Where's the 12k?

Not much time left to make that 2022Q4 ETA. Indeed, not much talk about the 12k at all lately.

There is no Q4 2022 ETA for the 12K.

The most recent tidbit of information is that the product is still in R&D at about 70% completion.

I personally don’t expect availability before Q4 2023 but it’s as good a guess as anyone else‘s.


Yeah I wouldn’t be surprised if the 12k is due for 2024. I was, just for fun, reading back some old posts like this one Crystal——Some assembly required - #46 by Sargon from august, where Bradley got ridiculed for saying it won’t be ready before mid 2023. He also said the Crystal would be due for Q3 2022. In one of my own posts in that thread I said I thought it would be Q4 2022. I think my view was one of the most pessimistic views but Pimax managed to not even deliver on THAT schedule. So for the 12K, take a pessimistic view (like yours above) and then add some months, so that would put us in 2024 :slight_smile:

Also, when Pimax says “70% ready” you should read that like 40% ready IMHO.

Haha it’s almost january too: Crystal——Some assembly required - #61 by Djonko @jamejame


Pimax really needs to quit it with these release dates, they have literally never met one.


i think 2024 for the 12K too. not too bothered personally, i’m really enjoying my 8kx in the meantime.


Crystal and 12k are based on the same platform. So when Crystal is ready, 12k is 70% ready. They didn’t lie about it.
Yet the rest 30% will be a real battle:

  • The huge lens need to be made like a master piece, or it will easily have distortion or ghosting.
  • The DFR has to work flawlessly. Without it the 12k won’t work properly.
  • The connection cable need to be pushed to the limit, either with 1 DP cable or 2.
  • Most GPU on the market today cannot handle 12k resolution.
  • The XR2 chip will have a hard time just rendering the sheer amount of pixels in 12k.

I think the 70% is not that hard. Over the years, Pimax already accumulated enough know-hows for it. It’s the 30% that will really put up a test for them. I personally doubt if they really need to do the 12k at all. Crystal is already far ahead of the competition. Why not just focus on Crystal and Portal? Let the technology mature, let the XR chipsets grow to a level which can handle 12k, only then do the 12k. Isn’t that a better way to develop products?

According to the last report on the 12K from @PimaxUSA, the only additional hurdle holding back the 12K is an eye tracking issue at large FOV. Otherwise the work advancing Crystal to being ready for release is also pushing the 12K to being ready to release since they share the same platform.

The other elements such as the larger lenses and panels are supposedly already ready.

So that could mean that the 12K would be ready to release not long after the Crystal if the eye tracking issue is resolved.

As for bandwidth limit considerations, I expect this to be a nonissue in terms of affecting when the 12K releases. Pimax has claimed the 12K will be able to render at 6K per eye, 160Hz, wider FOV than the 8KX, standalone, etc. But right from the initial presentation, they have not claimed that it could do all of these at the same time.

The limits of what resolution it can do at what frame rate and in what mode are moving targets which we can reasonably assume will continue to move even after release (like how the 8KX gained a 90Hz mode after release and now has a 120Hz mode in beta). Based on Pimax interviews and comments on the forums, it seems like this is already at a level where Pimax feels that its acceptable for release, but they’re continuing to work on improving it further. So I don’t think bandwidth issues are holding Pimax back from releasing the 12K at all.

You’re right. It won’t… and it doesn’t need to. Pimax has said that resolution, FOV, etc will be reduced in standalone mode. We can expect this reduction to be quite significant and probably put its performance levels in the vicinity of the Pico 4 when in that mode. It will be rendering at probably around 2K per eye with an FOV similar to the Crystal would be my guess.

Its 6K panels will still give it a leg up in clarity over the Pico 4. The additional physical resolution is like having permanent passive super sampling. It won’t be nearly as sharp as it can be when driven by a PC with a monster GPU, but it can still be expected to have better clarity than every other standalone on the market.

In any case, I think it’s the right call for Pimax to not be talking much about the 12K right now. They’re doing a roadshow focusing on the Crystal, and that’s what they should be talking about. I would strongly advise them to not post some updated target release date for the 12K which they may end up having to push again. Don’t keep repeating that mistake. Announce the release date only when it’s actually ready to release. Go ahead and provide development updates, but keep future projected dates out of it.

1 Like

HI :innocent::+1:t2::+1:t2:

you all talk about 12k resolution but it’s 6k per eye, it’s not the same and fortunately!!!

The term 12k is commercial at pimax like all Pimax headsets since the Pimax 4k lol:

6k cinema in resolution = 6560 x 3102
Resolution per eye of pimax 12k = 5760 x 3240
12k resolution = 12288 x 6480

On the other hand, the sum of the resolution to be calculated is enormous for the pimax 12k:
-2 X 5760 = 11520 x 3240 = 37.324 million pixels to be calculated on steam vr.

A crystal helmet is 16/17 million pixels to calculate.
Even with eyetracking and foveal rendering that would work on the pimax 12k, it will take a hell of a gpu, the RTX 4090 is already not powerful enough!!!

An RTX 5090 or an Rtx 6090 to be able to play in simulation on Iracing / Dcs world / Mfs 2020 in 90/120hz??

Aplushhss :innocent::+1:t2::+1:t2:

1 Like

I am today rendering at 5032x3160 per eye on my 8KX with a 4090 as my standard resolution in all games. It is able to achieve solid 90Hz most of the time while playing VRChat, which is one of the most resource intensive games out there. And because of EAC, this is with foveated rendering (FFR) disabled.

Sure it is. At least from a more general VR gaming point of view. And you don’t even need to have a 12K to prove it. You can run the rendering resolution in SteamVR at any arbitrary values you want right now just to see how a 12K would theoretically perform.

Now I do realize that this is not comparing the same level of super sampling between the 12K and 8KX, but it’s just to point out that the 4090 actually can keep up with this scale of resolution. Would the 4090 be able to max out a 12K? Probably not. Would it significantly exceed the 8KX’s clarity on the 12K while still being able to achieve solid 90Hz? Absolutely.

And that’s before even taking DFR into account.

You mention simulators. I’m running iRacing with settings maxed out at 5032x3160 @ solid 90Hz on my 4090 with no FFR.

Mfs 2020 struggles with frame rate even on an 8KX being driven by a 4090 now. Even if it still will not achieve 90/120Hz on the 12K, it still can be expected to produce higher clarity at the same frame rate compared to the 8KX.

No matter which game you’re talking about, the 12K can be expected to perform better than the 8KX with the same GPU.


Yeah, supposedly.

If it’s true that not even the Crystal lenses are final, I don’t see where it could reasonably be expected for the much more complex 12K lenses to be ‚finished‘.

1 Like

The development of the 12 started earlier. The first prototypes of the lenses were also shown by Kevin quite early on (MRTV Online q&a vid) So it is quite possible that the topic is already largely settled.

I think the latest 12k prototype will be at CES2023 so only 3 weeks until we see reality drop.

CES 2023 is real critical for Pimax. Yes, missing it in 2022 was bad and an indicator of things to come, but if they miss it in 2023 on top of all the delays they’ve already had and we don’t get any good looks at the 12k, then that is most certainly an extremely bad sign for the 12k’s progress.



Hello how are you

When I talk about 12k in simulation I will be more precise.

I’m talking about the most greedy simulators in vr, the 4 vr games or next #Vr Chat is simplistic in VR resources, even Iracing where I drive almost every day is simplistic in graphics.
Iracing is with Il2 Battle of Stalingrad the 2 most optimized VR simulators in VR because in graphics their game engine is old.

DcsWolrd and Mfs 2020 is another pair of sleeves as we say in France:

-Test of #sweviver on Mfs 2020:
-Above New York/Crystal Helmet with an RTX 4090, and it only gets 44 fps!!!

How will we be able to run an RTX 4090 with a 12k in a simulator?

Tell you that the 12k will be more efficient with an identical gpu than the 8kx?
It’s not possible ?
Prettier yes thanks to #qled panels/aspheric lenses but with how many fps?
5/10fps in mfs 2020/dcs world?
Since 2012 we have changed gpu due to headsets which require enormous resources.

I repeat for extreme simulators in vr, the RTX 4090 will suffer in a 12k pimax

Aplushhss :innocent::+1:t2::+1:t2:

I think you misunderstood @Sargon here.

All he is saying is that he is already running an 8KX at SS levels that would be close to equivalent to a 12K with 100% SS and that he finds performance acceptable.

Some simulators do use ancient engines that are particulalry handi-capped by CPU performance even on current gen CPUs, others such as MSFS bottleneck both GPU and CPU.

They will perform exactly the same on an 8KX with @Sargon 's SS as they would on a 12K with 100% SS; in both cases, considerably above 12ms frametime.

This has always been the case and will continue to be the case, regardless of future GPU generations as with increased computing performance on the hw side, users will continue to increase resolution.

This doesn’t mean that a 12K in 2023 would be ‘too soon’ → all it means is that the very niche VR subset of simulation enthusiasts will continue to have to balance frametime and resolution; again, as has always been the case and will always be the case.

If they don’t have the 12K at CES, you really start to wonder what they were planning to present on CES 2022. I still don’t get that part.


We need to let go of the idea that the rendering resolution has to equal the physical resolution of the panels. Just because the 12K has higher resolution panels does not mean that best tuning would necessarily be to crank rendering resolution through the roof.

It’s not like flat monitors where you should have a GPU that can keep up with the physical resolution of the panels, and higher resolution panels can actually result in lower overall performance. There is no 1:1 native for VR displays. Higher resolution panels are always a benefit in VR.

It’s not actually important whether the 12K can be “maxed out” by the GPU. What matters is the quality of the video display that can be achieved given the same GPU between two different VR headsets. This will be improved on the 12K versus the 8KX.

  • The 12K’s higher physical panel resolution will produce higher clarity from any input rendering resolution, even if it’s not increased at all from what you were running on the 8KX. Most people are familiar with super sampling making video look better. Increasing the output resolution also improves the image for the same reasons.
  • The 12K’s improved lenses are expected to produce greater sharpness over a larger portion of the FOV which will also increase clarity regardless of input resolution.
  • QLED and local dimming will have improved colors and contrast.
  • DFR should free up GPU resources to either increase resolution or frame rate or some portion of both.

The 8KX is brilliant being driven by a 4090. The 12K is going to be even more brilliant on the same 4090. And in the future, the 12K will become even more brilliant still on the 5090, 6090, etc up until it reaches a point where it’s maxed out and more powerful GPUs aren’t making any real difference anymore. But it’s not any sort of waste in the meantime.


You know how people are. It must always be 100-150-200% SS.
I’ve been wondering about the statements for years, not playable, only 20FPS, stutters, blah, while I’ve been roaming the world at 90 for years, ok, before the 4090 only at 70 or 80% xD (2700pix V with a 2080ti eg.)

I think, the 4090 card can handle the 12k nativ in DCS with 50-60 FPS. This is ok for a flightsim.

1 Like

I doubt they would showcase the 12K at CES. Focus will likely be on pushing Crystal. Good question though, what was going to be presented last year who knows. Perhaps prototype panels with terrible ghosting :grinning:



If we follow your reasoning, we will compare a pimax 5k+ and an 8kx:

  • Same problem, the 8kx has a higher resolution for the simulation.
    I have friends in my #Team who had Gtx 1080TI / RTX 2080TI in 2020 and who were on their knees in fps in mfs 2020 / dcw wolrd with their 8kx even with very recent processors, if we follow your reasoning everything is fine in the best of the world due to the best resolution quality of 8kx Vs 5k+?
    Well no, we all bought rtx 3090/4090 like you to have a decent framerate due to the higher resolution.
    And with the 12k you will see if your Rtx 4090 will run dcs WOLRD, mfs 2020 with a very recent processor like Intel Core I7 13700k/I9 13900k/Ks??

I doubt it :roll_eyes::roll_eyes:

apluhsssss :santa::santa::christmas_tree::christmas_tree::christmas_tree: