Index vs Rift S ? - Page 3 — Oculus
New to the forums? Click here to read the "How To" Guide.

Developer? Click here to go to the Developer Forums.

Index vs Rift S ?

13»

Comments

  • CrashFuCrashFu Posts: 1,756 Valuable Player
    I think the benefits of increased framerate (in passive media / non-action games) "plateaus" at whatever point it convinces you you're looking at actual movement.  I've always been more into animation than live-action anyways, so I have a pretty high tolerance for low framerate, I guess.   (There's this CGI cartoon on Netflix right now called "The Dragon Prince"  that I'm pretty sure would make most of you guys' eyes bleed, but I'm totally into it.)

    And for action games it's at whatever point you're getting an accurate enough representation of object/player positions to play effectively.   The points made about competitive action games and high-difficulty beatsaber are interesting to consider, though it's honestly still hard to imagine that milliseconds of difference in reaction times would ever have that big an impact.

    I think my one biggest take-away from this thread is that I am truly fortunate to have never developed a taste for high-framerate displays, since I can get everything I need out of VR from a $400 system, while some of you will have to spend $1000 to be satisfied.   Or, I guess just wait a couple years until 100+hz HMDs are the standard, and the beefy hardware needed to run them at that framerate has significantly come down in price.   Either way.  :P 
    It's hard being the voice of reason when you're surrounded by unreasonable people.
  • LuciferousLuciferous Posts: 2,005 Valuable Player
    Well I am sure you will be even happier next year when Oculus reduce its next headset to 70hz ;)
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,549 Valuable Player


    And for action games it's at whatever point you're getting an accurate enough representation of object/player positions to play effectively.   The points made about competitive action games and high-difficulty beatsaber are interesting to consider, though it's honestly still hard to imagine that milliseconds of difference in reaction times would ever have that big an impact.

    Yes it would only have any noticeable effect at the highest levels of game play. The thing is, all of the milliseconds of delay add up. From the input lag of the control device, to the display itself, to compression (if any), to your internet latency and then to your reaction time to the information presented. In quick twitch gaming milliseconds do matter.

    For casual play/playing for fun 60hz/60fps is enough on a monitor. 
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,109 Valuable Player
    Well I am sure you will be even happier next year when Oculus reduce its next headset to 70hz ;)
    No doubt you'll still be here next year checking in. As all the ex-Oculus owners do.
    ;)
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • LuciferousLuciferous Posts: 2,005 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    Highly likely, I'll probably still be waiting for an Index video. :)
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 6,748 Valuable Player
    Dear Oculus, after reading about the Soap Opera Effect on your official forums I snagged my brother's wife. Now NONE of my family will talk to me any more. Thank you.
    "This you have to understand. There's only one way to hurt a man who's lost everything. Give him back something broken."

    Thomas Covenant, Unbeliever
  • kojackkojack Posts: 5,293 Volunteer Moderator

    when Oculus reduce its next headset to 70hz ;)
    The Quest is 72Hz, so for many people that is approximately true. :)
  • Comic_Book_GuyComic_Book_Guy Posts: 1,194
    3Jane
    The Quest isn't the future. It's an appeasement. 80 or 90hz on a SOC no better than a Galaxy S8 would have been hard.
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,109 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    The Quest isn't the future. It's an appeasement.

    A prediction that will likely prove completely false. Rift has already adopted Quest's design by going inside-out tracking, and HTC has their own version as well with the Vive Cosmos. After 3 years of VR on the mainstream and barely making a blip on the global consumer radar... if Quest isn't showcasing the future then that would mean VR has not future. Stand-alone VR that removes stationary external tracking hardware most certainly represents the future, as has been dictated by  the market itself.

    Index is following in the footsteps of the Vive Pro and Pimax 8K, which has proven to have remarkably low numbers.
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • Comic_Book_GuyComic_Book_Guy Posts: 1,194
    3Jane
    edited May 16
    Zenbane said:
    The Quest isn't the future. It's an appeasement.

    A prediction that will likely prove completely false. Rift has already adopted Quest's design by going inside-out tracking, and HTC has their own version as well with the Vive Cosmos. After 3 years of VR on the mainstream and barely making a blip on the global consumer radar... if Quest isn't showcasing the future then that would mean VR has not future. Stand-alone VR that removes stationary external tracking hardware most certainly represents the future, as has been dictated by  the market itself.

    Index is following in the footsteps of the Vive Pro and Pimax 8K, which has proven to have remarkably low numbers.
    Uh, I think you misunderstood my post. Read my second sentence, not just the first one. I  mean 72 hz isn't the future. Not sure how you got that I'm arguing against wireless or some such. I'm just saying the Quest's limitations are pretty big ones. Wireless VR...of course it's the future. But not on a SOC from 2017 , @ 72hz. Not sure why so many people are SO excited for a HMD powered by a smart phone SOC. Yay I guess?

    Valve made strange decisions with the Index. 144hz VR is a useless feature. Pimax is a piece of crap with bad quality control and the sweet spot is no bigger than any other head set. Vive Pro is too expensive and typical of HTC. We will be watching them go under at this rate.


  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,109 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    Uh, I think you misunderstood my post. Read my second sentence, not just the first one. I  mean 72 hz isn't the future. Not sure how you got that I'm arguing against wireless or some such.

    Yeah it sounded like you were dismissing Quest altogether in the first sentence, and then bringing up its hardware specs in a negative way to just further condemn it. So yep, I misread. My bad.

    I'm just saying the Quest's limitations are pretty big ones. Wireless VR...of course it's the future. But not on a SOC from 2017 , @ 72hz. Not sure why so many people are SO excited for a HMD powered by a smart phone SOC.

    I agree that, technically, Quest shouldn't be all that glorious. I think that the heavy commitment to bring PCVR content over plays a big role in the acclaim it receives.

    Comic_Book_Guy said:
    Valve made strange decisions with the Index. 144hz VR is a useless feature. Pimax is a piece of crap with bad quality control and the sweet spot is no bigger than any other head set. Vive Pro is too expensive and typical of HTC. We will be watching them go under at this rate.


    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 2,584 Valuable Player
    kojack said:

    when Oculus reduce its next headset to 70hz ;)
    The Quest is 72Hz, so for many people that is approximately true. :)
    Damn it, I blew my trash talk...knew I should gone for 50hz

    Even though I'd love 120 Hz or better in VR games like Lone Echo, truth is I'm more or less used to just 45 fps asw. One thing is what I want for fps, the other is what I have to endure to enjoy the best image quality. When it comes to fps vs. ss I feel I often have to do something like this :blush:


    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz boost, 11 Ghz ram); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Oculus Rift CV1 - nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • LuciferousLuciferous Posts: 2,005 Valuable Player
    You have to dress up in spandex?  :D
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,549 Valuable Player
    edited May 17
    RuneSR2 said:
    kojack said:

    when Oculus reduce its next headset to 70hz ;)
    The Quest is 72Hz, so for many people that is approximately true. :)
    Damn it, I blew my trash talk...knew I should gone for 50hz

    Even though I'd love 120 Hz or better in VR games like Lone Echo, truth is I'm more or less used to just 45 fps asw. One thing is what I want for fps, the other is what I have to endure to enjoy the best image quality. When it comes to fps vs. ss I feel I often have to do something like this :blush:


    Yea, in a lot of games that I play, I won't be worried about refresh rate because I'm going to be pushing my GPU to the limits until Nvidia comes out with another tier. I also feel like resolution at this point is more important than refresh rate for the average use until we get rid of SDE and also get some beefier GPU's. (Unless the Index lenses are working some magic)

    I don't agree that refresh is useless though, especially with the low persistence of the Index panels. 144hz should make for a super fast and smooth experience and I love that we have the option to cater the headset to whatever type of game that you're playing. If I'm playing something competitive I'm going to opt for higher refresh with lower graphics quality and likewise I'll run 80hz with motion smoothing down to 40 on the other end. I am looking forward to pushing both extremes and see what the index can do and I hope I can switch them on the fly or without a lot of issues. 
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 2,584 Valuable Player
    pyroth309 said:
    RuneSR2 said:
    kojack said:

    when Oculus reduce its next headset to 70hz ;)
    The Quest is 72Hz, so for many people that is approximately true. :)
    Damn it, I blew my trash talk...knew I should gone for 50hz

    Even though I'd love 120 Hz or better in VR games like Lone Echo, truth is I'm more or less used to just 45 fps asw. One thing is what I want for fps, the other is what I have to endure to enjoy the best image quality. When it comes to fps vs. ss I feel I often have to do something like this :blush:


    Yea, in a lot of games that I play, I won't be worried about refresh rate because I'm going to be pushing my GPU to the limits until Nvidia comes out with another tier. I also feel like resolution at this point is more important than refresh rate for the average use until we get rid of SDE and also get some beefier GPU's. (Unless the Index lenses are working some magic)
    I don't agree that refresh is useless though, especially with the low persistence of the Index panels. It should make for a super fast and smooth experience and I love that we have the option to cater the headset to whatever type of game that you're playing. If I'm playing something competitive I'm going to opt for higher refresh with lower graphics quality and likewise I'll run 80hz with motion smoothing down to 40 on the other end. I am looking forward to pushing both extremes and see what the index can do and I hope I can switch them on the fly or without a lot of issues. 

    Exactly - it's about having options and not being forced to use some specific Hz. In singleplayer high-end PCVR games I prefer the best possible image quality and 144 Hz probably will not be an option. 

    To name a few games, Beat Saber and Flappy Flappy VR should be perfect candidates for 144 Hz gaming  ;) Actually there're tons on small indie games in VR with super-low system requirements, most should work perfectly in 120 or 144 Hz. 
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz boost, 11 Ghz ram); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Oculus Rift CV1 - nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • Comic_Book_GuyComic_Book_Guy Posts: 1,194
    3Jane
    pyroth309 said:
    I don't agree that refresh is useless though, especially with the low persistence of the Index panels. 144hz should make for a super fast and smooth experience and I love that we have the option to cater the headset to whatever type of game that you're playing. If I'm playing something competitive I'm going to opt for higher refresh with lower graphics quality and likewise I'll run 80hz with motion smoothing down to 40 on the other end. I am looking forward to pushing both extremes and see what the index can do and I hope I can switch them on the fly or without a lot of issues. 
    Of course the high refresh would be nice. But nobody has the hardware to make use of it without putting everything on low, or outside of  low effort N64 graphics indy titles. I don't see that changing any time soon.
  • LuciferousLuciferous Posts: 2,005 Valuable Player
    edited May 17
    I read an article where they said they had played No Mans Sky at 144hz. Don't ask me how but that was by one of the choosen few index reviewers. Norm from tested also said he saw apps in 144hz. I think he said watching movies in a theater type app.

    I just bought No Mans Sky as its on 50 percent off on steam, didn't have much else to do and I reckon it wont be on sale once it does release.


  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,549 Valuable Player
    edited May 17
    pyroth309 said:
    I don't agree that refresh is useless though, especially with the low persistence of the Index panels. 144hz should make for a super fast and smooth experience and I love that we have the option to cater the headset to whatever type of game that you're playing. If I'm playing something competitive I'm going to opt for higher refresh with lower graphics quality and likewise I'll run 80hz with motion smoothing down to 40 on the other end. I am looking forward to pushing both extremes and see what the index can do and I hope I can switch them on the fly or without a lot of issues. 
    Of course the high refresh would be nice. But nobody has the hardware to make use of it without putting everything on low, or outside of  low effort N64 graphics indy titles. I don't see that changing any time soon.
    Well you just summed up competitive gaming on PC monitors lol. Hop on twitch and watch someone playing CSGO and it looks like crap but they're getting them 240 fps.  B)

    It's just a nice option to have. 

    I think 120hz would be doable to maintain good looking graphics especially with a 2080TI or the upcoming GPU's.
Sign In or Register to comment.