cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

The Pimax 8K MEGA Thread - First Reviews Now live

Shadowmask72
Honored Visionary
I've been on the fence about this and have some reservations about build quality and performance under heavy load, but for me the positives outweigh the negatives and I guess many others feel the same way. Now I never backed the Rift during its Kickstarter campaign (unfortunately) but I assume the feeling is similar where you're helping to forge the future of VR in some way, or at least like to think so. I consider myself an enthusiast and not the majority, therefore what's another £600 to experience the latest  in VR. Sadly, having Samsung not release the Odyssey here in the UK left me with an itchy wallet finger, a void that needed filling and with GO not releasing until next year either I thought the Pimax 8K will scratch the itch and might just prove to be pretty good too. I'm excited for it.

There is always going to be skepticism and no doubt a number of people will suggest I am backing a paperweight but, that's ok it's fully understandable to have those feelings and that prediction is always a possibility. But... if someone doesn't take the risk and we all play it safe, how can VR move forwards - I guess we've already taken risks with past VR investments in some way or another including with the Rift. I've never claimed any loyalty to anyone having owned The Gear VR (still have that knocking around somewhere) DK2, Vive, Rift, PSVR and come next year Pimax will be added to the list. However, I am interested like many of you agreed in the poll we did here a while back that certain things were important to improve on what we have now and it seems the Pimax 8K is offering some of those things on paper. 

I think once you can look past the silly marketing name (8K) and the hammerhead shark design and focus on what's inside, this HMD offers something many claimed they would like in the past but are not prepared to trust Pimax to deliver. I think a number of people would rather wait for a more established company (like Oculus) to offer a similar experience further down the line. All very understandable. But I am impatient, and whilst I use my Rift quite often I want more of what VR can offer sooner rather than later. 

So, (and the main reason for this post) is come Feb 2018 some point in 2018 I will gladly post impressions and comparisons without hyperbole and answer questions any of you might have. That said, I expect many others at the time will post their impressions also so there should be plenty of opinions going around from various sources.


System Specs: MSI NVIDIA RTX 4090 , i5 13700K CPU, 32GB DDR 4 RAM, Win 11 64 Bit OS.
1,860 REPLIES 1,860

Phil007
Protege
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.

Zenbane
MVP
MVP

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"

Anonymous
Not applicable

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?
https://youtu.be/MjJzibFTaqA
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.

Zenbane
MVP
MVP

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

Anonymous
Not applicable

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"

kojack
MVP
MVP
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.
Author: Oculus Monitor,  Auto Oculus Touch,  Forum Dark Mode, Phantom Touch Remover,  X-Plane Fixer
Hardware: Threadripper 1950x, MSI Gaming Trio 2080TI, Asrock X399 Taich
Headsets: Wrap 1200VR, DK1, DK2, CV1, Rift-S, GearVR, Go, Quest, Quest 2, Reverb G2

Anonymous
Not applicable

kojack said:

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.


I wasn't sure on their native res they were aiming for - but even at that res - it doesn't explain the overhead they're seeing right now. I am 100% sure it's the FOV. I have no proof other wise I spit out some numbers in math - but once you remove all that is kown - what is left unknow must be the truth. That is - FOV is costing more overhead than they really want it to.

That is silly - scaling should always be 2:1 if they are aiming for a good product unless they are doing something extra with the offset pixels?

Anonymous
Not applicable

Atmos73 said:

Last I read they’re rendering 4k upscaling to 8k.



No, they are upscaling the two images. Yes in total they have a value 2x of the image, but it's half of what they are saying this is why Zenbane and I hates their math. It's plan stupid and misleading on their page.

Anonymous
Not applicable

Atmos73 said:

The fact remains they’re rendering 4k and upscaling to 8k which is a ratio of 2:1.


No, upscaling 2x 2k images to 2x 4k is not the same as 2x 4k image to 2x 8k images... not the same at all... I mean if they could do that - then why the hell not just do native 4k by 4k instead... that be pointless to run a upscaler LOL xD


Zenbane
MVP
MVP

Mradr said:
Anyone that has tried the Pimax agrees it's still better than current gen headsets. 



Not the stuff I've quoted from folks like Test.com

But that's the whole point: Everyone is Theorycrafting based on things we read and hear from secondary sources. Just look at that videos shared in this post:
https://forums.oculusvr.com/community/discussion/comment/567792/#Comment_567792


Videos attempting to showcase the Pimax' abilities are low budget and low-quality snippets made by obscure no-name amateurs. 

This Megathread is 22 pages of theorycrafting... from false notions than "2+x=2x," right down to denying that upscaling  resolution yields a noticeable difference when compared to native resolution.

Regardless of who may be right/wrong about the Math and Visual Specifications, the biggest issue is that this HMD fosters debates over legitimacy instead of promoting discussion about innovation. All this is only made worse by the fact that so many Pimaxers (trademarked) validate their product based on the idea that it could be better than the Rift. It's a hilarious notion considering the other competitors on the market: Windows Mixed Reality, HTC Vive, and Sony's PSVR. Yet the Rift remains the point of contention for this not-available-in-stores piece of Hardware.

Upscaling to 4K and then doubling that Specification to call it 8K simply because the 4K upscaling is on 2 screens is probably the biggest Technology Ruse I've seen since Google Glass.

I mean hell... we have Mace404 who supports the Pimax 8K based on the notion that "8K is just a marketing term and shouldn't be taken literally," while Atmos is here arguing that it really is most literally presenting 8K resolution. Because that's what this product is all about: Obtaining Kickstarter funds through confusion, delusion, and obfuscation. 

I still like your posts though, Mradr.
 🙂