05-06-2015 05:51 AM
05-21-2015 12:54 AM
"mrmonkeybat" wrote:"vizionvr" wrote:
If 1440 is incapable of 90hz+ then how did CB do it? Review after review of CB claimed at least 1440 plus 90 hz. Or is Oculus doing something else to make these reviewers believe a 1440 res?
People where guestimating the resolution people who tried Vive DK said it looked similar resolution to CB even though it had a slightly wider FOV.
05-21-2015 11:10 AM
"SuperDre" wrote:"mrmonkeybat" wrote:"vizionvr" wrote:
If 1440 is incapable of 90hz+ then how did CB do it? Review after review of CB claimed at least 1440 plus 90 hz. Or is Oculus doing something else to make these reviewers believe a 1440 res?
People where guestimating the resolution people who tried Vive DK said it looked similar resolution to CB even though it had a slightly wider FOV.
That's something I'm really wondering about, why is Oculus going for more vertical resolution instead of going for more horizontal resolution, in most cases people seem to like a wider FOV..
But it's true, Oculus never publicly said what the real resolution was of the CB, so it could be these double screens, but ofcourse it's also possible it was a single 2560x1440p screen inside the CB (as I believe there were different CB prototypes)..
05-21-2015 11:59 AM
05-21-2015 03:37 PM
05-22-2015 01:37 AM
"ThreeDeeVision" wrote:"JET" wrote:
So many people here are missing the point on the resolution. The issue is that you need silky-smooth refresh rates in VR. DK2 was 75Hz, CV1 is 90Hz. Right now, there is no display technology that can handle a higher resolution than Rift at 90Hz. 1440p screens are 60Hz. That will get you the dreaded "judder" that so many people complain about. It's good enough for GearVR because that's all there is, but I'd much rather have CV1 resolution at 90Hz than GearVR resolution at 60Hz.
NVidia's latest drivers, released yesterday, do not support 90Hz at any resolution beyond CV1. HDMI 1.3 does not support 90Hz at any resolution beyond CV1. They are hitting the absolute ceiling of current technology. Once panels improve, drivers improve, and HDMI improves, the resolution will improve. That's what CV2 - x are for, right?
Persistence is also the reason Sony is incorporating frame-doubling tech into Morpheus. 60Hz is not good enough, so they're doing internal processing to interpolate up to 120Hz (I believe you can also render natively at 120Hz, at the expense of a lot of graphic detail). Interpolated 120Hz is still not as good as native 90Hz, though.
Based on what we know, CV1 will have exactly what Oculus claims it will have - the best VR display of any headset.
Thanks for this post Jet, that clears things up for me. I was wondering why they wouldn't go to at least a 1440p screen, but if they are all 60Hz refresh, that would explain it. That would explain why Vive went with the same resolution as well.
Having the Vive and Rift share specs will also help with software compatibility.
05-24-2015 11:30 AM
05-25-2015 05:32 AM
"Malkmus1979" wrote:
I don't have the quote offhand, but when people were trying the Vive (which has the same "taller" vs "wider" FOV) they said it was better because you tend to look up and down with your eyes more, and actually turn your head when looking side to side. Or something like that. Either way, it seems to have its benefits.
05-25-2015 08:53 AM
"kojack" wrote:
I read this somewhere too, it said something about being able to easily see your feet helps make the experience more comfortable when moving around. Or something like that.
One possible technical reason for going for this screen arrangement is due to the fact that high res panels aren't available in landscape orientation (pretty much every panel over 720p is intended for a phone). The DK2 has a portrait mode screen mounted sideways, requiring rotation of the image before display (by the drivers in extended mode or the oculus sdk in direct mode). Plus frame tearing (when vsync isn't uses) goes across rather than down, causing eyes to be out of sync.
Having dual portrait screens means no rotation needs to happen, they just need to split the input to two panels, which should simplify things.
05-25-2015 06:24 PM
"SuperDre" wrote:
But the vive uses these displays in landscape mode
Valve’s design actually arranges the two screens in portrait orientation, extending the vertical FOV. Simply, the image is taller.
05-26-2015 12:02 PM
"Malkmus1979" wrote:"SuperDre" wrote:
But the vive uses these displays in landscape mode
No they don't.
http://www.tested.com/tech/concepts/504 ... takeaways/Valve’s design actually arranges the two screens in portrait orientation, extending the vertical FOV. Simply, the image is taller.