Index vs Rift S ? - Page 2 — Oculus
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 ?

2

Comments

  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 6,250 Valuable Player
    Higher refresh rates will help with motion sickness.
  • TheRealCyberTheRealCyber Posts: 188
    Art3mis
    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.
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,348 Valuable Player
    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.
  • CrashFuCrashFu Posts: 1,756 Valuable Player
    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.
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,348 Valuable Player
    edited May 15
    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.
  • TheRealCyberTheRealCyber Posts: 188
    Art3mis
    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).
  • JeremyC85JeremyC85 Posts: 240
    Nexus 6
    Wildt said:
    Mradr said:
    the blind testers wasn't sure on the Hz ranges

    I think I can explain that one!
    LOL!
  • CrashFuCrashFu Posts: 1,756 Valuable Player
    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.
  • nalex66nalex66 Posts: 4,528 Volunteer Moderator
    When it comes to movies, I really dislike the effect of higher frame rate. It looks like the "soap opera effect"--it somehow seems less cinematic and more like people in costumes acting.

    Of course, VR is a different thing entirely, and higher frame rate should improve immersion, as Cyber said above.
    i7 5820K @ 4.25 GHz | EVGA GTX 1080 SC | Gigabyte GA-X99-UD4 | Corsair DDR4 3000 32 GB | Corsair HX 750W
    Corsair Hydro H100i | Samsung SSDs: 860 Evo 1 TB, 850 Evo 1 TB, 840 Evo 1 TB | Seagate BarraCuda HDD 3 TB
  • ParadoxAnomalyParadoxAnomaly Posts: 90
    Hiro Protagonist
    nalex66 said:
    When it comes to movies, I really dislike the effect of higher frame rate. It looks like the "soap opera effect"--it somehow seems less cinematic and more like people in costumes acting.

    Of course, VR is a different thing entirely, and higher frame rate should improve immersion, as Cyber said above.
    But when you watch TV you’re watching at 60hz and no one complains. The soap opera effect is interpolation done badly. Native 48fps should look a lot better than 24fps especially fast paced action scenes.
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 6,733 Valuable Player
    CrashFu said:
    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".

    If you change those two Bs into Ds it gives that name a completely different meaning altogether :o :D
    "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
  • ohgrantohgrant Posts: 163
    Art3mis
      The way I see it, Oculus made no bones about the fact that the Rift-S is an incremental upgrade, not really intended for current Rift users. In my view, a wise decision to try to get more people into VR with their release instead of focusing on the high end, in which Valve themselves are struggling to make baby steps. 
     I can certainly see why Rift owners would go with a Rift-S if they don't have a Vive, but right now it looks like the Index in my future. I recently upgraded to the Vive wireless adapter and really loving being wireless. I will probably get the Index controllers first. I'm not happy about the price but will make my wireless time more Rift like. The Index itself, I'll wait. It would only be $499 to me at that point but I'm thinking I can do much better if I wait for a Black Friday sale. 
    It is quite possible that the Rift-S will be discounted in that time period. 
     Right now, I've been doing more 3D gaming, I picked up another projector that is 3D vision ready and a 3D vision 120hrz monitor. With the last driver for 3D vision, I want to enjoy the last days of 3D before Windows 10, Steam VR, or Oculus need a driver update. Comparing 3D 120hrz with 3D vision and the same games with Tridef at 60hrz. with my passive 3D monitor. There sure seems a greater advantage in smoothness and immersion with 3D Vision @ 120. I don't know if that will translate the same way in VR, but may be my determining factor in my choice whether or not to pass on the Index. I will wait for reviews on anything I choose to buy. Except the Knuckles controllers, I'm just yearning to fondle them too badly to entertain any notion of restraint.        
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,549 Valuable Player
    edited May 15
    CrashFu said:
    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?
    Well that's just it, on monitor gaming there's plenty. Csgo is the obvious one and then also games like rocket League. Pretty much anything where you have to make very fast panning movements in a very short period of time.

    In VR, I am not sure which games you would really benefit from higher refresh for competitive type reason but I would imagine everything will look a lot smoother considering there so much head movement. But until I try it for myself I can only speculate.

    I think something like beat saber may see benefit too because you're moving your hands so rapidly on the Expert Plus levels. May give you a slight Advantage actually to see things faster with a little less input lag since it's also coupled with the lowest persistence panels in VR. But that's just a guess on my part. 
  • kojackkojack Posts: 5,291 Volunteer Moderator
    In the case of input lag in Beat Saber, there's no need to tie the input to the headset framerate.
    Touch controllers report IMU movement at 500Hz (with correction at 60Hz via the cameras).

    So Beat Saber could read hand tracking at a much higher rate, then render the result with a multi-segment blade trail.
    (For example, Rift-S games are already doing 160 samples per second: each frame has one sample done by the game then one done in the runtime for timewarp)

    Let's say we are swinging a saber 180 degrees in 0.1 seconds. On a Rift-S, that would be 22.5 degrees per frame. A Rift would be 20 degrees. An Index would have 12.5 degrees per frame.
    But using full tracking rate you could get it down to 3.6 degrees per segment while still rendering at 80Hz.

  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,549 Valuable Player
    edited May 15
    kojack said:
    In the case of input lag in Beat Saber, there's no need to tie the input to the headset framerate.
    Touch controllers report IMU movement at 500Hz (with correction at 60Hz via the cameras).

    So Beat Saber could read hand tracking at a much higher rate, then render the result with a multi-segment blade trail.
    (For example, Rift-S games are already doing 160 samples per second: each frame has one sample done by the game then one done in the runtime for timewarp)

    Let's say we are swinging a saber 180 degrees in 0.1 seconds. On a Rift-S, that would be 22.5 degrees per frame. A Rift would be 20 degrees. An Index would have 12.5 degrees per frame.
    But using full tracking rate you could get it down to 3.6 degrees per segment while still rendering at 80Hz.

    I was mostly referring to actually seeing where your sword is at any given time and the time required to make a correction from seeing where it is and not so much the actual tracking lag. But that is great info. The time difference would be very small and It was just speculation on my part, but on some of those rapid beat saber maps, you're moving the swords as fast as the human muscles can do lol. 
  • MowTinMowTin Posts: 1,485
    Project 2501
    The lack of manual IPD adjust is forcing me to buy an Index. I'm 70mm. 

    I still ordered a Rift-S. I'll give it a try. 
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,549 Valuable Player
    edited May 15
    So to elaborate more on what I mean. On the really advanced beat saber maps, the boxes are coming super fast, so fast that they actually begin to blur. I'm thinking a higher refresh would help with the clarity some and also give you a few millisecond advantage for correction over someone running 80hz if you're running 144hz. For an example of a song I mean, look at this one around 30 seconds. 


    It could be so small of a difference that it's hard to notice though. I look forward to finding out. 

  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,348 Valuable Player
    edited May 15
    pyroth309 said:
    So to elaborate more on what I mean. On the really advanced beat saber maps, the boxes are coming super fast, so fast that they actually begin to blur. I'm thinking a higher refresh would help with the clarity some and also give you a few millisecond advantage for correction over someone running 80hz if you're running 144hz. For an example of a song I mean, look at this one around 30 seconds. 

    They are also increasing the tracking rate with the new LH as well - so in theory you should be getting not just a few millisecond for sight - but also on the controllers as well allowing both to sync up correctly.
  • MorgrumMorgrum Posts: 1,569 Valuable Player
    nalex66 said:
    When it comes to movies, I really dislike the effect of higher frame rate. It looks like the "soap opera effect"--it somehow seems less cinematic and more like people in costumes acting.

    Of course, VR is a different thing entirely, and higher frame rate should improve immersion, as Cyber said above.
    I can get that a few years ago movies came out in theaters with such high definition and resolution that it looked so real that it actually killed the immersion for me somehow.

    WAAAGH!
  • Comic_Book_GuyComic_Book_Guy Posts: 1,193
    3Jane
    Morgrum said:
    nalex66 said:
    When it comes to movies, I really dislike the effect of higher frame rate. It looks like the "soap opera effect"--it somehow seems less cinematic and more like people in costumes acting.

    Of course, VR is a different thing entirely, and higher frame rate should improve immersion, as Cyber said above.
    I can get that a few years ago movies came out in theaters with such high definition and resolution that it looked so real that it actually killed the immersion for me somehow.

    I can't think of one case of this topic that applies to movies at movie theaters. No one likes the soap opera effect. they aren't going to use frame interpolation in movie theaters. 
  • MorgrumMorgrum Posts: 1,569 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    I honestly dont give a shit about the soap opera effect i was responding to how the higher def and resolution used in the past by a few movie companies actually degraded my experience.
    IMAX became so real it looked fake.

    Considered how folks in this trend have been bashing each other about framerates, resolution, and definition I figgered I would throw in a view on something else similar but different.

    But shit on it I guess we can only post bashing vs one headset or the other now.

    So now I just need to find out where to direct foolish anger at when I am directed to whichever team am I going to be sorted to skins or shirts.
    WAAAGH!
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,099 Valuable Player
    Morgrum said:
    I honestly dont give a shit about the soap opera effect i was responding to how the higher def and resolution used in the past by a few movie companies actually degraded my experience.
    IMAX became so real it looked fake.

    Exactly. HD eventually ruined "movie magic." The film sets looked fake, and the actors looked like they were merely rehearsing lines.
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • WildtWildt Posts: 1,903 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    Zenbane said:
    Morgrum said:
    I honestly dont give a shit about the soap opera effect i was responding to how the higher def and resolution used in the past by a few movie companies actually degraded my experience.
    IMAX became so real it looked fake.

    Exactly. HD eventually ruined "movie magic." The film sets looked fake, and the actors looked like they were merely rehearsing lines.
    Good thing movies make more money than ever, so they can afford to put more effort into the CGI, sets and makeup :)
    Asus Z370-A ||  Watercooled 8700K || 16 GB gSkill DDR4 3200 || Samsung SSD 840PRO 256GB+850PRO 256GB+850EVO 500GB+970EVO 1TB || Watercooled FE Geforce 1080ti || Zalman Reserator XT watercooler || TPcast wireless adapter || MamutVR Gun stock V3 || Asus ROG PG279Q  G-sync monitor
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,099 Valuable Player

    10 Reasons Why CGI is Getting Worse, Not Better

    • CGI has transitioned from a complimentary dish to the main course.
    • The physics are off.
    • The move to HD and 4K make CGI less convincing.
    • Stylized grades and CGI don’t mix.

    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • MorgrumMorgrum Posts: 1,569 Valuable Player
    Cgi has gotten out of hand.
    I mean look at this WB gem that was supposed to be flagship quality cgi!
    Its becomming a crutch.
    Wished Superman had his facial hair after this abomination.

    WAAAGH!
  • JeremyC85JeremyC85 Posts: 240
    Nexus 6
    ^^^ off topic, but I totally agree. I HATE cgi in movies the vast majority of the time. Absolutely HATE it
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 4,499 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    They can be overdone @JeremyC85, end up being a crutch to bad story telling.



    But I am a sucker for good particle effects - the bigger the better  B)  

    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
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 2,573 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    Morgrum said:
    I honestly dont give a shit about the soap opera effect i was responding to how the higher def and resolution used in the past by a few movie companies actually degraded my experience.
    IMAX became so real it looked fake.

    My Sony TV has Motionflow XR 1000Hz and it makes all movies look like The Hobbit in 48 fps - or more. My wife said it completely ruined her beloved Harry Potter movies, because you can clearly see all the fake backgrounds and the bad CGI totally pops. This even happened watching the new movie Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, which is real 4K, but the CGI is 2K, and often it's easy to tell (especially that green plant in his pocket, sigh). 
    Personally I don't mind it - I've grown so used to the high frame rates that almost all other TVs look like they're lagging - unless these, like TVs from LG and Philips, have similar tech to increase frame rates. 
    Movies with no CGI look awesome - extremely lifelike, and that's worth it all. And I love being able to see all of my favorite actors smallest skin imperfections  :D 
    It did completely ruin Alien though - so easy to see the plastic spaceship models, then again I've never - ever - seen Sigourney Weaver look more real. Feels very close to 3D and "being there".

    I think Billy Lynn's Halftime Walk was the first 4K 3D movie to be shown in 120 Hz - that's gotta be amazing, and reviewers in general seemed to agree:

    "The Verge even went as far to say that scenes depicting an Iraq war battle and a football game halftime show were like “looking through an impossibly-clean window,” rather than watching a screen, with the 3D “producing no eye strain whatsoever. Given the lack of blur, it was possible to discern normally imperceptible details that simply wouldn’t be visible in other movies”.

    However, the writer did note that the “soap opera effect was still there,” and that the footage “seemed like it could have been pulled from some fantastic and futuristic camcorder”.

    The Hollywood Reporter also noted that although “a few viewers complained that the results looked too much like video,” most of the reactions to the footage were “overwhelmingly positive”.

    Naturally, when preparing for the film’s upcoming west-coast debut, the director needed to use the best cinema-projection technology available in order to present the 4K, 3D presentation at 120 frames per second per eye."

    https://essentialinstall.com/commercial/ang-lee-120fps/

    My dream is 3D 120Hz in 4K on a giant TV or projector - not sure 8K really matters... Then again my current setup with 4K + 100 Hz + motionflow is awesome, but I miss real 3D. 

    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz boost, 11 Ghz ram); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Oculus Rift CV1 - nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
Sign In or Register to comment.