Completely out of topic, but I just LOVE when you call the headsets for 'Helmets'!
Best VR Headset for ED?
- Thread starter Balmung
- Start date
Completely out of topic, but I just LOVE when you call the headsets for 'Helmets'!
suum cuique (Lat.) - to each his own
If you want a "perfect" Headset: XTAL VR
But cost near 6000 Euro, because it use no Fresnel Lenses.
But the advantages are impressiv:
The Display Resolution and the FoV is identically to the Pimax 5K XR (2560x1440 Pixel per Eye and ~170° FoV), but thanks to other Lenses you have a better image than in a Pimax 8K X with 4K per Eye.
Heres the different compared with the Pimax 5K+, which have instead a OLED a normal RGB LCD, so a better SDE than the 5K XR. If the XTAL would use the same LCD than the 5K+, it's SDE would be even better than in the image here:
So the truth is: more important to higher resolutions for a smaller SDE we need a other Optic between Display and Eyes.
The advantage is clear: much better Quality with not a single % more PC power.
Here is the complete Video that shows how that works:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpPY_XNpn08
Short: with Fresnel Lenses we only use 2/3 of the Display, the XTAL use normal Fullscreen and it didn't zoom up the middle part.
That video was really a mind opener for me yesterday. If I had 6000 Euros...
But cost near 6000 Euro, because it use no Fresnel Lenses.
But the advantages are impressiv:
The Display Resolution and the FoV is identically to the Pimax 5K XR (2560x1440 Pixel per Eye and ~170° FoV), but thanks to other Lenses you have a better image than in a Pimax 8K X with 4K per Eye.
Heres the different compared with the Pimax 5K+, which have instead a OLED a normal RGB LCD, so a better SDE than the 5K XR. If the XTAL would use the same LCD than the 5K+, it's SDE would be even better than in the image here:
So the truth is: more important to higher resolutions for a smaller SDE we need a other Optic between Display and Eyes.
The advantage is clear: much better Quality with not a single % more PC power.
Here is the complete Video that shows how that works:
Short: with Fresnel Lenses we only use 2/3 of the Display, the XTAL use normal Fullscreen and it didn't zoom up the middle part.
That video was really a mind opener for me yesterday. If I had 6000 Euros...
Oh, and i forget: the XTal has by default no 6DoF Tracking, that in the video some sort of craft solution to use the Lighthouse tracking system, thats why the HMD looks in the video so like a devkit.
My result after some day of research: there is no VR HMD on the market that have no downsites, that a other VR HMD already did better. Valve Index has more godrays than others, Rift S has a worser LCD than others (color, brightness, black level), HP Reverb has a smaller sweetspot than others...
Only the Pimax ones are the HMDs that i can't sort in right now.
My result after some day of research: there is no VR HMD on the market that have no downsites, that a other VR HMD already did better. Valve Index has more godrays than others, Rift S has a worser LCD than others (color, brightness, black level), HP Reverb has a smaller sweetspot than others...
Only the Pimax ones are the HMDs that i can't sort in right now.
Last edited:
Interestingly I believe we can completely forget about the electronics in the ridiculously over-priced XTAL ( overpriced simply because they have no wholesale manufacturing partner which would be a massive upfront cost for a tiny high risk company such as VRgineers - through no fault of their own ). In fact, doesn't the XTAL use those crappy OLED pentile matrix displays which we all hate? So why does the picture look soo good?
It's all in the lens:
I have no idea how they did it but they have massively better panel coverage than anybody else. Must be a magic aspheric lens design
Comparison
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpPY_XNpn08
In short, VRgineers have a great idea but a rubbish business model. I would sell the IPR to MS and or/Steam.... but probably MS for royalties if MS make it part of the WMR compliance standard. Every WMR compliant title sold would incur a fee to my company. This is not the ideal example but, from experience, there are a number of ways to work this from a mutually beneficial revenue standpoint. I can still make headsets of my own but now I can subsidise the manufacture or use my IPR revenue as collateral against a business loan to capitalise a wholesale manufacturing partner and produce headsets at closer to retail prices.
It's all in the lens:
I have no idea how they did it but they have massively better panel coverage than anybody else. Must be a magic aspheric lens design
Comparison
In short, VRgineers have a great idea but a rubbish business model. I would sell the IPR to MS and or/Steam.... but probably MS for royalties if MS make it part of the WMR compliance standard. Every WMR compliant title sold would incur a fee to my company. This is not the ideal example but, from experience, there are a number of ways to work this from a mutually beneficial revenue standpoint. I can still make headsets of my own but now I can subsidise the manufacture or use my IPR revenue as collateral against a business loan to capitalise a wholesale manufacturing partner and produce headsets at closer to retail prices.
What about StarVR? https://www.starvr.com/
With Sli support?
With Sli support?
You are right my friend i am so disappointed that it has been put on hold until further noticeI challenge you to show me the shopping cart and checkout button. I will wait...
I was hoping you'd actually found it. I had my credit card to hand. On the bright side, the innovation in headset market has never moved at such pace so it will be months, not years, before you see this or similar!
And to cap it all this coffee is disgusting. Stay away from Carte Noir 'classique' - they have clearly lost the plot. Should give it to the FDev who coded smoke rendering. They can have good coffee again when they fix it...
Incentive Level: Expert
Wrong, a RTX 2080 TI can run 2x 2560x1440, ask the Pimax 5K+/5K XR Users. The XTAL use the same resolution on his two displays and you should get more FPS out of it than on the Pimax. So no problem to run the ultra high end XTAL headset.
But the other headsets like the Pimax 8K X shows that this is the wrong direction. There is no graphic card that can run 2x 4K. What we really need is not more resolution, we need other Lenses than Fresnel one. The XTAL didn't use Fresnel and it have a much better image without a very high resolution and that means a much better image without the need of more powerful graphic cards. And graphic cards are the reason why higher resolutions are a dumb idea right now.
Also don't forget XTAL is a 170° FoV VR headset, with a lower FoV we would have Rift like displays but absolutley no SDE anymore. But I don't know if this XTAL Lenses would work with lower FoV.
About Star VR, the website didn't say what panel resolution the headset use, but it says 16.000.000 Subpixels and AMOLED, a AMOLE Display have 4 Subpixels (RGBG), so that are only 4.000.000 Pixels, the XTAL have 3.686.400 Pixels on ONE eye, so a total of 7.372.800 Pixels. And Star VR only use Fresnel, they wrote that on their website. And because StarVR should have 210° FoV, the resolution must be even more worse.
I don't know what should be so great on StarVR, the resolution can it not be also not the optics, so in the end the resolution. The Rift S use 1.280 x 1.440 per eye, so 2560x1440 in total with a FoV around the half of the StarVR, so the SDE of StarVR should be only a little better than the Oculus Rift S.
I'm sure that is also a reason why StarVR get stopped, it sounds nice as it was announced, but it took to long and other headsets reach that pixel density too. So the only thing is the FoV of 210°.
But the other headsets like the Pimax 8K X shows that this is the wrong direction. There is no graphic card that can run 2x 4K. What we really need is not more resolution, we need other Lenses than Fresnel one. The XTAL didn't use Fresnel and it have a much better image without a very high resolution and that means a much better image without the need of more powerful graphic cards. And graphic cards are the reason why higher resolutions are a dumb idea right now.
Also don't forget XTAL is a 170° FoV VR headset, with a lower FoV we would have Rift like displays but absolutley no SDE anymore. But I don't know if this XTAL Lenses would work with lower FoV.
About Star VR, the website didn't say what panel resolution the headset use, but it says 16.000.000 Subpixels and AMOLED, a AMOLE Display have 4 Subpixels (RGBG), so that are only 4.000.000 Pixels, the XTAL have 3.686.400 Pixels on ONE eye, so a total of 7.372.800 Pixels. And Star VR only use Fresnel, they wrote that on their website. And because StarVR should have 210° FoV, the resolution must be even more worse.
I don't know what should be so great on StarVR, the resolution can it not be also not the optics, so in the end the resolution. The Rift S use 1.280 x 1.440 per eye, so 2560x1440 in total with a FoV around the half of the StarVR, so the SDE of StarVR should be only a little better than the Oculus Rift S.
I'm sure that is also a reason why StarVR get stopped, it sounds nice as it was announced, but it took to long and other headsets reach that pixel density too. So the only thing is the FoV of 210°.
Last edited:
Interesting how it renders at the eye resolution, and doesn't have to over-render to under-render at the headset. Saves a lot of cycles right off the bat. And the lenses must be a work of art. Interesting, but in the video he mentions getting the headset adjusted to your eyes sweet spot.. Placement and fitting is probably an issue here, just like IPD.
Beautiful piece of tech, but no way in heck I can justify that price tag.
Guess I'll be sticking with the O+ for a while yet.
Beautiful piece of tech, but no way in heck I can justify that price tag.
Guess I'll be sticking with the O+ for a while yet.
But the Fov 210° makes VR more realistic.
I disagree that the 8K X is the wrong direction. As far as I can tell, that rationale will only stand if GPU progression stops now, otherwise why else is this a problem? Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if Ampere can run it which is already due next year. We're not likely to so easily get around the 'physics' problem that aspheric lenses are very fat and have to use comparatively shallow angles of refraction to reduce aberration which means wide, fat and cropped lenses on the panels ( which is why such headsets tend to be huge ). Fresnel lenses however will always give us the problem of the small sweet spot as they are only 'approximating' a full convex lens. These are conceptual problems in optical physics which I believe are far harder to resolve than adding shader cores to next gen GPUs.
Hey Rolf65, I had the Vive Pro a few years ago and the SDE, by any contemporary measure, is terrible although there wasn't much to compete back then. Do the gearvr lenses fix this or is it still like pulling a black stocking over your face?I’m using htc vive pro with gearvr lens upgrade. highly recommended, oled and perfect black in ED
When inside out tracking is released, I'm absolutely going to grab the XTAL 8k. The 3000 series from nVidia should be out by then, and while it can't drive the full power of that headset, the headshet should be everything anyone would want at home. Until then I think the Reverb wins overall.