cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Index vs Rift S ?

JeremyC85
Heroic Explorer
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...
79 REPLIES 79

jayhawk
Superstar

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.

RedRizla
Honored Visionary
Higher refresh rates will help with motion sickness.

Anonymous
Not applicable
High refresh makes a difference, but up to a point. I recently got a 240Hz monitor for a spare rig and while it's faster it doesn't necessarily look twice as smooth as 120Hz. 144Hz is probably the sweet spot right now. I previously was on 144Hz (but the monitor died) so I got a 166Hz panel and it's nice. I think I do notice a slight difference from 144Hz, but I've also been on high refresh for a while so maybe I am more sensitive.
So I would say that 144Hz is probably optimum right now for what you can drive with decent graphics, and probably even a stretch for the resolution on the Index and in 3D, but should look really good. I think the 80Hz of S is a compromise, but should be decent enough to be acceptable quality. I know Go at 72Hz still was okay so maybe 90Hz is not 100% necessary.

Anonymous
Not applicable

jayhawk 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 🙂

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.


There are videos all over youtube of people doing that in blind test as well and even though the blind testers wasn't sure on the Hz ranges - they guess every time pretty quickly between low to high refresh rates.

CrashFu
Consultant
Okay okay, I believe you, you don't have to be a jet pilot to tell the difference!  I have been thoroughly owned and I retract my previous statement.
:tongue:

I guess the argument I should be making is that those ultra-high refresh rates aren't necessary to get a fully immersive or enjoyable experience.   I mean, heck, aren't most big-budget movies still shot at 24fps?  That's never made the action look less real to me, or prevented me from getting absorbed in them.   Has getting used to those hundred-plus level framerates ruined movies for you guys?  Do you sit through Peter Jackson's The Hobbit and think, "God, this 48fps looks so jerky and awful"?

And how much more would you pay to get a higher-framerate experience?  Most of you probably already have PCs that could run the Index on its higher settings, but if you didn't, would you really want to go out and buy a new computer just for that?  And if you were never going to take it above the 80 or 90 fps setting,  negating that selling point altogether, would the other small advantages of the Index still justify its tradeoffs and price?
It's hard being the voice of reason when you're surrounded by unreasonable people.

Anonymous
Not applicable

CrashFu said:
And how much more would you pay to get a higher-framerate experience?  Most of you probably already have PCs that could run the Index on its higher settings, but if you didn't, would you really want to go out and buy a new computer just for that?  And if you were never going to take it above the 80 or 90 fps setting,  negating that selling point altogether, would the other small advantages of the Index still justify its tradeoffs and price?


It's call customer choice - as I said many times everywhere. Some customers will keep it at the lowest levels because they don't have the money - others will be ok with some less FPS if it means playing at a higher resolution. Some are nuts over frames and will choice frames over resolution. Others will be upgrading their pc every 6 months to every 2-3 years. The problem is a company can't lump everyone into the low - or - limited section and say that is good enough is the problem.

More or less - customer choice needs 2-3 different types of the same product level to match what a customer might fit into the best. So while yes Rift S makes sense to some - esp newer users - it doesn't fit for the bill for people have are wanting to spend a little more money for a slightly be more of an upgrade to what they have now even if that is still more of a refresh for example. It's why people jump over to the "promise land" of Pimax at the time - because they wanted more than what current headset offer. 

Long winding answer - is yes - but it really depends on the type of person you are and what you are after in terms of the "next step" to what you have now. Same reason high end cell phones sell even though the curve of return value isn't as good as a mid level price point phone.

Anonymous
Not applicable
Correct, feature films still look good and realistic at 24Hz. Also, hand-drawn animation (like anime) can be produced at 12fps or sometimes as low as 8fps and still is acceptable. The issue with games is that they are interactive, and the lag causes a disconnect that hurts the experience. This is especially true with VR since it is tracking your head movements and those are particularly sensitive (sort of like how input lag is more noticeable and problematic for mouse movements than gamepads).

Wildt
Consultant

Mradr said:
the blind testers wasn't sure on the Hz ranges



I think I can explain that one!
PCVR: CV1 || 4 sensors || TPcast wireless adapter || MamutVR Gun stock V3
PSVR: PS4 Pro || Move Controllers || Aim controller
WMR: HP Reverb

JeremyC85
Heroic Explorer

Wildt said:


Mradr said:
the blind testers wasn't sure on the Hz ranges



I think I can explain that one!


LOL!

CrashFu
Consultant


The issue with games is that they are interactive, and the lag causes a disconnect that hurts the experience. This is especially true with VR since it is tracking your head movements and those are particularly sensitive (sort of like how input lag is more noticeable and problematic for mouse movements than gamepads).


When you're talking about lag of less than 1/80th of a second, though.. who is even going to notice?  What kind of game would even have visible functions occurring at that rate?



Side Note:   I say we forget about 90 or 120 or 144 fps and make the new standard for VR  96 fps, twice the framerate of Peter Jackson's The Hobbit.

We can call it "the Double Bilbo".
It's hard being the voice of reason when you're surrounded by unreasonable people.