Skip to main content
RuneSR2
Honored Contributor
August 4, 2020
Question

TestHMD - FOV, SDE, Res, Super Sampling - The Rift(s) against everything else! :-)

Couldn't find any thread about this great app that Sebastian (MRTV - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2mgZjuHRDW02mx_ok4wfPw ) lately used to measure FOV on HP Reverb G2 and many more hmds. Here's an intro to TestHMD:


According to the dev, current HMDs have these specs, especially when it comes to FOV (Field of View):

 

Or zoomed in on the results:


Note that when you're inside the app, the above results are seen on a wall, like this:



Comparing my own Valve Index and CV1, and spending some time double and triple checking my results, I got the exact same results as the above - that is for the Rift CV1 I got 88 degrees horizontal fov and 116 degrees vertical fov. And even using glasses - but Norm from Tested also could dial in the lenses all the way using glasses - I got 108 degrees horizontal fov and 132 degrees vertical for the Valve Index. It does take some practice to do these measurements correctly. I've defined the upper limit as where you no longer can see the stimulus material, for example when going from 114 to 116 using CV1, you can sense the last movement, but none when going from 116 to 118 or above. This takes some practice - and for horizontal fov you may have to look left to best see what's moving to the right, might seem counter-intuitive, but has to do with how our eyes are constructed. 

At least I can confirm the results shown inside TestHMD for CV1 and Index, and my IPD is 63.94 mm (right: 31.23 mm, left 32.71). I don't know how much IPD can or will affect these results. Interestingly MRTV (Sebastian) got quite different results for some HMDs, if he was too fast and forgot to triple check his results or if his IPD caused different results, I have no idea. 

Measured as a square, Valve Index (108 x 132) would have 40% larger fov the Rift CV1 (88 x116), which closely fits my subjective experience. 

Fov isn't the only interesting subject that can be examined and measured using TestHMD - I found the reading and vision tests to be just as important:

Reading test


This test was kind of an eye-opener to me - because it's a great way to test super sampling and compare different HMDs - like CV1 and Index. How much better is CV1 using 1.0 super sampling (ss) compared to Index using SteamVR resolution 100 %? Or CV1 ss 2.0 vs. Index res 200 %? In the reading test you just focus on the text and move backwards until you just barely can read the text. On the floor you can see how many meters you can stand from the text and still be able to read it. My results were somewhat surprising:

Rift CV1:
Ss 1.0 = 4 meters
Ss 2.0 = 6 meters

Valve Index:
Res 100 % = 4.5 meters
Res 200 % = 6.5 meters

Note that the ruler on the floor only goes to 5 meters, but I'm confident I'm not very mistaken for the results beyond 5 meters. 

I've spent a lot of time checking these results, but they are what I observed. Index res 200% looks a lot better, but I can't zoom out much more than CV1 ss 2.0. Also it helps moving your head slightly using CV1, because it removes/reduces the SDE, while you don't have to do that using Index. Index res 200 % is a total of 18 mill pixels per image, it's quite massive, so very surprising I can't zoom out a lot more... Also note that the TestHMD worked much better through SteamVR, where I could easily use Index res 200 %, but forcing CV1 ss 2.0 was so incredibly gpu demanding that the app once crashed - might be some driver bug (I used the regular version of TestHMD). 

Another interesting vision test is this one, where I went for the red line, namely normal 20/20 vision:

Visual Acuity (Distance Chart)
 


In this test you measure the  ability to identify each letter, especially separating the F from the P - and I got:

Rift CV1:
Ss 1.0 = 2 meters
Ss 2.0 = 3.5 meters

Valve Index:
Res 100 % = 2.25 meters
Res 200 % = 3.25 meters

I just wrote down the numbers after each test, but strange that I got a better number for the Rift ss 2.0 here than Index res 200%. Important factors could be better contrast due to oled making black text easier to read, and also I've got the Index lenses all dialed-in, so the pixel sizes may not be very different. That said, the Index looks a lot better due to no SDE and much larger fov. Again CV1 profited from moving my head slightly to remove the SDE, while you don't need to do that with the Index. 

I'm slightly baffled by these results - I would have thought that I could zoom out much more with the Index, but that's not the results I got. I was quite amazed with the CV1's image quality, especially for the readability. Comparing ss 1.0 with 2.0 it's easy to see the large impact of super sampling. This goes for both hmds. Also SteamVR res 100 % may correspond more the "ss 1.4", so it's not fully apples to apples, but I do consider CV1 ss 2.0 and Index res 200% for close to the best image quality you can get with these hmds - further increasing ss does not result in large gains. 

Now it could be really interesting to test Reverb G1 and/or G2 for visual acuity! Or if the above results can be confirmed. Note that I used the SteamVR default settings for antialiasing and everything else - to change res I only used the SteamVR res slider. For the CV1, I used Oculus Tray Tool to change between ss 1.0 and 2.0. Index used 90 Hz and lenses all dialed-in.  

    50 replies

    RuneSR2
    RuneSR2Author
    Honored Contributor
    August 12, 2020

    saami81 said:

    I got new computer on monday and decided to test with 2.0ss. I did "P" test once again and result at 2.0ss was 4.0 meters. There seemed to be slight bump going from 1.8ss to 2.0ss in image quality. I mean like a sharp bump. Using Rift S still.



    Time for an update  o:) Maybe best to focus on ss +0.5 or res 50 to 100 % increases to avoid too many numbers (leaving Pyroth's results in for now). 

    Snellen Test (Visual acuity)

    RIFT CV1
    Ss 1.0 = 2 meters (Rune - original faceplate)
    Ss 2.0 = 3.5 meters (Rune - original faceplate)

    RIFT-S
    Ss 1.0 = 2.5 meters (Saami)
    Ss 1.5 = 3.0 meters (Saami)
    Ss 2.0 = 4.0 - 4.25 meters (Saami & Lensmandave)
    Ss 2.5 = 4.50 meters (Lensmandave)

    QUEST
    Ss 1.0 = 2 meters (Pyroth)
    Ss 1.2 = 2.25 - 2.5 meters (Pyroth, latter = "insane streaming quality" using Virtual Desktop)

    INDEX
    Res 100 % = 2.25 meters (Rune)
    Res 200 % = 3.50 meters (Rune) 
    Res 300 % = 3.50 - 3.75 meters (Rune)
    Res 400 % = 3.50 - 3.75 meters (Rune)

    ODYSSEY+
    Res 100 % = 2.00 - 2.25 meters (Pyroth)
    Res 210 % = 3.00 meters (Pyroth)
    Res 330 % = 3.00 - 3.25 meters (Pyroth)
    Oculus Rift CV1, Valve Index & PSVR2, Asus Strix OC RTX™ 3090, i9-10900K (5.3Ghz), 32GB 3200MHz, 16TB SSD "Ask not what VR can do for you, but what you can do for VR"
    Up and Coming
    August 12, 2020

    RuneSR2 said:

    I'm still trying to understand why increasing physical res 80% does not provide improved visual acuity when it comes to reading letters (CV1 vs. Index). According to rather strict measurements:

    Rift CV1 ss 2.0 = 3.5 meters.
    Index Res 200 % = 3.5 meters
    (Index res 300 and 400 % also = 3.5 - 3.75 meters)

    CV1 ss 2.0 is 17 mill pixels per image close to Index res 200% with 18 mill pixels. If we assume that super sampling is king - why doesn't Index res 300 % then give me more acuity? Is it about the lenses? Glare restrictions? Oled being easier to read (more dark/black)? An awesome CV1 sweet spot? 

    The big question, if going from CV1 ss 2.0 to Index res 200% does not increase visual acuity (that's +80% physical res), how much will going from Index res 200% to Reverb G1/G2 provide? (That's +100% physical res)...

    I've been feeling less restricted in Lone Echo using CV1 ss 2.0 now - knowing that apart from the SDE visual acuity should be just fine, lol. 



    There's a lot of factors that go into legibility of text. Rift-S has more pixels in the center than Index so it should see a bit farther. Also we have to take these results between different people with a grain of salt because people have different levels of vision and we aren't testing on the same PC which can cause variance.

    Physical resolution does increase visual acuity but the software resolution does as well. Blurry images still look blurry now matter how many physical pixels your screen has. As far as Index, it's probably a question better asked on an Index forum. Does anyone see any benefit above 200%? Perhaps Valve has it capped at 200% in the software.

    Also have you tried turning off advanced supersampling filter? It makes things blurry as hell with O+.
    RuneSR2
    RuneSR2Author
    Honored Contributor
    August 12, 2020

    pyroth309 said:

    Also have you tried turning off advanced supersampling filter? It makes things blurry as hell with O+.


    Uh, no, nice catch - I'll give it a shot later!
    Oculus Rift CV1, Valve Index & PSVR2, Asus Strix OC RTX™ 3090, i9-10900K (5.3Ghz), 32GB 3200MHz, 16TB SSD "Ask not what VR can do for you, but what you can do for VR"
    Up and Coming
    October 18, 2020

    saami81 said:

    I did "P" test on Rift S. Using red underline text.
    Max distance where i could see white "inside" P without doubt. 
    1.0ss 2.5 meters
    1.5ss 3.0 meters




    Same test using Quest 2 with link cable. I have done "3664 hack" on debug tool already to get best out of Quest 2.

    1.0ss 3.2 meters
    1.5ss 4.0 meters

    Quest 2 is bit better than Rift S for reading small text. Only problem is that my 2070 super cant take it anymore in some games. Could be my blindness, but i cant see any artifacting on Quest 2 link.
    Inspiring
    October 18, 2020

    pyroth309 said:


    RuneSR2 said:


    pyroth309 said:

    Sebastian did some more headsets here

    He only got 92 HFOV with the Quest. Sounds like he needs a new interface lol. Considering my quest numbers are more in line with the chart, I've come to the conclusion that the chart just has the O+ wrong...either that or it's just made perfectly for me and sebastians eyes. I don't think that's the case though since he only has an IPD of 64. I just think the chart is wrong on the O+.





    The greatest error Oculus did was to make Rift-S with Lenovo instead of Samsung. Oculus already shared the GearVR bed with Samsung, just think of the Rift-S based on Odyssey+, meaning high-res oled with no SDE, close to Index fov, Touch, ASW 2.0 support, nice speakers and with Rift-S quality tracking....


    No kidding, I'm not sure what soured their relationship but it's a shame. I would have turned around and bought that immediately if it was literally just the O+ with insight tracking and touch controllers. I never went to Rift-S because I just never saw enough benefit in it.
    O+ speakers suck compared to CV1 or Index speakers but they're serviceable. Just don't have much bass which is unfortunate. The mid range is solid though and they're a much better option than the rail audio of Quest. (never used a Rift-S)





    i see the words Bed and Relationship and Sucks and Solid? gimmie the heebee jeebeez!

    https://youtu.be/xV7NS1yALFs
    Honored Contributor
    October 18, 2020

    saami81 said:


    saami81 said:

    I did "P" test on Rift S. Using red underline text.
    Max distance where i could see white "inside" P without doubt. 
    1.0ss 2.5 meters
    1.5ss 3.0 meters




    Same test using Quest 2 with link cable. I have done "3664 hack" on debug tool already to get best out of Quest 2.

    1.0ss 3.2 meters
    1.5ss 4.0 meters

    Quest 2 is bit better than Rift S for reading small text. Only problem is that my 2070 super cant take it anymore in some games. Could be my blindness, but i cant see any artifacting on Quest 2 link.


    Agreed. Did the same test with my Q2 including the 3664 hack and got similar results. I cranked up to 2.0ss and suffered some stuttering but once in position got 4.5 meters.
    I've experimented with the wireless desktop too. There is no doubt the desktop looks much sharper in wireless mode compared to the link cable. I couldn't get the ROV test app to open in VR unfortunately but I am confident it would yield even more impressive results :)
    Intel Core i7 6700K @ 4.5GHz. Asus-Z170-PRO MB - Nvidia RTX 3080 ti - 16GB DDR4 2666MHZ HYPERX SAVAGE.
    Honored Contributor
    November 17, 2020
    Had to post this update. Tonight I got the ver 23 update on my Quest 2. Still waiting for the PC update (still on 21).
    Using the 'P' test I'm getting 4 metres at 1.5 ss, 4.5 metres at 1.8 ss and a solid 5 metres at 2.0 ss :)
    Virtual desktop is looking so crisp and smooth, no sign of any compression artifacts.
    Will test again when I get ver 23 on the PC
    Intel Core i7 6700K @ 4.5GHz. Asus-Z170-PRO MB - Nvidia RTX 3080 ti - 16GB DDR4 2666MHZ HYPERX SAVAGE.
    RuneSR2
    RuneSR2Author
    Honored Contributor
    May 23, 2021

    I've been posting that CV1 ss 2.0 is both 17 mill pixels per image and 21 mill pixels per image. Then I thought I must have made a mistake, and checking Stormland using OTT 2.0 with the CV1 I got 2 x 2672 x 3184 = 17 mill pixels.

     

    But then I just happened to check Lucky's Tale, and now OTT clearly stated ss 2.0 and 2 x 3072 x 3536 = 21.7 mill pixels per image.

     

    Nice to know my memory is still working though, lol. And strange with this variation. Maybe kojack knows what's going on, but it seems there's more than one standard for CV1 ss calculations...

    Oculus Rift CV1, Valve Index & PSVR2, Asus Strix OC RTX™ 3090, i9-10900K (5.3Ghz), 32GB 3200MHz, 16TB SSD "Ask not what VR can do for you, but what you can do for VR"
    RuneSR2
    RuneSR2Author
    Honored Contributor
    August 12, 2023

    For the fun of it, here goes - and I really tried to stand the exact same place every time (within millimeters) - but you have to walk a few meters/feet and restart the app every time you change res - I chose a distance of 3 meters, so this is not close (the images below correspond nicely with the images seen through the lenses - Index does not have issues clearly showing up to 1820x1820 pixels, which was the largest image size sent to the lenses - image quality may even be slightly sharper in the hmd as two images are combined into one by the brain). Note that what you're seeing here is not just for the Index, expect similar changes with other hmds - so consider the images below as examples of the power of super-sampling.  

    Click on an image to see the full size image (very important to see the differences - clicking on an image will let you cycle through all images making it much easier to see the difference between res 400% and 500% - and 300% and 400%)

    Index res 100%

     

    Index res 200%

     

    Index res 300%

     

    Index res 400%

     

    Index res 500%

    The difference between res 100% and 500% is like night and day. Also note that res 500% is a lot better than res 200%. 

    For the size of the screenshots I got:

    Index res 100% = 1137 x 1137 pixels

    Index res 200% = 1604 x 1604 pixels

    Index res 300% = 1820 x 1820 pixels

    Index res 400% = 1820 x 1820 pixels

    Index res 500% = 1820 x 1820 pixels

    Image size in pixels seems maxed in this app at res 300% - but in Wolfenstein Cyberpilot res 500% is like 2250 x 2250 pixels. Maybe different apps gain differently from super-sampling. That said there is a noticeable difference between res 300%, 400% and 500% in the above images (click to see the full size). The impact of going from res 100% to res 200% clearly is the most profound - I really never use the blurry Index res 100%. 

    Limiting image sizes to 1820x1820 may indicate that this app limits images to a res close to the panel res (1440x1600). 

    Oculus Rift CV1, Valve Index & PSVR2, Asus Strix OC RTX™ 3090, i9-10900K (5.3Ghz), 32GB 3200MHz, 16TB SSD "Ask not what VR can do for you, but what you can do for VR"
    RuneSR2
    RuneSR2Author
    Honored Contributor
    August 13, 2023

    Btw, this is the spot where I'm standing when testing res 100% - 500%:

    For the previous images I just cut out the section with the numbers and letters to show the differences. 

    Oculus Rift CV1, Valve Index & PSVR2, Asus Strix OC RTX™ 3090, i9-10900K (5.3Ghz), 32GB 3200MHz, 16TB SSD "Ask not what VR can do for you, but what you can do for VR"