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 ?

JeremyC85JeremyC85 Posts: 266
Nexus 6
I'm the type that upgrades WAY too often, and I already have the itch! 

As a loyal Oculus fanboy, the Valve Index looks phenomenal... I am having a hard time pulling the trigger on the Rift S with its compromises (mostly the audio downgrade) Is anyone jumping ship and if so, what pushed you over the edge? I love the Oculus Home and HATE steamVR with such a passion I can't see myself leaving just yet...
«13

Comments

  • dburnedburne Posts: 2,775 Valuable Player
    edited May 13
    Well if you want the Index you will have to live with the itch a while longer, last I saw they were quoting like Sept for deliveries of new orders.

    I went ahead and pre-ordered the Rift S.
    I prefer using earbuds anyway ( have the Oculus Earbuds for my Rift), so I ordered a set of Klipsch Earbuds to use with my new Rift S when I get it. I just hope the audio processor on the Rift S is decent.
    Don

    EVGA Z390 Dark MB | I9 9900k| EVGA 2080Ti FTW3 Ultra |32 GB G Skill 3200 cl14 ram | Warthog Throttle | VKB Gunfighter Pro/MCG Pro grip | Crosswind Pedals | EVGA DG 87 Case| Rift S | Quest |
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,113 Valuable Player
    I'm getting the Rift S because Valve are blatantly price gouging with the Index. The Lighthouse 2.0 base stations are cheaper to produce than the 1.0 base stations (they only cost $60 to make and ship) but Valve are charging a tenner more than HTC are for their 1.0 base stations.

    Valve are taking the piss and there's no way in hell that I'm going to reward them for it.

    If I'm going to spend £920 on a headset I'm going to want either the resolution of the HP Reverb or the FOV of a Pimax headset. A 1600p headset with a 20° increase in FOV doesn't cut the mustard.

    Instead I've got three options:

    1) Buy a Rift S and an HP Reverb

    2) Buy a Pimax full bundle if they don't take the piss with the price, if it's 700-800 I'll probably bite

    3) Buy a Rift S this year and buy a Yaw VR Motion Simulator early next year.

    Options 1) and 3) are looking joint favourites to me.
    "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
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 6,709 Valuable Player
    edited May 13
    You might have a job buying HP Reverb because it doesn't look like they will be available in the UK. I'll get a Rift -S when they come down in price. It might only cost £399, but it's the same price as the Oculus Quest that has higher resolution Oled displays. We all know Lcd screens are much cheaper, so what makes the Rift -S the same price as Oculus Quest when Oculus Quest offers so much more? I'll get a Rift -S when it drops to £300 to £350, which is what I think it's worth when you consider what the Oculus Quest has got.

    Had they bumped the resolution to that of the Valve index I wouldn't mind paying the £399, but not with just the small bump they added. I get they want to cater for really low end graphics cards, but my graphics card is capable of higher resolutions, so I'm not going to bite at £399. I will get it when it comes down in price, but I'm just happy to keep my CV1 in the meantime. 
  • JeremyC85JeremyC85 Posts: 266
    Nexus 6
    Yea the Rift-S is a bit of a head scratcher...I keep find myself saying.,if they only included.. 
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,113 Valuable Player
    Someone on Reddit has had it confirmed by an HP executive that the Reverb is coming to the UK so there's no worries there. :)
    "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
  • JeremyC85JeremyC85 Posts: 266
    Nexus 6
    Honestly the price doesn't concern me.. It would be missing out on the oculus home and oculus exclusives. If one got the valve index, would it be possible to use it with oculus home?? 
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,535 Valuable Player
    edited May 14
    JeremyC85 said:
    Honestly the price doesn't concern me.. It would be missing out on the oculus home and oculus exclusives. If one got the valve index, would it be possible to use it with oculus home?? 
    Oculus exclusives are just to the store only - not the headset. There for - you could play them on the Index if you wish. There can be a few downsides to this though as having to 1) Use a third party software to make it work, and 2) sometimes OCulus does give out free games for their headsets. Even though 2 happen a lot last year - I have a feeling this wont be happening as much going forward as they feel more confident in their hardware and software. 1 might change as well if openVR takes off as well in the next 6 months. They are already on a release candidate so I can't see it taking much more time until Oculus adds support for other hardware.

  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,074 Valuable Player
    Mradr said:
    They are already on a release candidate so I can't see it taking much more time until Oculus adds support for other hardware.

    The moment this happens pretty much all my VR purchases will be made on the oculus store.  until there is official support however with proper controller mapping etc however i tend to only buy excluisves and mega special offers.
    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • JeremyC85JeremyC85 Posts: 266
    Nexus 6
    edited May 14
    Yea I would LOVE to use the Index with Oculus Home seamlessly until Oculus releases a true Rift 2.0
  • JeremyC85JeremyC85 Posts: 266
    Nexus 6
    After giving it some thought, I ended up ordering the Rift S. It should greatly improve tracking in my specific area and the resolution bump will be nice. Just can't believe it has WORSE audio, black levels, and refresh rate
  • jayhawkjayhawk Posts: 812
    3Jane
    edited May 14
    I wouldn't agree the Index looks phenomenal. To me it's more like what the Rift S is to the Rift, the Index is to the Rift S. I'm looking forward to the inside-out tracking and pretty much want to be done with external sensors. Then there's the whole $1000 thing, since I have nothing (Vive gear) to start with in the first place. S makes a LOT more sense for me. In all honesty all current and soon future HMDs have their drawbacks. Might as well stick with what I'm already invested in for $400.
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,113 Valuable Player
    JeremyC85 said:
    After giving it some thought, I ended up ordering the Rift S. It should greatly improve tracking in my specific area and the resolution bump will be nice. Just can't believe it has WORSE audio, black levels, and refresh rate

    If you look at the black levels in the video in the other thread they look pretty good, and I agree about the sound, but the refresh rate isn't that big a deal imo.

    A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people and has the benefit of allowing you to super sample a higher resolution display at the same level you're super sampling your Rift without needing to upgrade your GPU.
    "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
  • JeremyC85JeremyC85 Posts: 266
    Nexus 6
    snowdog said:
    A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people 
    I actually tend to agree with this. We'll see about the black levels, the newest "through the lens" video does look promising tho! 
  • OmegaM4NOmegaM4N Posts: 585
    Neo
    ^^^Yeah i would not worry too much about that refresh rate, i disable AWS when i am playing certain steam Vr games that are hogs and lock it to 45hz and it works fine, and that drop in RR might actually help with those steam games overal, we shall see. ;)
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,535 Valuable Player
    snowdog said:

    A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people and has the benefit of allowing you to super sample a higher resolution display at the same level you're super sampling your Rift without needing to upgrade your GPU.
    I agree I dont think people will notice the difference really. I do wonder if people will feel it in other ways though such as in monition/animations. 
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,113 Valuable Player
    OmegaM4N said:
    ^^^Yeah i would not worry too much about that refresh rate, i disable AWS when i am playing certain steam Vr games that are hogs and lock it to 45hz and it works fine, and that drop in RR might actually help with those steam games overal, we shall see. ;)

    I always use OpenComposite myself, SteamVR has always been a bit of a clusterfuck with regards to performance for Rifts.
    "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
  • LuciferousLuciferous Posts: 2,153 Valuable Player
    edited May 14
    JeremyC85 said:
    snowdog said:
    A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people 
    I actually tend to agree with this. We'll see about the black levels, the newest "through the lens" video does look promising tho! 
    Yes but a 120-144hz bump up will be :)
  • CrashFuCrashFu Posts: 1,756 Valuable Player
    edited May 15
    JeremyC85 said:
    snowdog said:
    A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people 
    I actually tend to agree with this. We'll see about the black levels, the newest "through the lens" video does look promising tho! 
    Yes but a 120-144hz bump up will be :)
    I don't... I don't think refresh rate works that way???

    It's my understanding that the human eye (with the exception of exceptional individuals such as Fighter Pilots) just cannot see more than 60-80 frames per second, period... so for the average person there would literally be no difference between 80z and 2000hz.    Anything between would just be more frames than an average person could even see.

    (edit: retracting the above statements because I have been proven wrong.)

    There's certainly no noticeable difference between 90hz and 80hz;   Oculus are the ones who invented the 90hz standard, and they were aiming high at the time, to play it safe..  if years of testing told them that 80hz or even 72hz were good enough, then I think they know better than anyone.  They wouldn't make that change if it actually risked turning off any significant number of users, after all..
    It's hard being the voice of reason when you're surrounded by unreasonable people.
  • TomCgcmfcTomCgcmfc Posts: 1,463
    Project 2501
    I think many of us PC gamers are used to the better visuals that +120hz refresh rate monitors give with games with high framerates and very fast action.  Maybe it is hard to translate the benefits of higher refresh rates into VR?  Esp. since high framerates are currently the least of our concern, lol!

    Custom built gaming desktop; i9 9900k (water cooled) oc to 5ghz, gtx 1080 ti (from my old AGA), 32 gb 3000hz ram, 1 tb ssd, 4 tb hdd.  Asus  ROG Maximus xi hero wifi mb, StarTech 4 port/4 controller sata powered usb3.0 pcie card, Asus VG248QE 1080p 144hz gaming monitor, Oculus Rift cv1 w/2x sensors. Vive Cosmos, currently work in progress.

  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,113 Valuable Player
    One of the main problems with the Index is the refresh rate. Yes, it's great that it can display up to 144Hz, but how many people have a GPU capable of running a decent game in 1600p resolution at 144fps?
    "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
  • ParadoxAnomalyParadoxAnomaly Posts: 90
    Hiro Protagonist
    edited May 15
    Deleted.
  • WildtWildt Posts: 2,076 Valuable Player
    CrashFu said:
    JeremyC85 said:
    snowdog said:
    A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people 
    I actually tend to agree with this. We'll see about the black levels, the newest "through the lens" video does look promising tho! 
    Yes but a 120-144hz bump up will be :)
    I don't... I don't think refresh rate works that way???

    It's my understanding that the human eye (with the exception of exceptional individuals such as Fighter Pilots) just cannot see more than 60-80 frames per second, period... so for the average person there would literally be no difference between 80z and 2000hz.    Anything between would just be more frames than an average person could even see.

    There's certainly no noticeable difference between 90hz and 80hz;   Oculus are the ones who invented the 90hz standard, and they were aiming high at the time, to play it safe..  if years of testing told them that 80hz or even 72hz were good enough, then I think they know better than anyone.  They wouldn't make that change if it actually risked turning off any significant number of users, after all..
    There's a lot of articles etc on the subject, but personally I find the difference between 60 and 120 to be huge.

    There's some decent info here

    "tl;dr: The human eye can physiologically detect up to 1000 frames per second. The average human, tasked with detecting what framerate he/she is looking at, can accurately guess up to around 150 fps. That is, they can see the difference in framerates all the way to 150 fps."
    PCVR: CV1 || 4 sensors || TPcast wireless adapter || MamutVR Gun stock V3
    PSVR: PS4 Pro || Move Controllers || Aim controller
    WMR: HP Reverb
  • OmegaM4NOmegaM4N Posts: 585
    Neo

    snowdog said:
    OmegaM4N said:
    ^^^Yeah i would not worry too much about that refresh rate, i disable AWS when i am playing certain steam Vr games that are hogs and lock it to 45hz and it works fine, and that drop in RR might actually help with those steam games overal, we shall see. ;)

    I always use OpenComposite myself, SteamVR has always been a bit of a clusterfuck with regards to performance for Rifts.
    I have never head of that, OpenComposite?
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,568 Valuable Player
    edited May 15
    Wildt said:
    CrashFu said:
    JeremyC85 said:
    snowdog said:
    A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people 
    I actually tend to agree with this. We'll see about the black levels, the newest "through the lens" video does look promising tho! 
    Yes but a 120-144hz bump up will be :)
    I don't... I don't think refresh rate works that way???

    It's my understanding that the human eye (with the exception of exceptional individuals such as Fighter Pilots) just cannot see more than 60-80 frames per second, period... so for the average person there would literally be no difference between 80z and 2000hz.    Anything between would just be more frames than an average person could even see.

    There's certainly no noticeable difference between 90hz and 80hz;   Oculus are the ones who invented the 90hz standard, and they were aiming high at the time, to play it safe..  if years of testing told them that 80hz or even 72hz were good enough, then I think they know better than anyone.  They wouldn't make that change if it actually risked turning off any significant number of users, after all..
    There's a lot of articles etc on the subject, but personally I find the difference between 60 and 120 to be huge.

    There's some decent info here

    "tl;dr: The human eye can physiologically detect up to 1000 frames per second. The average human, tasked with detecting what framerate he/she is looking at, can accurately guess up to around 150 fps. That is, they can see the difference in framerates all the way to 150 fps."
    Ah your post didn't show up until after I posted. Yea exactly, I can see a difference at least to 144hz but I can't pin it down to about what it is above 120. It just looks fast lol. But I have 40 year old eyes. These pro gamer 18 year old kids can see upwards of 200 and above which is why 240hz monitors are all the rage. 
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,535 Valuable Player
    edited May 15

    How Many FPS Can Your Eye See?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhSHeYT2U70

    What Is Video ??

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buSaywCF6E8

    What Is The Resolution Of The Eye?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4I5Q3UXkGd0

    In short - we see faster frame rate - we just can't see the frame changes after a set amount of frames they start to blend togather creating transition frames. Something NV wants to use using black and gray scales for future technology such as Ray Track Engines. Yet, we can still see the data. This is why I keep bring up motion as a question between CV1 and Rift S and how it'll effect that. For most people - I dont think they will see a difference - but there are a large number of people even 10 frames can be felt like me between 60 and 75 Hz monitors when it comes to motion on screen.

    I think the rumor started around the time LCD was taking over the display world because it was cheapest frame rate to hit that had the best over all performance.

    Long answer look at the videos.

    Also , Oculus wasn't the one that created the 90Hz stander - they was just the ones that made a big deal over it. I can't say who really came up with it - but searchers and even GPU companies had papers written talking about the 90Hz and above to really get the most out of VR. Actually - Oculus went backwards because they talk about trying to hit 120Hz for anything above the 4k screens mark in this one case. I am sure they will future support higher frame rates now that Valve is doing this and I am sure other HMD will follow suit as well as it opens the door not just for lower end customer hardware - but higher end customer hardware as well for a choice - and customers love choice.

    There is a video of NV talking about how they want to hit 1000 frames for VR using a RT graphical pipeline instead because of the BIG benefits on how it'll work with our eyes and depth of field at that range.
  • JeremyC85JeremyC85 Posts: 266
    Nexus 6
    Yea I definitely agree that the human eye can differentiate between 60fps, 120fps, etc. I have a 4k 60hz monitor and while it looks amazing and I love the resolution, I can tell a huge difference when looking at a 144hz monitor, etc.  
  • Comic_Book_GuyComic_Book_Guy Posts: 1,195
    3Jane
    JeremyC85 said:
    After giving it some thought, I ended up ordering the Rift S. It should greatly improve tracking in my specific area and the resolution bump will be nice. Just can't believe it has WORSE audio, black levels, and refresh rate
    Worse audio is rectified using your own earbuds, black levels...you won't notice the difference vs the OG Rift, SPUD was impacting black levels and you didn't even know it. And refresh rate...the panel used in the S is lower persistence, again, you won't notice. It's a solid head set that gets rid of the messy sensors.
  • JeremyC85JeremyC85 Posts: 266
    Nexus 6
    ^^ That's why I pre-ordered one after all. I also really want to see Oculus succeed. I just wish the Rift S came with better audio out of the box and a little MORE of a bump in resolution. 
  • jayhawkjayhawk Posts: 812
    3Jane
    CrashFu said:
    JeremyC85 said:
    snowdog said:
    A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people 
    I actually tend to agree with this. We'll see about the black levels, the newest "through the lens" video does look promising tho! 
    Yes but a 120-144hz bump up will be :)
    It's my understanding that the human eye (with the exception of exceptional individuals such as Fighter Pilots) just cannot see more than 60-80 frames per second, period... so for the average person there would literally be no difference between 80z and 2000hz.   
    PC gamers would like to have a word with you. Theres a YouTube vid where a guy randomly switches his monitor between 60 (I think), 120 and 144 hz without looking and guessed right every time, but he was 'trained' to it, as anyone would be who regularly games a higher frequencies. Most wouldn't see the difference past, I would say 90 fps IMO.
Sign In or Register to comment.