I’m glad we got some assessment of the risks. I was waiting for that.
Unfortunately it didn’t give me more info than i already had, except for saying the final product might not be able to do 90hz even though in theory it should… No mention of what component might cause it or if they are determined to find out.
The people testing the headset all noticed the stutter in the headset and some said they hope it will improve, so that means something…
I seem to have even more questions now:
-Will 80hz do? Even when using brainwarp? No one knows.
-Is brainwarp finished? Working? Will we see it in action soon?
-have they tested a longer cable yet? 5m. 10m… Will be for sale but will this affect performance? For a long cable like that they will need a breakout box. But none will come with the headset. Hence the question…
The stretchgoals are nice extra’s but i don’t care about them right now. The headset is the most important thing!
Qualcomm make mobile system-on-chip parts. In other words, that platform almost certainly is a standalone headset or phone, not PC connected, and doesn’t support external video input.
Agree with you that the headset is the most important thing, that is the focus of our work.
As for the stutter, we believe there will be a big space to optimize, now we just make sure the function is working properly, we don’t do much performance optimizations.
Brainwarp is still in developing, should need one more month.
10m cable, yes need test, we will do in the near future.
@bacon: Do you have signal integrity statistics from the chipsets at each stage? That is, if you can get an indication of how much the 8b/10b recovery fails from the DP receiver, that would let us know whether the current failures are before it or after it. Most likely the more parallel (thus lower clock) MIPI sections are less sensitive. As the largest section, the cable would almost certainly be the biggest source of distortion. I did notice in the V3 video overview that the strain relief for the cable is not well attached, and that sort of bend would be a major risk. Static ones as in the connector should be more easily compensated by the receiver’s equalizers.
Anyway if your MTP formula is ok,
We’re talking about a framerate-induced delay of :
13ms for 75Hz,
12ms for 82Hz
and 11ms for 90Hz …
So no big deal, it’s only 1 or 2ms…
With your clpl lcd panels choice over oled ones, how many ms have you gained comparatively with current hmds anyway?
The MTP formula is oversimplified. We have at least three sources of motion: simulated, hand motion, and head motion. Reprojection can only improve on the head motion latency, at the expense of the two others (which operate on predictions from before 3D rendering). Simulated motion can be calculated a bit in advance to compensate, but brain warp uses two distinct reprojection times, so it can only line up with one of them (with your typical VR frameworks not designed for alternate frame rendering).
The display refresh rate issues are more significant from a flicker perspective. In particular, we can expect people will be more sensitive to this in the Pimax 8K family because of the wider field of view. Video usage will also suffer, as 80Hz isn’t a multiple of the common video frame rates (24, 25, 30, their doubles and /1.001 variants). The result is basically that more people will get tired or even ill from lower frequencies.
Hi Pimax Team, appreciate your update and commitment to be transparent, or at least make sure that your reps rather take a rain checque if they cannot answer rather than guess around.
On the Eye Tracking Module, could you kindly be just a bit more specific: I suppose most of just really want to know if you are looking to add this module in order to allow for foveated rendering, and which kind of specs you expect to be required to perform that well (enough) to allow massive reduction of GPU load (with your 200 FOV I would guess a LOT of the display would be within the peripheral portion to be rendered only at 20% of the resolution). If it is low level eye-tracking not good enough for foveated rendering, I expect that this module will not be very relevant for the majority of backers. I appreciate that asking for a high-level eye-tracking solution may be just over the top, but this is about managing expectations in the community, you know.
Thanks, very good posting! @bacon Can you please also shed some light on how the “4096х2657@80 Hz per eye” have to be interpreted that we saw in the latest YouTube videos? Is this the actual render resolution of the game before downscaling to 2x1440p - so does the GPU really have to render the game in 2x4096x2657@80 Hz resolution? If yes - how is it possible to do this with a GTX 1070 with the shown games, is there a shortcut involved and if yes - which?
Thanks a lot!
So what if I want to play in another room and need 5 meters more?
Do I need to only buy cables or active cables?
How does the refresh rate perform?
Do you have a good solution for me?
In total I need 10 meters. So your 5 meters at the headset and additional 5 meters.
So with a 1080ti we should be able to lower the settings a bit in order to bump up the refresh/hz to a point where it will be sufficient for high action games and not cause stutter or dizziness?
I am OK with not running at ultra settings if it means a nice smooth experience.
I’m not technical enough to fully understand the results of everything being discussed, I just want to know if everyone who uses it with a 1080ti will be able to play games and not notice any issues if settings are lowered some.
Thanks, looking forward to that!
Without shortcuts I would even be surprised if a 1080 TI could deliver stable 80 fps or above at 2x4096x2657 with these games.
