It will be interesting if the 12k can actually acheive the FoV there setting out for. Even.ppl whom have received the Crystal may have some clues on whether the frame would suipport a 200wide as the face gasket would have to allow the screens/lenses to wrap around the sides of the head. See Math Protractor if the screen is screen/lenses are more in front of the eyes best we could likely get is 180wide.
Abd we know the Crystal has missed hitting tye origibal Advertised HFoV/DFoV values much like the original KS hmds.
To be frank, I really don‘t need the advertized FoV of the 12K, I’d rather have a good edge2edge clear 180 degrees horizontally utilizing the maximum of the displays resolution in the visible area. So that is not my biggest concern - it should just be vastly more than the Crystal offers.
On the other points re Aero vs. Crystal: correct, the Aero was not appealing to me due to very high cost and serious design mistakes like the missing built-in audio solution. But if I had to take one of the two today, I would be torn: while the Crystal has serious potential upsides, if these don‘t work out as desired the components to achieve these might be diminishing the value of what is functional: as you mentioned, tethered use case battery usage would be one; added dead weight for battery, SoC etc. would be another one. And general concerns of Pimax headsets & software being high mantenance.
But this is an academic discussion, in the current state I wouldn‘t buy either of the two. Both are priced out of the range of normal VR headset upgrades you get every 1-2 years.
Tbh I think pimax’s max fov of 160 wide with edge to edge clarity would be enough. Especially since most only use Normal at 140 wide for gpu rendering savings.
On another note pimax is tripling down on there FoV misinformation.
It is too bad as the impressions of the Crystal have been quite good even though the FoV is clearly not 125 wide. Even a couple of there reps long ago endorsed Risa’s hmdq as correct.
The team whom endorsed this update clearly do not understand if you render a FoV of 103 and apply a transform dor 125 wide you get a fun house distorted image.
However, PIMAX shouldn’t be running around touting their own measurements without the corroboration of some industry standard measurement. If there is such a thing?
With removal of any subjective deviations.
For Example:
Industry Standard Measurements confirm a maximum HFoV of 125°.
HFoV may be less due to things like the users’ facial shape, types of cushions used and variation in eye positions.
Now. If they could nail down some widely accepted Industry Standard measurement and make the above statement, then I think this can be put to bed…
Indeed pimax is not using a standard save what there hmd is passing onto Steam/Game to render.
Which does not align with there claims of greater FoV which as mentioned if the rendered FoV does not match the distortion/transform you get a stretched distorted image.
Risa’s tool is not subjective as it pulls the info that the driver passes to steam.
All they have to do is clarify there mistake which even Voodoode using an older bugged test hmd was 103x113 with the 113 being 10 degrees higher than actual.
Next they will go back and state they never claimed a revised optical cable was going to solve/remove the batter use in tethered mode.
Thank the heavens you guys FINALLY put something really ‘OFFICIAL’ out about this.
HOWEVER:
As it may not be well known, there are some limitations in technology regarding how AMD GPUs and their drivers can work with VR technology.
Would PIMAX please take this opportunity to explain this to the consumer, any limitations when running VR under AMD GPUs as compared to nVidia GPUs?
What are the known issues/limitations, advantages/disadvantages of running a PIMAX Crystal on an AMD GPU?
Please point us towards resolution numbers/data for both PCVR and All-In-One mode.
What specifically are the numbers for:
Illuminator/Sampling Frequency = ??? Hz
Image Sampling Rate & Gaze Frequency = 120Hz (?)
Your questions are all reasonable especially askings like the now claim of 130 diagonal when there other material claim 140 diagonal is the 35ppd lenses. Now we all know the FoV originally spec’d is incorrect not only by results of hmdq but also Test hmd align with each other’s results. Even Steam and games are not being requested to render the claimed FoV; so if tye game is not rendering the advertised FoV anf the image looks great; then pimax driver is not setup on these lenses to have a greater FoV.
The request for Standalone details and Amd pros and cons is also reasonable save there are things that will be common among vr manufacturers. But things like this new model and software will Tobii and other foveate methods work? Or are they still only piggybacking on Nvidia’s hit n miss driver techniques?
That being said @PimaxQuorra has likely collected the questions and requesting authorized details be released. Which may take sometime; especially if some details the team think atm will not have a favorable response.
Like during the initial stages of original ks @PimaxVR ducked/put off answering direct questions on Amd compatibility. Which they Knew RX and Vega56/64 cards were completely broken.
I receiving early had this confirmed at a computer shop where the owner is on Amd’s advisory board. Pimax during that time had failed to provide amd with a unit to work on fixing things on there end(and had told Amd they were going to have to wait til backers received)… When they were made aware that I had 2 hmds they asked him to secure one of my hmds with giving me whatever I might want for it. So it paid mostly for my upgrade to Ryzen 7 2700x with mobo and Ram.
Amd gpu backers would have and were upset that Pimax during all that time did not put honest efforts in getting that resolved during the lengthy waiting time for the product release. The beta was not managed well as no testers were audited and selected that had Amd gpus.
I have added this matter to our weekly report and intend to discuss it with our developers and product manager. We hope to have answers by Monday and assure you that we are not ignoring the issue, but rather actively working towards a solution.
It’s all about active communication to timely correct any inconsistencies.
Providing more timely, clear and concise information to the community only helps PIMAX build its trust-factor with consumers.
I believe the more PIMAX can improve on the above, the more likely people will have more confidence in PIMAX, and that translates into PIMAX becoming a higher priority on the consumers’ list for purchasing VR products in the future.
By the way, what‘s the current status on Wireless and Eye-Tracking for fully functional DFR? I heard that Nordic recommends to use an RTX4070Ti at minimum for MSFS, that would seem to suggest that you cannot leverage DFR. I mean, if the headsets are sent to the beta testers you would assume that these core features must be fully functional and robust by now.
Btw, still under NDA for another 3 weeks so can’t go into full detail until then. For now I’m sticking to videos as I can be sure the content in those doesn’t violate the NDA and after it’s up I will share all my thoughts etc. So far, overall, I will say it’s quite positive with some refinements it will definitely be my personal favourite and main headset. The most important thing though is to take opinions from multiple people and not just one. For reference, I don’t mind heavier or larger headsets while that would be a deal breaker for some, things like that I am referring to.
Oh and the chevron is no longer a sticker haha. It’s stuck on I imagine but it’s now a solid piece of plastic.
@Atmos might be a good time to bring up your table of specs again from the OP. With news hopefully dripping in from now on we might get a better picture if features are functional now and how good they perform.
Your impressions on the unboxing is quite good not really too long imho.
So atm the beta group has the copper cable and test plastic lenses for only the 35ppd.
The controller does look decent upgrade. I am also looking forward to hear more on the inside out to remove LH use; less components to go wrong. And of course LH currently is useless for non pcvr.
I always thought you were Italian so surprised with the Irish accent haha.
It the sticker to solid piece of plastic your get out clause? Lol
Did you get two pairs of lenses or did I miss that part?
Shame the battery doesn’t come out easier that seems like another revision needed and another two months lost but seriously Pimax will not delay this headset again.
Was there a power adapter in the box or did I miss that as well?
Overall Crystal looks like a nice headset, better built than Previous headsets but I don’t see it surviving the competition if not in 2023 definitely not in 2024.
The build quality is definitely looking up. I think tbh the crystal will do fine with the competition as atm the main one is Varjo. Only time will tell. AppleXR hmd will really push things forward with there features and form factor. However it is stated to be a $3000 us hmd; which there not expecting to sell high volume of.
With the Crystal now established FoV with the 35ppd lenses as has been reported by a variety of users including Voodoode who used test hmd agrees with the non subjective hmdq. The thing that would directly make things harder will be if a micro oled hmd comes out with a similar formfactor as bigscreen with the clarity of Crystal without battery use in tethered mode using the xr2+ or newer xr chip if available. Of course adding usb4 and DP 2.x vs sticking with 1.4.
But with that being said these should sell well for year to 2 for sure till new things come out. Which is where vr hmds are heading for is the 2 year cycle if your always wanting the new releases. Form factor and battery life atm are the weaker points for this FoV hmd.
