I doubt we’ll see consumer Hypervision headsets before display port 2.1 emerges on 5000 series GPU and that could take 1-2 years.
Besides Somnium has the VR1, Bigscreen has the BSB and Lynx has their headset still to release. They’ll want at least 2 years of sales before a new model makes them obsolete.
Possible but data is uncompressed atm. not sure they are waiting for more bandwidth and power.
But has no pass through, eye tracking, WiFi, stand-alone. Pico4 enterprise is the best all round HMD atm unless you like Meta.
Hypervision headsets have no current eye tracking making them run at native panel resolution. That’s a mega task if they use 4x 2880x2880 panels. Only XTAL has that sort of capability and I think that uses custom software.
And eye-tracking for a Hypervision headset won‘t be trivial to accomplish…
Then don’t we were fine without it. Not a super high priority, no game changer, is it? I would take large FOV over Eyetracking any day.
But currently Hypervision uses 2 panels per eye. You can’t have 4 high res panels and expect over 25fps. So the compromise would be lower res 2000 pixel panels and that would not look as sharp as BSB or Crystal. I would say if you want to keep pixel density to 2880 eye tracking and FR is an absolute must have for ultra wide FOV. XTAL does it but that headset is one of the biggest HMDs ever made. Star VR1 I think had Eye tracking but the lenses in that HMD were huge too.
XTAL 4 is going to be the big break through and we should see it in action this year.
I agree, if you ask for a super-wide FoV and a high PPD (because otherwise you won’t be able to enjoy the FoV, will you), you get the kind of resolutions the 12K is boasting. Pretty simple maths.
Dynamic foveated rendering (DFR) may be a nice to have for the Crystal, because a good chunk of the available FoV will need full rendering to make it look good - so it will help with the performance, but perhaps not dramatically.
With a horizontal FoV beyond 200°? DFR will be an absolute key element to allow you to play your favorite games with your petty 4090. And it is possible because on that FoV - unlike the 90-100° FoV - you can have the majority of the picture rendered in low resolution. No DFR? Better prepare for a slide show.
What is the resolution of that 240 FOV Hypervision. I am quite sure they are not 4K displays 35ppi. Such a large FOV would justify lower resolution.
Yes the dfr Is a must have for the 12k if it works great then I think the performance is the same as the crystal or a bit worse but it is acceptable for that fov I think.
Hypervision is only the lens developer. They don’t do panels and they don’t even manufacture these lenses.
I would say 2880 is the industry standard and that is the limit if you’re also using the XR2 chipset for AIO.
4k per eye is 8KX territory and that HMD only uses 2 panels. Hyper vision 240FoV needs 4 panels so 4k per panel is out of the question.
From a theoretical trade-off perspective for sure.
But for practical use, by you, by me? No way. I am not going back to screen door hell with pixelated view just for the sake of covering my extreme peripheral view. Why do you think the vast majority of manufacturers opt for improving the PPI with the same FoV rather than using the o.g. Vive/Rift PPI for 140-160 degree FoV‘s? Because they appreciate that many users will rather sacrifice FoV than PPI. Of coure there will come a point of diminishing returns, if the go beyond a certain PPI, and that could be the 35 PPI frontier. After that, it may make more sense to increase FoV rather than go above 35 PPI.
I believe @Djonko has a headset which offers the trade off you are flirting with - the XTal. Ask him if he was/is happy with lower resolution to achieve more FoV.
Well I thought people are already having a tradeoff for wireless or when playing on PSVR2. One is because of compression capability of a snapdragon of 100mbit (soon better with Quest 3) and the other is because of the processing power of the console. Standalone is the same looking forward to see what happens to that 35PPI on the Crystal with the Wifigig if its done as promised. They wont get the 35PPI. So there the barrier comes much closer. What I read people dont really need 240FOV of the the Hypervision, 140 would be enough for a less closed up feel. So imho that 140 should be shot at generally the same way as you say 35PPI for tethered.
Yes, that is what I was thinking since I had experienced the 8K/5K+ and I believe it was at that time when the discussion around the large and standard FoV of these headsets emerged: the peripheral view on large was pretty distorted anyhow so many chose to switch to standard, sacrificing the last couple of degrees of FoV for better performance (and possibly less irritation by distortion).
And to me it seemed these extra degrees were not that important any longer to get rid off the toilet roll view feeling. So I thought to myself that ideally - until we have ridiculous resolution and computing power available - a horizontal FoV between 120-140 degrees would be the sweet spot (but we will need a PPD not below 25, which is approx. what the G2 features). So yes, 140 degrees with 35 PPD would be a great standard for the industry to aim for in 2024.
IMO we really do not need crystal clear fully textured rendered visuals the further away from center you are in FoV.
What I mean to say is that as long as the view in front of us achieves the fidelity necessary to mimic our every day vision, then a step gradient towards lower quality the further you go out to the max FoV is fine. That’s important is that there’s no visible line or distinction as to where that visual quality starts to become less.
The large FoV that Hypervision could bring is great, and I do not expect their side displays to be called up to render such high clarity unless the user moves their eyes towards those displays, and even then there’ll come a point where the user will just move their head.
So the whole point, to me, for the side displays is to give a real-life-like experience of having peripheral vision without the need for the same fidelity as what we see directly where we’re looking. It helps fill out the whole experience and allows fully immersion."
I’m looking forward to that.
The thing with the XTALs’ is that their panels have a really good fill factor. So even if the PPI is a bit lower than the crystal/Varjo, it still looks very good since you don’t see any SDE at all. Of course, this does result in a less detailed image, but I’d certainly take more FoV over a sharper image. Then again, simmers who need to see in the far distance might disagree.
The biggest issue with the XTAL is imho, just like with Pimax, lenses that are just not good enough. Hopefully the Hypervision deal will result in some really good lenses!
Any news from the project team, when the pimax 12k Demo is shown to us, I guess it’s not going to be in the end of third quarter anymore?
I pretty much quit playing my 8KX due to eye strain. I am still waiting for 12K…looking forward to the auto IPD adjustment and improvements to the overall experience.
My 8KX had been collecting dust for some time, but having a 4090 I thought I‘d give it another chance. Unfortunately due to the replacement of the Pimax Experience form Sweviver & Co. by the new tool, all of my IPD settings were lost. It too k me 2-3 weeks at the time to dial them in so I could play for 1-2h before the strain got too big.
I did not have the nerve to go through that again this time, it was such an uncomfortable sensation for my eyes. So I put my 8KX back to the shelf, where it will likely stay as a kind of a museum exhibit from now on.
I am curious to see the 12K whenever it is released (and feature complete), but the eye comfort will be a major hurdle it has to clear. Trying the Crystal at the MRTV road show stop of Pimax last year I again had some kind of convergence issue with it. Sebastian is convinced it was a kind of a prescription value apparently given to it, which is why some users who are shortsighted felt it worked for them without prescription lenses. I don‘t know what it is, but I know I have issues with the 8Kx and Crystal which I didn‘t experience elsewhere (the Vive Pro 2 wasn‘t entirely okay for me either though).
I have 4090 as well…only play 8KX occasionally. Now, hardly. I don’t know if the minimum of 58mm of ipd is good enough. My eyes might need 55mm.