That was simply used as it was the original target & does have playability. It gives a goid refetencing point on the 2080’s perferformance.
He does clearly mark it as an early review & not release product.
Look at how bad wmr headsets were in the beginning? Now they are probably the easiest headsets for aversge pc users.
The biggest trouble is folks are comparing it with the bubblegum reviews all performed generally on super computers. SweViver & yanfeng have at least had contrast testing on 1070 laptop & a gtx 1080.
Demoing on nothing but 1080 ti gives a very onesided impression. Fpsvr is also knew & should be directly compared with Nvidia’s vr test tool.
I do agree the compare to og vive & rift is off imho & should be more in line to the vive pro.
But unlike free rain bloggers there is a criteria to follow. It is likely based on scoring system. For example why not Vive pro?
The Vive pro has built in hand tracking & augmented reality capabilities & possibility to use without lighthouse tracking; where as Pimax by default has Steam Tracking & no camera.
A friend of mine bought an epson ecotank printer. Review wise it had a low score. Why features; no scanner & a variety of other things & the competition can print pages faster.
@pumcy can you share with us the scoring system?
Now Pumcy won’t have control of the uk website & unfortunately have to wait on TH tech team.
Pumcy did say it’s a pre release review & the editor wanted a quick preliminary review. I am sure later they will make sure they have a wider range of gpus to compare with. On the good side at least when done it will be clean without heavy overclocking.
Most of us power users should know how to read a general review & take home what applies to us & not.
1 Like
Blame computer industry for marketing computers as plug n play & being user friendly. Computers are not user friendly as most of know.
With more time things will get easier as the vive pro wasn’t easy on release & now it is easier.
With Pitool my reccommendation is to leave at 1 & only play with Steam’s SS settings until Pimax actually explains this setting better & how it interacts.
I think going by Piplay it is pixel density? Thanks to @Guancho we now know that pimax never updated us p4k users that at some point pimax driver can actually use Steambr SS settings.
Microsoft in reality has targeted average pc users with wmr easy to use headsets.
2 Likes
The difficulty is if your not launching from pitool might not work as easy. Steamvr at least has this for their end.
Why pimax whrn backers said they would rip tgem off tge deluxe strap they changed idea to have removable.
Yes, really!
I’ve never had access to a 1080Ti. I used to have a 1080, but the shroud broke off in a transportation incident. The best card that TH has ever provided for me is a 980Ti. I’m on my own for the rest.
Tom’s Hardware has many freelance reviewers that work from home from all over the world. I am one of them. The GPU reviewer is also one of them.
I don’t get access to the samples that Nvidia and partners send for GPU reviews.
Pimax does in fact say the headset works with the 1070, just not to the full potential. They introduced the narrower FOV for just that reason, which is what I tested.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/pimax8kvr/pimax-the-worlds-first-8k-vr-headset/posts/2252002
"GTX 1070 is the minimum graphics cards that we can run 8K with, however, GTX1070 cannot utilize the full potential of Pimax 8K.
We have integrated different FOV options in PiTool for users to choose from. 1070 users would use smaller FOV before upgrading graphics cards.
Worth to mention that, with GTX 1070, 5K performs better than 8K. For those who are not planning to upgrade the graphics cards, we will provide you options to exchange your 8K for 5K + accessories."
as for ignoring the unconstrained framerate results, what exactly would you like me to say?
That framerate doesn’t hit the display and is not indicative of the actual experience.
If you want a deeper explanation, here it is Nvidia FCAT VR: Benchmarking Performance In Real-World Games | Tom's Hardware
2 Likes
I already have.
The scoring system, which was not created by me, is completely arbitrary. Personally, I hold little stock in the number of the score.
There is no break-down of different criteria (I’m actually forbidden from doing it that way).
The scores should not be compared directly to each other. For example, the Oculus Go got a 5/5. Not because it’s the best headset you can buy, but because the package that Oculus delivered checked all the boxes for what Oculus was trying to accomplish.
I would not give any PC-connected VR headset a 4 or higher at this point. The “Totally worth it” rating is hard to achieve.
The Vive Pro is way too expensive for that rating. The Vive and Rift offer great experiences but they have too many shortcomings. The Pimax 5K+ is nice but it’s certainly not for everyone, so I can’t recommend that it’s “totally worth it” to TH’s average reader.
5 (rendered as 10) = Practically perfect
4.5 (rendered as 9) = Superior
4 (rendered as 8) = Totally worth it
3.5 (rendered as 7) = Very good
3 (rendered as 6) = Worth considering
Anything lower than 2.5 is considered “not recommended”
6 Likes
Are you saying that even if somebody would create the ‘perfect’ PC connected VR HMD, that it would only get 4 points maximum? Or are you saying that at this moment in time no such ‘perfect’ HMD exists? Not sure I understood you remark.
1 Like
No such headset exists that I’ve tested. I’m sure something will eventually come out that I feel comfortable rating higher.
3 Likes
Gotcha. That makes sense indeed.
1 Like
Put it this way, if the Pimax headset had everything the Vive Pro has going for it, plus the wide FOV and high res display, then it would probably score higher. That’s not the reality of the situation, though.
1 Like
Cool this should help folks realize that as you said the rating system is not a good measure that is under your control.
It is unfortunate that the rating system is not more detailed. & that as a freelancer you can’t just write whatever like a blogger or youtuber you have standards you have standards laid out by the publication.
Oh, that was you that wrote that? Maybe don’t post graphs you don’t want to mention then? You didn’t say anything about them at all, just included them. I still don’t know what that metric means, my assumption without any extra data was “without vsync”, as that is the only “unconstrained” rendering method I can think of. As for your access to hardware, Tom’s Hardware should have provided you with suitable hardware if they wanted you to do a review, the site is known very specifically for its GPU and CPU knowledge, reviews, and hierarchies, plus you specifically mentioned testing it in Tom’s Hardware’s “VR lab”, which such a lab would include all modern GPUs. Saying that and then testing it with a GPU Pimax states is underpowered just doesn’t make sense, not on a site dedicated to power users who replace their GPUs and CPUs and build their own systems.
“The scores should not be compared directly to each other”…
Yet more rubbish. The Oculus Go is a different category because it is a standalone device… So should be directly comparable to other headsets which fall in the same comparative category. Especially if it is the same reviewer comparing devices within the same subsection. This is just basic logic and common sense.
If it was completely arbitrary with little stock as you put it, then you would have no qualms about giving a pc bound hmd a 4/5 or even 11/10. You keep on somehow managing to contradict yourself even when it comes to attempting to justify your reviewing methods.
1 Like
Maybe time to give this guy a break, agreed the review wasnt very good and from the backers point of view it was TERRIBLE 
Maybe @Pumcy will do a follow up later, at least when the software is more refined and the add ons are available.
Edit. Tom, if you’re reading this: you should sponsor this guy a proper hardware! !
4 Likes
I read the article and understood the graphs. Fps & frame timings showing differences between 1070 & 2080.
The cpu/ram is 50/50 on whether or not it’s holding back the gpu. Though it’s stronger than my Windows setup. @yanfeng though i7 4790k might be holding the 2080 ti back as he said. In Aerofly i believe the fps difference was 12 fps difference to the 1080 at stock clocks.
And as he mentioned it’s not a full vr lab. It’s freelancers publishing through a publication’s standards. If he was completely independed like a blogger or youtuber he could write things without an editor saying it doesn’t fit.
1 Like
He is correct as the scoring system as he said is not imho a good system as it compares the headset on rendering capability & it’s advertised features. That is not on the authors but on TH for not having it setup for comparimg to other headsets.
In my view the Vive Pro actually shares many of the shortcomings of the Vive (and Rift).
I had another look at a discussion I had with a couple of folks sometime after the Vive and Rift had been released, on what we considered to be required to get a better experience - in other words, our wishlist. Here it coms in order of importance, no.1 being the most important, etc.:
- resolution (possibly using foveated rendering)
- SDE
- FoV
- wireless
- lightweight
- comfort
- Godrays
- sweetspot
- inside out tracking
- handtracking
- non-disruptive awareness of the physical space (for use of keyboard, etc.)
If I check the advancements of the Vive Pro and Pimax against that list:
Vive Pro vs. Pimax
- resolution: improved (no FR) // more improved (no FR)
- SDE: improved // more improved
- FoV: same // vastly improved, almost where it belongs longterm
- wireless: (optional) // (announced to become optional; TPCast likely to succeed)
- lightweight: almost same // lighter than Vive, approx. Rift weight
- comfort: improved yet still facehugger // Vive standard, DAS announced
- Godrays: same // vastly improved
- Sweetspot: same // vastly improved
- inside out tracking: N/A // N/A (vaguely considered)
- handtracking: N/A (LM can be modded on) // module available (LM based)
- non-disruptive aw.: N/A (cameras not used effic.) // N/A
When I check which headset currently has the better score, the first and most important three issues are all tackled by the Pimax in a more substantial manner than by the Vive Pro. Twice men steps vs. baby steps, and on FoV giant leap vs. standing still. The only two issues where the Vive Pro would have a lead are wireless and comfort, and those two are on the roadmap of Pimax to be tackled in the coming months.
I know, there is stuff missing, audio, black levels, eye-tracking, but those were not being stated by the group at the time as issues. The Rift audio was considered to be good enough already by most, and Vive users nowadays have the DAS, which isn’t a revelation but does the job.
And yes, the Pimax has more flaws like the distortions (though if we go down that path please don’t forget to count the Vive Pro’s Godrays as an optical flaw too !).
But to me the Pimax is like a raw Ford Mustang, while the Vive Pro is the Toyota Prius. The latter surely has less flaws, is reliable, doesn’t ask the same mileage (=GPU power) - but honestly, why would I opt for the Prius if I can ride the Mustang ?!
5 Likes
This is where as pumcy has said the rating system unlike printers is not a good one as it doesn’t allow scoring by feature sets. 