Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > VR Megathread: Valve's VR Has Entered The Game
«‹›7 »
 
  • Post
  • Reply
wolrah
May 8, 2006
what?

mashed_penguin posted:

Ideally in a quest 2 they will have a direct signal path to the display from an external source rather than having to send and then decode it as a video.
Agreed. I've been saying since the Quest was announced that it'd be so much better if the USB-C port were able to support VirtualLink or DisplayPort Alternate Mode as an input. VirtualLink would technically be better as it offers USB 3.1 data transfer speeds along with four lanes of DisplayPort, but I don't know if the back channel really needs to be any faster than USB 2.0 so normal DisplayPort Alt Mode in four lane mode might work just fine.

quote:

Or they will succeed in doing what Carmack was talking about in his presentation and be able to get direct access to the video processor on the snapdragon so that they can send a much lower level stream that has much less latency than what they can currently do.
That could reduce the latency on the Quest end, but USB and video compression will still be significant factors.

quote:

My feeling on the whole quest link vs rift S is its way to premature to make a buying decision on so waiting until its live in the real world make a lot more sense. Madness I know.
IMO what this has done is cemented the Quest's place as the perfect "gateway drug" to VR. You can start off with a single purchase use-anywhere device that's basically a VR game console and if you have access to a decent PC you can take a peek down the rabbit hole. I see no good reason for anyone to ever buy a WMR device or Monoculus unless they're already a VR enthusiast and know exactly what they're getting.

If your primary use case is as a PC VR headset though, a Rift S will still be a better choice IMO.

As a Vive owner who was already pondering a Quest but also considering another used Vive as a second headset, now the Quest is the obvious choice.

* # ¿ Sep 27, 2019 21:10
  • Quote
Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 18, 2024 02:56
  • Quote
wolrah
May 8, 2006
what?

8-bit Miniboss posted:

The Rift S might be the better choice, but it’s not the best choice for everyone. The recommended IPD range on the Rift S is criminally small and cuts out a significant portion of potential users. Me included.
Of course. I wish I could just say the OG Rift still, and those who want a headset primarily for PC use but can't use a Rift S due to its limitations are kind of SOL right now with no great options. I have a really hard time recommending that anyone buy an OG Vive new right now, especially with them still shipping the old wands and strap. If they included the Index controllers and the DAS it'd be a much more compelling bundle.


Stick100 posted:

Well Carmack was confident he could reduce the motion to photon latency (of Quest HMD) to less than the Rift S with the rolling shutter optimization because they do a Spacewarp right before rendering. So I think the Oculus Link motion to photon latency is going to be nearly identical between Quest/S.

You'll still have some controller latency and compression artifacts but I'm optimistic that the Oculus link will be nearly imperceptible. When ALVR is working well it's hardly noticeable and their solution seems much more optimized.
You have two-way USB latency plus encoding time versus one-way USB latency and an uncompressed signal. Carmack is of course someone who I'll give a dump truck full of benefit of the doubt to, but unless Rift S has some bad built in latency I really can't imagine how it could be possible for the Quest Link configuration to have lower latency for inputs that need to go back to the host.

Lower latency specifically on Spacewarp movements, that of course is entirely plausible if they've come up with some way to do that part on the headset itself while waiting for the next frame from the PC.

* # ¿ Sep 27, 2019 22:33
  • Quote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > VR Megathread: Valve's VR Has Entered The Game
«‹›7 »