifically am talking about index tracking. Compare psvr1 or psvr2 to index, and let me know how it compares to index millimeter precision. Again, I'll wait.
 
Last edited:

RavageX

Member
Imo, i suspect most people are too lazy to go all out with VR, and dont think wireless is that big of deal with a home setup. I personally love physically active games.

I remember seeing some people complain about some games like boxing causing you to work up a sweat.

I get annoyed by the cable on PSVR sometimes, but there is no way id pass on the new one because its not wireless.

VR support is one of the main reasons im even keeping up with gaming.
 

ethomaz

Banned
I believe PSVR2 will have both options.
Wired for best experience.
Wireless for convenience.

Most will probably use wired.

Another key point is if Sony will use the router wireless signal or a direct WiFi 6 connection.

I hope it is a smart way like Vita Remote Play… direct wireless connection when close to PS4 or using router WiFi connection when far away.
 
Last edited:

MrFunSocks

Banned
Imo, i suspect most people are too lazy to go all out with VR, and dont think wireless is that big of deal with a home setup. I personally love physically active games.

I remember seeing some people complain about some games like boxing causing you to work up a sweat.

I get annoyed by the cable on PSVR sometimes, but there is no way id pass on the new one because its not wireless.

VR support is one of the main reasons im even keeping up with gaming.
I can’t even imagine playing something like super hot or creed with a wired headset. Whatever it’s attached to would come crashing down in minutes.

I’ll literally never even consider a wired vr setup.
 
Last edited:

Tripolygon

Member
Is it because of the 4k per eye resolution?
The bandwidth is not necessarily the issue, but latency is not up to where they consider it suitable for the mass market yet. You don't want to release a product that makes people puke. Wifi 6E promises lower latency for VR and low latency applications. I think with good software they might be able to push Wifi 6 to achieve a usable result.
Not as capable? Would you like to provide proof on that? If you know anything about me, audio is my realm of expertise. You can literally go through my post history and see it. The soc in ps5 is nothing special compared to any built in audio on motherboards. I'm not sure why people believe this, I guess marketing is to blame? And you are it's prime customer, as you fell for it.
I don't need to go through your post history, you are a very vocal visible fanatic on this forum, this is not the first time we have got into a discussion on this forum. Never said the SoC in PS5, I said consoles Xbox included have much capable audio solutions than what is included in your general PC motherboard which are just simple Realtek audio codecs, nothing fancy. Some expensive motherboards might include high-end DACs. What does most of the audio processing in games is the CPU in your PC. There use to be a time where dedicated sound cards that did audio processing were a thing but that task has been taken over by the CPU. An audio person should be able to know that.

During Hotchips 2020, Microsoft talked about what is dedicated to audio processing on XSX. PS5 does not have a similar detailed presentation but going by what we know they talked equivalent of a CU dedicated to audio, which would equal 64 x 2 x 2.23 = 285GF worth of compute dedicated to audio processing. Yes, Intel CPUs have dedicated DSPs but nothing compared to what these consoles have and AMD removed DSPs in favor of using GPU compute for audio processing. Has nothing to do with marketing. Consoles have always put great emphasis on included powerful dedicated audio hardware.




What makes you think the ps5 can run native resolution, per eye, consistently, when it can't do it for pancake games (2D)? Siii you think VR games will somehow have magical performance out of the blue? Literally 2x screens being rendered, when it doesn't have the performance to run a single screen half the time?
Ask yourself how VR can run on a 1.8TF PS4 or the Oculus Quest with a mobile SoC. Foveated rendering. VR games are not rendered in the native resolution of the display, only the center of the lens gets higher resolution while everywhere else is rendered at a quarter or even lower in the periphery.
Higher resolution means nothing, when you gotta rely on CB rendering. That is not the move, when you have DLSS. This simply can't be argued. It's proven time and time again.
High resolution means more PPI, lower perceived screen door effect, sharper image. DLSS is a form of reconstruction like Checkerboard rendering or Unreal Engine reconstruction technique. Some are better than others but the end result is to produce a perceptually higher resolution compared to rendering at a lower native resolution.
Valve specifically choose the lowest latency panels. So it's 144hz will have better response time of the pavr2 oled at it's interpolated 60hz/120hz. We all know ps5 isn't going to run full resolution x 2 screens, at full resolution, when it can't achieve that on a single screen in most games. Please correct me if I'm wrong (which I'm not).
LCD will never produce a lower latency panel than OLED. It is just the nature of the technology. Pixel response time on OLED will be unmatched by LCD. You are wrong simply because you don't know what you are talking about.

PSVR1 Motion to photon latency 0ms
(the delay between the movement of the hmd and the change of the VR display showing the movement)


Vive Index 3ms


I specifically am talking about index tracking. Compare psvr1 or psvr2 to index, and let me know how it compares to index millimeter precision. Again, I'll wait.
The experience will be comparable. You keep saying millimeter precision and you don't even know what that means.

 
Last edited:

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
The bandwidth is not necessarily the issue, but latency is not up to where they consider it suitable for the mass market yet. You don't want to release a product that makes people puke. Wifi 6E promises lower latency for VR and low latency applications. I think with good software they might be able to push Wifi 6 to achieve a usable result.

I don't need to go through your post history, you are a very vocal visible fanatic on this forum, this is not the first time we have got into a discussion on this forum. Never said the SoC in PS5, I said consoles Xbox included have much capable audio solutions than what is included in your general PC motherboard which are just simple Realtek audio codecs, nothing fancy. Some expensive motherboards might include high-end DACs. What does most of the audio processing in games is the CPU in your PC. There use to be a time where dedicated sound cards that did audio processing were a thing but that task has been taken over by the CPU. An audio person should be able to know that.

During Hotchips 2020, Microsoft talked about what is dedicated to audio processing on XSX. PS5 does not have a similar detailed presentation but going by what we know they talked equivalent of a CU dedicated to audio, which would equal 64 x 2 x 2.23 = 285GF worth of compute dedicated to audio processing. Yes, Intel CPUs have dedicated DSPs but nothing compared to what these consoles have and AMD removed DSPs in favor of using GPU compute for audio processing. Has nothing to do with marketing. Consoles have always put great emphasis on included powerful dedicated audio hardware.





Ask yourself how VR can run on a 1.8TF PS4 or the Oculus Quest with a mobile SoC. Foveated rendering. VR games are not rendered in the native resolution of the display, only the center of the lens gets higher resolution while everywhere else is rendered at a quarter or even lower in the periphery.

High resolution means more PPI, lower perceived screen door effect, sharper image. DLSS is a form of reconstruction like Checkerboard rendering or Unreal Engine reconstruction technique. Some are better than others but the end result is to produce a perceptually higher resolution compared to rendering at a lower native resolution.

LCD will never produce a lower latency panel than OLED. It is just the nature of the technology. Pixel response time on OLED will be unmatched by LCD. You are wrong simply because you don't know what you are talking about.

PSVR1 Motion to photon latency 0ms
(the delay between the movement of the hmd and the change of the VR display showing the movement)


Vive Index 3ms



The experience will be comparable. You keep saying millimeter precision and you don't even know what that means.

What does wifi6 have to do with anything? Isn't psvr2 wired? Haven't heard about wireless with it at all. No release papers.

Having the option to have whatever DAC instead of using default ps5 on board sound, is literally the best option. Having spacial audio is better than on the ear audio, which emulates how us humans perceive audio in real life circumstances. That's why open back headsets are used, over sealed headsets for mixing, mastering, etc. This is the reality of audio engineering. If you ever worked with movies, shows, etc, you would know this as a fact.

Consoles don't have this "amazing" audio that you keep on mentioning. It's not a sophisticated audio chip, and I'm not sure why you keep on going in this direction. A very basic ass DAC, will do so much more than any console in existence. I don't care where you came from, or what you think know, etc, but you'll never beat a dedicated DAC.

Do you think foveated rending is somehow better than native all of a sudden? Lol

Do you think DLSS is worse than checkerboard rendering, lol again

Please show me where psvr2 has lower latency than valve index, while running the same game. Think about it. Native resolution, x2, being that there are two eyes that need to be rendered, at full screen resolution. Does ps5 even have the hardware to do that @ 120fps @native resolution? Come on now, it can't do that at 60fps in most games. What makes you think it can handle 120 fps, x2 screens, at max resolution?! Please show me that magical cerny sauce that will allow VR do do that, when it can't do it with pancake games.
 

Tarkus98

Member
But one number shouldn't be compared to the other. If the PS5 goes on to sell 120 million units, but the PSVR2 sells 10 million units........someone in the year 2026 will say it failed because it only sold 8% of all total PS5s. Now how silly will that sound?
This.
 

Tripolygon

Member
What does wifi6 have to do with anything? Isn't psvr2 wired? Haven't heard about wireless with it at all. No release papers.

Having the option to have whatever DAC instead of using default ps5 on board sound, is literally the best option. Having spacial audio is better than on the ear audio, which emulates how us humans perceive audio in real life circumstances. That's why open back headsets are used, over sealed headsets for mixing, mastering, etc. This is the reality of audio engineering. If you ever worked with movies, shows, etc, you would know this as a fact.

Consoles don't have this "amazing" audio that you keep on mentioning. It's not a sophisticated audio chip, and I'm not sure why you keep on going in this direction. A very basic ass DAC, will do so much more than any console in existence. I don't care where you came from, or what you think know, etc, but you'll never beat a dedicated DAC.

Do you think foveated rending is somehow better than native all of a sudden? Lol

Do you think DLSS is worse than checkerboard rendering, lol again

Please show me where psvr2 has lower latency than valve index, while running the same game. Think about it. Native resolution, x2, being that there are two eyes that need to be rendered, at full screen resolution. Does ps5 even have the hardware to do that @ 120fps @native resolution? Come on now, it can't do that at 60fps in most games. What makes you think it can handle 120 fps, x2 screens, at max resolution?! Please show me that magical cerny sauce that will allow VR do do that, when it can't do it with pancake games.

People shouldn't confidently talk about things that have no clue on.
If you can't tell the difference between a DAC, ADC, and a DSP you should probably stfu.
 
Last edited:

Snake29

Member
All of those run better than it would on a ps5. I don't get your point? What's better on a ps5? I'm still waiting on your supposed examples, which I keep asking for. So if you are gonna reply, please state some better software, with better visuals and elements of gameplay. Oh yeah, and make sure you mention AAA titles, since you keep harping on about em. And again ... I'll wait. Time is ticking my brother.

PCVR is stuck with old titles in general. Alyx a early 2020 title. PSVR2 just needs one game that is in the same league or better and then Alyx, and it will be ahead already with quality games. Games like Boneworks and Alyx will also see the light on PSVR2 for sure.
 

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
If you can't tell the difference between a DAC, ADC, and a DSP you should probably stfu.
I don't think you understand what any of it means, if you are still stuck on the basics. Please don't come at me on audio related stuff. I'm giving it to you as simple as can be. I can school you if need be. But please don't try to act like you know this stuff, while being completely wrong all this time.
 

Romulus

Member
What are you going on about. I made my point very clearly.

How much processing power do you think it takes to render Beat Saber or Cooking Simulator?

My point is that your Index and PC together are capable of running amazing software that DOESNT EXIST and shows no sign of existing anytime soon. It's a waste. By the time there are enough AAA games to make it worthwhile, it's going to be severely obsolete.

If Sony makes PSVR2, they will have AAA experiences lined up for it, I guarantee it.


Modding is the answer. Playing these new mods feels like a fleshed-out port and they're only getting better. RDR2, GTA5, Resident Evil 2,3, and now 7 are all running great on PCVR as mods. The list goes on, and will grow exponentially now as modders have gotten way better at it. Cyberpunk next month.
 

Tripolygon

Member
I don't think you understand what any of it means, if you are still stuck on the basics. Please don't come at me on audio related stuff. I'm giving it to you as simple as can be. I can school you if need be. But please don't try to act like you know this stuff, while being completely wrong all this time.
Simply put you are an idiot. A DAC or an ADC does digital to analog or analog to digital conversion of an audio signal. A DSP is what is responsible for all the other audio processing like mixing, upsampling, and also in the case of VR, HRTF, and other spatial audio convolution.

Look at this right here
Having the option to have whatever DAC instead of using default ps5 on board sound, is literally the best option. Having spacial audio is better than on the ear audio, which emulates how us humans perceive audio in real life circumstances. That's why open back headsets are used, over sealed headsets for mixing, mastering, etc. This is the reality of audio engineering. If you ever worked with movies, shows, etc, you would know this as a fact.

Consoles don't have this "amazing" audio that you keep on mentioning. It's not a sophisticated audio chip, and I'm not sure why you keep on going in this direction. A very basic ass DAC, will do so much more than any console in existence. I don't care where you came from, or what you think know, etc, but you'll never beat a dedicated DAC.

You call yourself an audio person but you can't really tell the difference between a DAC and DSP. How can a DAC which is just a digital to analog converter be more powerful than the DSP in consoles? Like how is that literally possible?
 

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
Simply put you are an idiot. A DAC or an ADC does digital to analog or analog to digital conversion of an audio signal. A DSP is what is responsible for all the other audio processing like mixing, upsampling, and also in the case of VR, HRTF, and other spatial audio convolution.

Look at this right here


You call yourself an audio person but you can't really tell the difference between a DAC and DSP. How can a DAC which is just a digital to analog converter be more powerful than the DSP in consoles? Like how is that literally possible?
If the dsp isn't anything to walk home about, please tell me how it can outperform a dedicated DAC?? LET'S START WITH THAT. You call me an idiot, but you are harping on about something you have literally no clue about.

Was the dsp in ps4 any good? Anything in the ps5 to talk about in comparison to a basic sub $100 DAC. Please let's keep this going to expose your unintelligence.
 

Tripolygon

Member
If the dsp isn't anything to walk home about, please tell me how it can outperform a dedicated DAC?? LET'S START WITH THAT. You call me an idiot, but you are harping on about something you have literally no clue about.

Was the dsp in ps4 any good? Anything in the ps5 to talk about in comparison to a basic sub $100 DAC. Please let's keep this going to expose your unintelligence.
SMH. Are you a car person? We like car analogies around here so let me use it to illustrate how your question makes no sense.

If an engine isn't anything to walk home about please tell me how it can outperform a torque converter.

If that does not work, another way.

DSP is like a CPU that does signal processing, could be audio or images, etc.

DAC converts that digital signal to an analog signal your speaker can use to create vibrations (sound)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom