The Pimax 8K MEGA Thread - First Reviews Now live - Page 21 — Oculus
New to the forums? Click here to read the "How To" Guide.

Developer? Click here to go to the Developer Forums.

The Pimax 8K MEGA Thread - First Reviews Now live

1181921232472

Comments

  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,247 Valuable Player
    edited November 2017
    Mace404 said:
    (4K should just be called 2160p tbh)
    So yeah, when counting horizontal pixels they use the proper name and it's no secret they use dual 4K panels (You did read the tech specs before calling them liars, right?)


    Most humans have 2 eyeballs, but you seem confused about how your eyes work vs a computer screen. Go look at a 4K TV screen, now close one eye... did that screen become 2K all of a sudden? You seem to think so.

    The resolution for the Pimax 8K is 3840x2160, that is not 8K resolution. Math wins.


    Mace404 said:

    I agree, the name is cheesy marketing, but not wrong. 


     It is both cheesy marketing and wrong. Looking at a screen with both eyes doesn't double the screens native resolution. The Pimax marketing campaign seems to be targeted towards those who are easily fooled by the word "two." I am actually surprised at the number of people who not only fall for it, but defend it. And on the Internet of all places... where learning Math is free! lol


    Mace404 said:
    you can clearly read the Pimax 8K has 2x 4K screens.

    That is called 4K Resolution. Here's another exercise for you: Look at a single pencil with one eye. Now look at it with both eyes. Did the one pencil become 2 pencils? 
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 6,890 Valuable Player
    Atmos73 said:
    No ones demanding anything. Pimax are offering 200FOV and 2x4k. Some of us want to except that offer with the risks that come with it. Others want to discredit this headset because they know It’s going to beat the very thing they’ve argued so vehemently for since release.


    If Pimax manage to release their headsets with everything working correctly I don't think ANYONE is going to argue that the Rift is technically better than the Pimax headsets - you'll be comparing a gen 1 headset with a gen 2 headset after all. But it remains to be seen whether they do or not, and if they do how much better the resolution is going to be compared to a Rift at 2.0 super sampling compared to a Pimax at 4K upscaled. The FOV is going to be better of course, but it still remains to be seen how good it's going to be, whether it releases on time or even if it releases AT ALL.

    We'll have to wait and see I guess, but for me personally I'm more likely to get the Rift CV2 in a couple of years because I know that Oculus are guaranteed to release a top quality product. I will of course check out all available options in a couple of years before I make my final decision, the same as I did for this generation.
    "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
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,247 Valuable Player
    edited November 2017
    Mace404 said:
    I agree, the name (8K) is cheesy marketing, but not wrong. 
    A more proper name would be Pimax Dual 4K.


    I think this deserves it's own Sticky on the forum... a Pimax supporter just argued that the following formula is accurate:

    2+x = 2x

    LMAO
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • Mace404Mace404 Posts: 208
    Nexus 6
    So your beloved Rift only has a 1080x1200 resolution? It has when you apply your logic above.
    I don't have the energy to argue your fanboism and flawed logics.
    Others in this thread already did that, I do not need to repeat them.  :D (and it has no effect, because Zenbane)
  • reefy86reefy86 Posts: 238
    Nexus 6
    Zenbane said:
    That is called 4K Resolution. Here's another exercise for you: Look at a single pencil with one eye. Now look at it with both eyes. Did the one pencil become 2 pencils? 
    after a few drink's it kind of does :smiley:
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,247 Valuable Player
    Mace404 said:
    So your beloved Rift only has a 1080x1200 resolution?  It has when you apply your logic above.
    I don't have the energy to argue your fanboism and flawed logics.
    Others in this thread already did that, I do not need to repeat them.  (and it has no effect, because Zenbane)


    The native resolution of the Rift and Vive is in fact, 1080x1200. Neither product lied and tried to double the resolution specifications simply because that resolution is viewed by a "pair" of eyeballs.

    You argued that 2 + x = 2x, so you are the last person to use the word "logic" in any meaningful way. You also do not seem to understand that the two eyeballs on a human are used to interpret a single image. This is probably why you are so convinced that having 2 eyeballs magically doubles the native resolution of an electronic viewing device.

    Math, science, and anatomy are your friends, not enemies. But that has no effect, because Mace404
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,247 Valuable Player

    snowdog said:
    We'll have to wait and see I guess, but for me personally I'm more likely to get the Rift CV2 in a couple of years because I know that Oculus are guaranteed to release a top quality product. I will of course check out all available options in a couple of years before I make my final decision, the same as I did for this generation.

    As a side-wager: I'm willing to bet that both Pimax and Vive users will still be using non-finger tracking wands & pads by the time the Rift CV2 launches!
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 6,890 Valuable Player
    Mace404 said:
    So your beloved Rift only has a 1080x1200 resolution? It has when you apply your logic above.
    I don't have the energy to argue your fanboism and flawed logics.
    Others in this thread already did that, I do not need to repeat them.  :D (and it has no effect, because Zenbane)

    Both the Rift and the Vive are 1K headsets.

    As I've mentioned in an earlier post both OCulus and HTC could have released 4K headsets instead if they wanted to but decided not to because the two barriers of entry into VR - cost of the headset and cost of a PC to run it - were too high. They're both still too high for a 1K headset tbh, why do you think that Oculus got ASW sorted and have cut the price of their headset and controllers in half?

    We'll only see 4K headsets from HTC and Oculus if they manage to get foveated rendering sorted, otherwise we'll be looking at 2K headsets instead imo.
    "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
  • sdplayersdplayer Posts: 128
    Art3mis
    This thread is spinning wheels (potential, and tedious, round 7 coming up). Lets just end it here as there's not much more to be learned until the Pimax backers have a product in their hands to review!  

    Alas, how naïve of me! You guys can carry on arguing (maybe someone should make a modern day bawdy British comedy film called Carry On VR!) until Gods great destroyer (Nibiru) arrives and ends all arguments for good - or maybe the Illuminati decide to trigger world war three - or maybe nature decides its time for an evolution reversal in which monkeys rise up and enslave mankind! God knows, there's enough monkeys in this thread >:)

    Whatever, carry on arguing until page 47, but for me, well, I'm off to bed to dream of floating among the Elite Dangerous stars in 200 degree FOV (I'll be optimistic and keep my fingers crossed this dream comes true next year but, even if it doesn't, it will the year after - so I cant really lose).

    Goodnight.
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,247 Valuable Player


    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • ThmoasThmoas Posts: 318
    Trinity
    Is this this still going on? Haha! 8k is a marketing term. I agree. Is the all round resolution better then Rift? Yes. Is it true 8k, no.  How it will play out with the added Fov. We will see. Interesting times. I'd love to use my Touch controllers with a Pimax 8K if it works the way current reviewers represent it.  I'm sure the added FOV will appeal to me, even if it's just blurred stretched stuff. Your eyes don't notice as long as you don't look in the corners. They will accept it as eyes dont notice details on "the edge" anyway. As long as you don't look in the corners, FOV will appear huge. Each his own.

    I did not back the Pimax and I love my trusty Rift. I love the advances Pimax makes to lenses, we can all benefit. I don't get the "ant fking" as we say in our language, the bigger picture (no pun) is more important.

    Im at a bar drinking great Westmalle Trippel while typing this on my cell phone. Please dont slash me on word usage.
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,247 Valuable Player
    edited November 2017
    Thmoas said:

     I'm sure the added FOV will appeal to me, even if it's just blurred stretched stuff. Your eyes don't notice as long as you don't look in the corners. 

    I love the advances Pimax makes to lenses, we can all benefit. 

    As you said, it's just "blurred stretched stuff" which is not a true advancement. Increasing FOV by stretching something is as artificial as trying to turn $1 in to $2 by cutting a 1-dollar bill in half. Maybe you can benefit by having a screen stretched over your face, but not everyone finds that beneficial.


    Thmoas said:
    Is this this still going on? Haha! 8k is a marketing term. 

    8K is a technical term, it refers to Screen Resolution on a Display Device. And yes, as long as people keep bumping this thread to respond (especially in a way that involves defending lies about Math) then "this" will probably keep "going on."
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • Phil007Phil007 Posts: 56
    Hiro Protagonist
    edited November 2017
    I really like the idea of higher res screens, as do all of us. I want to be playing games 2x4k@90hz, and it seems that the screen and lens technology is not to far away. But i feel this res is overkill for today and tomorrows gpu's. 
    I'm thinking its ~6x higher. Today most people will recommend a 1080ti to play most games with high settings and 90fps. On my 1080, there are games where i already feel i would like a better gpu.
    If the next ti is 1-1.5yr away, and is 40% faster. That is still nowhere near fast enough for the 8k X, plus as the years pass the games will be more demanding. How much faster will the 1280ti be in 3yrs time? My gut still says not enough gpu power for 2x4k@90hz native with the same kind of performance at current res and 1080.
    I'm thinking, personally an overall res the same as 4k is better balanced and will give the better overall experience.
    Being able to run games at native res for the next 1-2yr until we see the cv2, versus playing most games at 4k upscaled due to low fps. Upscaled can't look as good as native, and so the headset for the interim for me would have to be a more sensible resolution which can run a majority of games at native with todays gpu's. Then in a year or two, if gpu power has significantly risen and 2x4k seems more plausible then the cv2 will release... (16k eyetracked foveated :D)
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 4,546 Valuable Player
    I heard the "...you will never need it" argument range from size of harddrive, CD's, USBsticks, and graphic processors and more -  every time  we have more than managed to utilise the space, and demanded more.

    Best not say 'we have enough' without waiting to see what we can do with it. I think we may need to wait for the Pimax release before claiming we don't need it! Just saying.
    P6ftmuw.jpg
    ** New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,247 Valuable Player
    edited November 2017

    Did Phil007 say "you will never need it" ?? Let's check:

    Phil007 said:
    I really like the idea of higher res screens, as do all of us. I want to be playing games 2x4k@90hz, and it seems that the screen and lens technology is not to far away. But i feel this res is overkill for today and tomorrows gpu's. 
    I'm thinking its ~6x higher. Today most people will recommend a 1080ti to play most games with high settings and 90fps. On my 1080, there are games where i already feel i would like a better gpu.
    If the next ti is 1-1.5yr away, and is 40% faster. That is still nowhere near fast enough for the 8k X, plus as the years pass the games will be more demanding. How much faster will the 1280ti be in 3yrs time? My gut still says not enough gpu power for 2x4k@90hz native with the same kind of performance at current res and 1080.
    I'm thinking, personally an overall res the same as 4k is better balanced and will give the better overall experience.
    Being able to run games at native res for the next 1-2yr until we see the cv2, versus playing most games at 4k upscaled due to low fps. Upscaled can't look as good as native, and so the headset for the interim for me would have to be a more sensible resolution which can run a majority of games at native with todays gpu's. Then in a year or two, if gpu power has significantly risen and 2x4k seems more plausible then the cv2 will release... (16k eyetracked foveated :D)

    Nope, definitely never stated nor implied that. A bunch of other smart stuff was said, but people see what they want to see.

    Great post, @Phil007
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • Phil007Phil007 Posts: 56
    Hiro Protagonist
    It's not about not needing. I want it really bad. It's more one technology is far ahead of the other in this particular application. We are talking a jump of 6x the pixels, whilst gpu's have been progressing ~40% every 1.5-2yrs.
    In the monitor market it has taken a good few years for gpu's to overcome the jump from 1440p-4k@60hz. In vr we are shooting for 90hz, so even today the 1080ti is far being a 4k90hz card. 8K X is then taking this a step further, missing out a whole resolution generation. 
    I feel Pimax may become a victim of their failed 4k and the need to market "8K". 
    They are branding with resolution. Their usp. Ideally we are ready for a 4k headset with full tracking etc. But they already rode that train. They can't come back to market at 4K, so now its an "8K". The gpu market is very far from ready for this. 
    I'm talking in terms of the next couple of years. No doubt we will all be using 16K headsets in the not so distant future, but in this instance it's a step too far for me.
    The 8K i see using upscaling from 4k res for 99% of people for the next 2years. This is a shame, as i think the better overall experience for the users will be using a native 4k screen.
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 4,546 Valuable Player
    Glad to speak directly to the poster - and thanks for the clarification. So your approach was that one manufacturer is ahead and it best to wait on their offering. I see the point, but am not married to one solution, just to encourage as much diversity as possible (all boats float, and the stuff). 

    Am interested if the Pimax interest will force the hands of other manufactures to consider their own 4k solutions?
    P6ftmuw.jpg
    ** New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • Phil007Phil007 Posts: 56
    Hiro Protagonist
    edited November 2017
    hopefully, i'm just explaining my doubts and why it isn't ideal for me. I have brands i like and dislike for different reasons. With Oculus they have trust for a future gen headset.  But that doesn't stop me for looking at upgrades in the meantime. If the Pimax 8K delivers on its promises, i will be one of the first non backers buying. And that doesn't mean i then won't be looking to upgrade to the cv2 when that comes. 

    I wouldn't be too surprised if the headset market ends up like the tv market at some point. Many brands, many models, many budgets. All much the same for each particular price point.
  • RoasterRoaster Posts: 1,053
    3Jane
    The Facebook quest for a billion hoi-poloi goes counter to this increase in specs. So many low end units will require a lot of low end software.
    The high res users will have to push hard to get serviced, and like it or not, the mythical CV4 could go either way. There's demand for better headsets, but the trend is toward low cost, low weight, low horsepower units.
    The desperation for a PiMax-type headset comes from this doubt, and Oculus fed the fire by not bringing it up.
       Another poster said that watching movies and using the desktop are insignificant features, but for the record, I'd buy a PiM just for that.  I don't understand how someone could think higher resolution and better field of view suddenly aren't important.
       I really don't think the Rift screens are that bad (lucky to have gotten a good one), It's the field of view that makes it hard to use. I'm only getting 75° perceived fov, and it just isn't good enough.
    i7-5820K @ 4.2Ghz, water cooled, Asus X99-Pro USB 3.1, 48 Gb DDR4 2400, Samsung 950 pro M.2 SSD, GTX 980 Ti SC, 750w psu
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,247 Valuable Player
    edited November 2017
    Roaster said:
    The desperation for a PiMax-type headset comes from this doubt, and Oculus fed the fire by not bringing it up.
      

    Agreed that the Pimax line of (currently "imaginary") consumer products yield desperation. As for that last line... anyone claiming that Oculus "fed the fire by not bringing it up" is simply trying to rephrase the truth which is, "Oculus didn't fall for the Pimax trawl bait."

    There is an infinite amount of things that Oculus and Facebook could never bring up; naysayers look for those things. Facebook is doing the thing that has made them a global leader both technologically and financially.

    HTC did "too much too soon" when they rushed to market with Room-Scale and sub-par hand-controllers. Pimax is doing the same thing by rushing with 4K resolution. There is zero evidence that Pimax is avoiding the pitfalls that caused HTC to sell to Google and turn their attention to a strictly Chinese based MobileVR market.
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • RoasterRoaster Posts: 1,053
    3Jane
    This is true, PiMax may be trying too much too soon, which is why I'm waiting for the reviews before sending the cash. I retired recently and the bux ain't rollin in like they used to.
    i7-5820K @ 4.2Ghz, water cooled, Asus X99-Pro USB 3.1, 48 Gb DDR4 2400, Samsung 950 pro M.2 SSD, GTX 980 Ti SC, 750w psu
  • hoppingbunny123hoppingbunny123 Posts: 488
    Nexus 6
    edited November 2017
    pimax 8k video seen by a camera looking through the lens, ignore the strobing its the recording camera:





    Just to watch video if it didn't make me sick because of the flicker then I would want one! Looks sweet.
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,366 Valuable Player
    edited November 2017
    Phil007 said:
    The 8K i see using upscaling from 4k res for 99% of people for the next 2years. This is a shame, as i think the better overall experience for the users will be using a native 4k screen.
    I've seens upscaling first hand, I can't really say it's better than native, but it is workable long as the pixels are in good scaling from the base pixels. For example, 1080 to 4k doesn't really look that bad off really. You do lose some detail and things do look a bit softer, but overall it's still worth the jump/use if it you ask me for the higher res in this case. VR surfers more from the lack of pixel distant than it does the detail of that resolution.

    I don't really fault Pimax using this idea and so far the results are people can't see the different 100% either because the res is still too low for that golden 16k per eye that we need. Comparing it to native - like the Pimax X will show a difference, but overall - I think it might be worth taking the risk in this case and having the higher resolution jump for them or vr as a whole until we can really hit that gold number for res.

    When we can hit true 4k natively at 90hzs, I will hope to see 8k upscaling to help push the technology forward that much more. Even though Pimax will claim it to be 16k:) it will be a pretty sick jump from what we see today for sure. The bigger question will come in the form of if we can see that in OLED vs just LCD. LCD is kind of hitting the limits of how fast they can refresh before smearing the image pretty bad. The higher the res, the worst it gets over the distance from the screen to the eye.

    Truth be told here, the res isn't what is killing the performance number on Pimax - it is the FOV. Back in the day, Oculus did want to go higher FOV, but they found that even 30 degrees of extra FOV was adding 20-25% overhead in performance hit because they had to 1) increase the amount of pixels that was drawn and 2) some of those pixels were not even shown unless ATW kick in. Remember, Pimax is only requesting a 1080/base pixel resolution then upscaling it, so they shouldn't be having any issues with hitting the target 4k @90hzs unless there is an issue with the screen, cable bandwidth, or their upscaler. They use BW - so that should overcome the cable bandwidth issue. That leaves the screen or upscaler problems. From what it sounds - it's the upscaler maybe having problems keeping up with, but that doesn't explain why they are having such a high need for GPU resources unless you count in that fact that the FOV is adding extra overhead in the process. Even then, having a increase in FOV means more things to draw and more the GPU has to work to include that information. The jump from 110 to 200 is a pretty scary jump and why so many people are saying they are crazy to do so. Not that it isn't impossible, but more than it's almost a waste of resources in doing so.
  • Phil007Phil007 Posts: 56
    Hiro Protagonist
    edited November 2017
    I was saying about the 4k screen in terms of not even being ready for that yet. 1080ti is just about a 4k60 card, we need another 50% for it to be 4k90. So, in terms of growth i am allowing for scaling to a large degree. Personally i would be happy with this. Play my older games at crisp 4k90, use upscaling for newer titles. Then in a year or two, i will be able to play most games at 4k90 (similar to now with 1080ti on rift). Then the next jump to 2x4k screens will be a 100% jump, with gpu's following the same trends of the last decade taking a good 4-5yrs to catch up. In GPU market, we have seen instances such as 4k monitors that needed far more gpu grunt then was available at the time of release. These did not speed up the progression of GPU's. 

    I am one of those people who are very sensitive to scaling. I agree that 1080 - 4k doesn't look as bad as others because of the linear scale, but it is still very noticeable to me and obvious without looking for it. I'm guessing if its obvious to me at the ppd of my monitor or tv, then it will be even more obvious at the relatively low ppd of the headset. Even with the scaling it will look superior to the current gen (thats why people are saying the upscaling looks great).

    I also keep forgetting to say that i am looking at this from a purely gaming perspective. 4k-8k-16k will all be great upgrades that will be a lot easier to achieve for vr desktop use. But personally, i dont think i would even use it much for reading and browsing etc as i prefer to use my monitor in real life.

    I am all for pushing forwards, and it's great to have competition. I am really sure the visuals in these headsets will be better than the current gen. But i am holding out, during the months before 8k x. Maybe there will be announcements of other headsets more suited to my preferences. I definitely want a new headset within a year. I want the pimax to be great, its about 6 months away during which i think we will hear about other headsets coming. 

    The 5k is more inline with what i think will give the overall better gaming experience for the next 1-2years. But i stepped back from it as i want more ppd upgrade. If it was 150-160 fov with higher ppd, i would've gambled (still other concerns such as software). In this case it's funny that i would have potentially backed a lower spec headset.

    I guess my whole point is the 8k x is a step too far. Pushing forwards is great, i am 100000% for that. I am a tech head, need the latest and greatest. But sometimes pushing to far to quick can be a detriment. VR is still in it's infancy, lot's of outsiders don't really understand the need for high fps etc. Many when they finally jump in, will see 8k x pimax adverts etc, buy it then give vr a bad reputation because as "amazing" as it is they feel nausea etc... Stretching but maybe similar to 3d vision. Pushed into homes far to early, when LCD is clearly not fast enough. People bought in, gave 3d vision a bad rep for the ghosting etc. But use it on an OLED, my friends say that is not the 3d vision they remember, they would still be using it today.

  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,247 Valuable Player
    edited November 2017
    Mradr said:
    1080 to 4k doesn't really look that bad off really. You do lose some detail and things do look a bit softer

    That isn't a very good selling point. You're basically suggesting that as long as people remove any sense of standards and expectations of quality, then... it's really not that bad. Well, we can say that for pretty much any extreme, yes?

    Walking everywhere instead of driving isn't that bad off really. As long as you have some water available so you don't pass out, wear the right shoes, and never have to be anywhere on time then it's worth the exercise.

    Here's a good read on Upscaling vs Native, with an example image provided:
    http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/upscaled-1080P-vs-4K

    "Upscaling is therefore a stopgap measure in the absence of true 4K"

    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,366 Valuable Player
    edited November 2017
    Zenbane said:
    Mradr said:
    1080 to 4k doesn't really look that bad off really. You do lose some detail and things do look a bit softer

    That isn't a very good selling point. You're basically suggesting that as long as people remove any sense of standards and expectations of quality, then... it's really not that bad. Well, we can say that for pretty much any extreme, yes?

    Walking everywhere instead of driving isn't that bad off really. As long as you have some water available so you don't pass out, wear the right shoes, and never have to be anywhere on time then it's worth the exercise.

    Here's a good read on Upscaling vs Native, with an example image provided:
    http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/upscaled-1080P-vs-4K

    "Upscaling is therefore a stopgap measure in the absence of true 4K"

    I read that, but that website isn't a good example of it either. I used to walk every where instead of driving. When I want to grab something local just down the street I would rather walk than drive. For one I don't have to worry about hitting something and having to pay more money to have it fix, and then come home sad with a cop behind me either:)) 

    Sure you can put any words anywhere you like. I mean that is what English is good about :)))

    But my point still holds, VR still lacks the pixels per degree that having a higher res > than a lower native res. Once we can hit true 4k on raw performance then it'll be even better, but till then it's not as bad as that website made it out to be. Did you not look at the linus video I put on before?

    I mean it was only ONE page back:))

    As you can see upscaling is really is not that bad. I even did try it on another VR unit in the past and really I mean it's softer than real 4k. I am not saying it's better - but it's worth the trade off of what you are getting in terms of better visual quality and less screen door effect. Sure it's not as detail and I agree it's not for everyone I guess, but it's still worth it until we hit around real 8k and we hit a higher per pixel to degree that matters. 

    Who says it has to be a selling point in itself? Anything that has a selling point usually has a drawback for that selling point:) Your car is giving off gases, it burn up your money to drive it, and puts more wear and tear on it sooner than if you would've walk down the street for that milk.
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,247 Valuable Player
    edited November 2017
    Mradr said:
     I used to walk every where instead of driving. When I want to grab something local just down the street I would rather walk than drive. For one I don't have to worry about hitting something and having to pay more money to have it fix, and then come home sad with a cop behind me either:)) 


    I used to walk a lot as well. I'm both a good walker and driver so I never really had all the problems you described.  But since we're playing the Theorycraft game... one can have just as many problems walking as they do driving. Sometimes more.  You can get hit, instead of hitting something. It is also easier to get robbed, mugged, and murdered while walking around town as opposed to driving. You can pay more money due to hospital bills. And you can come home injured with an ambulance behind you.

    But hey to each it's own. If your point is that the Pimax 8K is the proverbial "walking" in a world of driving, then yes sir, I agree with you.


    Mradr said:

    But my point still holds, VR still lacks the pixels per degree that having a higher res > than a lower native res. Once we can hit true 4k on raw performance then it'll be even better, but till then it's not as bad as that website made it out to be. 

    The phrase "not that bad" is very subject. I believe considering the cost (over 4 million dollars) to develop plus the predicted price of the product itself ($500 for the HMD, $300 for the controller)... then yes, it is very very bad. Maybe if it were $200-$300 total then sure you'd have a point about it being "not that bad." But right now we are talking about a high-end product that is implementing low-end technology. And make no mistake, upscaling is the low-end of graphics quality in a world of native resolution.

    My previous point still holds: It is not that bad as long as any expectations of quality are abandoned.


    Mradr said:
    Who says it has to be a selling point in itself? Anything that has a selling point usually has a drawback for that selling point

    Yet you're here trying to "sell" upscaling as "not that bad" lol
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,366 Valuable Player
    edited November 2017
    Zenbane said:
    Mradr said:
     I used to walk every where instead of driving. When I want to grab something local just down the street I would rather walk than drive. For one I don't have to worry about hitting something and having to pay more money to have it fix, and then come home sad with a cop behind me either:)) 


    I used to walk a lot as well. I'm both a good walker and driver so I never really had all the problems you described.  But since we're playing the Theorycraft game... one can have just as many problems walking as they do driving. Sometimes more.  You can get hit, instead of hitting something. It is also easier to get robbed, mugged, and murdered while walking around town as opposed to driving. You can pay more money due to hospital bills. And you can come home injured with an ambulance behind you.

    But hey to each it's own. If your point is that the Pimax 8K is the proverbial "walking" in a world of driving, then yes sir, I agree with you.


    Mradr said:

    But my point still holds, VR still lacks the pixels per degree that having a higher res > than a lower native res. Once we can hit true 4k on raw performance then it'll be even better, but till then it's not as bad as that website made it out to be. 

    The phrase "not that bad" is very subject. I believe considering the cost (over 4 million dollars) to develop plus the predicted price of the product itself ($500 for the HMD, $300 for the controller)... then yes, it is very very bad. Maybe if it were $200-$300 total then sure you'd have a point about it being "not that bad." But right now we are talking about a high-end product that is implementing low-end technology. And make no mistake, upscaling is the low-end of graphics quality in a world of native resolution.

    My previous point still holds: It is not that bad as long as any expectations of quality are abandoned.


    Mradr said:
    Who says it has to be a selling point in itself? Anything that has a selling point usually has a drawback for that selling point

    Yet you're here trying to "sell" upscaling as "not that bad" lol
    Na, theorycrafting is if I am saying "if they hit that res" but they are hitting the res requirements already. The problem is in the refresh of the device it self that is the known problem right now along with the FOV (many other things, but I already talk about those). They are also not making anything new for that headset that a Gen2 should have. More or less it's a 1.5 gen release if you ask me than a real gen 2, but we already know what I want to see in a Gen2 headset. I made that point across a few pages now:) Even you like the ideas.

    I am focusing on that one part right now. So yes, 4k fake res > native 1k res hands down. Anyone that has tried the Pimax agrees it's still better than current gen headsets. We just don't have the pixels per degree to a point they need to be. Now going back to the other post - most of that could even be better on the PM if they really went with a lower FOV and allow the pixels per degree be even higher.

    "not that bad" is subjective, but only in the eyes of the beholder to a level of what is comparing to. When comparing it to 1k native res - then yes, 4k upscale is better. It allows more pixels per degree and looks better for the resolution. Now if we're comparing 4k vs native 4k - then agree - it's not better. But that website is a super bad example of that if you ask me. I mean look at the video and get a hands on what a good upscaler can do. Witch I already and you are agree too as well, so I am bit confused on your point just a bit here on why you keep repeating yourself?

    Well they made 4m doesn't mean it cost them 4m to make. Along with this subject, I already talk about it as well. They are kind of a failing company of a niche market that will not be able to compete with Oculus toe to toe in software, but they are offering something that will be on the market, so we have to still understand what they are doing and learn as much to make a better product in the future. I kind of joke about this and said they are my guinea pigs if a upscaler would work well in this. The fact people did bid into the product (facebooker haters or not) it's still something that people are interested in and something that needs to be figured out in some cases. Sure, OCulus is still the better product because of price and software - but the raw numbers will say something else and most people only understand raw numbers. Just because I can buy a 400$ computer that has 8GB of ram and 1 TB HDD doesn't mean it's a better value than a 800$ computer with 8GB of RM and 512 SSD. Most people will only see the numbers and buy the 400$ model because of price alone with some confused by the other numbers and see 1TB > than 512 SSD even though the SSD is still a better value to have and that ram is 4x faster than the 400$ model.

    But we don't have native res 4k at 90Hz right now. As I said before, once we hit 4k native I will want to see a 8k upscale version because right now the quality of that pixel per degree would be better than native res right now in terms of real value of better visual and screen door effect.  In 2018, we will have a GPU that should be able or un 4k at 90hz for sure. The nv Titan will/should(?) have enough power to run at that level and the way I talk will start to change then to we need to have native 4k or the ability to turn on or off the upscaler option. Then again - why not give the option for a 8k upscale option around then as well? Cost? Who cares - you just offer it in low numbers - the cost will come down over time and you learn a lot about the product over time so that when you do release the next gen headset - it will be more fit to that level of hardware/performance. More or less it's a Dev HMD than a customer version, but then again - it gives Devs that much of a heads up of what they should be aiming for.

    Should that be part of a high end product? I am not sure. I know the mid range should for sure. It makes sense here. It allows that much more hardware to run the product that results in more people into VR. As for high end - if you already pushing the limits and then using upscaling to make the differences - it does scream we are jumping a bit too far, but if you are targeting high end anyways - what differences does it make in the first place?

    Now if we're talking about cost to keep it lower - then having a upscaler in the device will just increase the cost of having to have one built in. This is where a upscaler for the mid range would still value having it as it wont have to jump that high up in res and they can keep the cost of that upscale in check. Where at the higher end - having it on board just means that much more you are paying for. Granted at that point you just have to question to yourself is having a higher res better than the cost at that point. There are other cost to having that as well such as the screens and the cable bandwidth that will also need to increase quality to handle that raw performance required to run higher end stuff. That is just a known fact to have anything - the better it is the more cost it comes with it, so really - it comes down to where and when do you stop and say "good enough" or "not that bad".

    So upscaling can fix at least 3 of those problems in one shot with a little extra cost (not having to have a cable that has to handle 4k - 8k - 16k of res, cost have a GPU that can even handle that, and higher degree of pixels). Is that good enough to say it's worth having or do you remove that and wait longer until native can play a role in it because native cost more than upscale, but does come down in cost over a given amount of time. So really Time vs Money vs "good enough"
  • kojackkojack Posts: 5,349 Volunteer Moderator
    Upscaling 1080p to 4k could be done with a simple nearest neighbor sample, you'd have the same effective res, no bluring, but with smaller pixels (so probably reduced sde).

    The problem is the Pimax 8K doesn't do a simple 2:1 upscale, it's doing 1440p to 4K. That means it's not an integer multiple, so rows and columns don't evenly map from one res to the other. That causes problems with fine detail that moves around.
  • Atmos73Atmos73 Posts: 3,128 Valuable Player
    Last I read they’re rendering 4k upscaling to 8k.

    DK2 owner - Vive owner - Pimax 8k backer - Waiting for Knuckles on Valve time.
Sign In or Register to comment.