Anyone notice a Hz difference between the 5K+ and 8K

Sounds to me like no one noticed this but I am curious. I think they said the 8K couldn’t reach 90 and the 5k could. Is this still an issue and did anyone notice a difference with them?


This guy said he could notice:

But most couldn’t according to him. Personally I’m not worried at all about the refresh rate.


The guy in that Reddit thread also says he didn’t test the other 8K that was better optimized:

“They had 2 8Ks there, and one I tried apparently was not configured correctly…”

I’m hoping that’s why he noticed a difference in lower refresh rate, if the unit he used, wasn’t set up correctly.

We shall see I guess, once the final specs are made public.

I had the original Oculus DK2 and then the CV1 and I didn’t notice the difference in Hz. So I think it’ll just be down to the way you’re built if it’s a problem or not.

1 Like

On old style CRTs, I can easily see the difference between 60, 75, and 85 Hz. I’m not sure if I can see any difference between 80 and 90 Hz, though. However, this is one of the things that makes the 5K+ more appealing to me.


Same. CV1 was a bit smoother but 75 hz on the dk2 was surprisingly ok.

1 Like

I’ve not actually heard any official specs yet. Is there any confirmation it’s 90hz?

Noticing a difference in hz really is down to a person’s sensitivity to motion and sim sickness.

Sounds like both HMDs are awesome, but would definitely love the option of higher native resolution on the 8k.

1 Like

couldnt you put it to 170 deg and get 90fps?

Dont think it works that way. I think the 170 degree option just blacks out the periphary, which is good because it fixes the edge distortion while not giving up the exprrience.

1 Like

IIRC, it’s the upscaler that limited the 8K to 80 Hz. I’d be willing to bet a beer (redeemable in WI, USA only) that the upscaler isn’t configurable enough to reduce FOV to increase performance. Upscalers certainly exist that offer this, but I suspect that they’d be slower (every millisecond counts) and might actually worsen the refresh rate.

1 Like

Not sure about this…. In one video somebody complained about reprojection and swe argued that it is because of the fact that the device was using full FOV. In conclusion it should do more than just blacking out if it matters for performace. So yes…the thought to increase Hz by lowering the FOV due performance/bandwith saving is valid.

I’m still curious whether the 80Hz are final. I am very sensitive to refreshrates and the hope that the 8k may work at 90Hz in the future (probably even due less FOV) could be a decison maker not to switch to the 5k+
Also very interesting will be the exact difference of performance demands.
I’m not going to buy the 2080ti anytime soon. So I’ll prefer to max out the 5k+ with my 1080ti (probably even headroom for SS) instead of sacrifizing game options and Hz for the 8k.
The black levels are very important as well, at least for me. Some said that the 8k had better blacks… we’ll see. BTW the black levels of the Oculus Go were not aceptable for me, not only because black is supposed to be black. I had the feeling that my eyes had to deal with too much light which I percieved as too stressful since blacks usually calm the eye.

1 Like

This is an entirely computer-side matter, though; The option blacks out the last degrees of FOV, and reduces the FOV and bitmap size the game is asked to render accordingly, resulting in less work and less need for reprojection (any reprojection also occurs on the computer, of course).

The matter of how the HMD uses the signal it receives, and how flexible it is about it, is separate to that, so the presumed bottleneck stands.

1 Like

Thanks for the explanation! So u mean that the amount of data remains the same that is transfered to HMD? (in this case parts of black) and the decrease in FOV is only saving performance on the computers side? Hope I got it right :slight_smile: But IF the bridge chip would grasp the difference though that another aspect ratio (therefore a different resolution, lets say roughly 4500 x 1440 instead of 5120 x 1440) comes in, it still would not benefit the bandwith?

That should be it, I believe. :7

If the the bridge chip would accept a wide range of resolutions and refresh rates, and maybe even scale and position the incoming image arbitratrily, there are indeed a lot of nice things that could be done, optimising this way or that. Current assumption is that there we’re stuck with only one format to rule them all, though… :confused:

1 Like

But did Robin state that he thought it was possible to send the scaler a higher rez at a lower Hertz? If so then there is some adustability there/

Being able to watch movies at an increase resolution, but lower Hz could be a huge factor in my HMD choice.

If he did, I am yet to hear/read a transcript of it. We’ll see. :7

It was during a video interview, I’ll try to find it

Maybe we should start a dedicated thread to show Pimax our interest in such a software setting.

I watched all of the videos and didn’t see / hear that. I did, however, hear mention that there could be a 60 Hz mode for watching videos. But I think it was clear that the resolution would be the same.


I would be happy playing games at higher resolution at 60hz. Virtual Desktop, Bogscreen, Elite Dangerous, any seated sim experience really.

I think as long as it can run at 60hz with low persistence enabled (like a gear VR,) that extra resolution would be awesome.