Odds of a 1440p display?

[Jossos]

So dk2 is out, which has pretty impressive specs. and apparently since consumer version will be a step above that, what are the odds for a 1440p display? I'm sure people are willing to drop the graphic settings for clearer vision. I got a 780 so it doesn't bother me. also whats the max hz for a 1440 screen? I hear it's like 83.33 or something. I use a dvi coord so idk if that makes a difference.

[MrMonkeybat]

Now that they have the capital for a full custom production run, 2 square screens would probably have higher yields than one rectangular screen so it could be cheaper as well as better. 2 small displays would also be capable of twice the frame rate as an unsplit rectangle. You can of course split up a single screen into a maximum of 4 subdisplays with there own drivers allot of the early 4k monitors are being made this way.

I think CV1 will definitely use Display Port with a dual HDMI/DVI USB adapter for older computers. Even if the framerate and resolution are not upgraded, more bandwidth to get the image to the display quickly will save precious latency.

I just aquired a r9 280x with 2 Display ports for $319AUD, add a Rift and my upgrade is still cheaper than an "X1" or PS4. Cards will likely be cheaper when it releases. A quick web search for benchmarks reveals that it has a framerate over 80 on Skyrim Ultra settings at 1440*2560.

[Anonymous]

"Hadwell" wrote:
It doesn't really make sense to bring out a high res model with hdmi the way it is now, since right now getting high frame rates is a lot more important than high resolution... as i said their trying for 95 Hz... not really even possible at 1920x1080 without blanking

I think we should assume the CV1 will either require two hdmi cables or Displayport if we want 1440p at the framerates absolutely needed...

if you really want the hard facts...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort

I think displayport is way to go. Then just some smart thinking and updatable firmware. PS3 is good example how you can jusr add more supported formats later on. I think PS3 actually support 3D 1080p these days with what 1.1 hdmi?

[jab]

There seem to be a lot of attention to pixel resolution. But pixel density is largely forgotten. Nothing is more important then pixel density when it comes to decreasing screen-door effects. The problem with current displays is that they are all made for viewing at arms length. And for this reason they have terrible pixel density, simply because there is no need to make it better. I am betting a 1080p display with close to 100% density would end up looking better then a 1440p or maybe even 4K with the normal pixel density you have today.

Edit.. Sorry, I meant fill ratio, not pixel density. In other words, the spacing between pixels.

[MiloSavage]

One idea they could go with For (CV2 or 3) is 1 screen (screen controller) with 2 concave (1600x1600 perhaps) sections (one for each eye) in theory this could reduce the size/weight of lens by doing some of the focusing with the curve of the screen surface. There's no real problem with non standard resolutions that drivers cant fix/games take into account. good time to be a techy 🙂

[Hadwell]

"jab" wrote:
There seem to be a lot of attention to pixel resolution. But pixel density is largely forgotten. Nothing is more important then pixel density when it comes to decreasing screen-door effects. The problem with current displays is that they are all made for viewing at arms length. And for this reason they have terrible pixel density, simply because there is no need to make it better. I am betting a 1080p display with close to 100% density would end up looking better then a 1440p or maybe even 4K with the normal pixel density you have today.

reason being their going for a 5" screen here... we're assuming the size of the screen is a constant... pixel density is only an issue if we're talking screens of different sizes... the bigger the screen, the lower the pixel density, the smaller, the more pixel density, but every 5" 1440p screen has the same pixel density... because you can't make the pixels smaller, with the same amount of pixels and have them still fill the whole screen... you'd need to make it a higher resolution, add more pixels to fill in the space those larger pixels took up...

or if you're talking about the screen door effect... the pixels at those resolutions are so close together it wouldn't be visible with the naked eye...

[Anonymous]

"Hadwell" wrote:

"jab" wrote:
There seem to be a lot of attention to pixel resolution. But pixel density is largely forgotten. Nothing is more important then pixel density when it comes to decreasing screen-door effects. The problem with current displays is that they are all made for viewing at arms length. And for this reason they have terrible pixel density, simply because there is no need to make it better. I am betting a 1080p display with close to 100% density would end up looking better then a 1440p or maybe even 4K with the normal pixel density you have today.

reason being their going for a 5" screen here... we're assuming the size of the screen is a constant... pixel density is only an issue if we're talking screens of different sizes... the bigger the screen, the lower the pixel density, the smaller, the more pixel density, but every 5" 1440p screen has the same pixel density... because you can't make the pixels smaller, with the same amount of pixels and have them still fill the whole screen... you'd need to make it a higher resolution, add more pixels to fill in the space those larger pixels took up...

or if you're talking about the screen door effect... the pixels at those resolutions are so close together it wouldn't be visible with the naked eye...

Maybe he meant fill ratio? Increasing fill ratio is one thing that really matters and it's true that it is good enough for mobile phone use(50% or less maybe?) but they can make it better for sure. DLP's have quite good fillratio(90%+ vs LCD 50%-60%) and it really shows.

[MrMonkeybat]

"Br0ken" wrote:

"mstdesigns" wrote:
Since the facebook acquisition I have stopped thinking about 1440p and 4K, but the possibility of going apple style with a resolution of something like 3000x1500 pixels, 3200x1600 etc. They could also do 2 1600x1600 screens, as that allows for perfect IPD correction, being able to move both the screens and the lenses!

I doubt that they will use the custom resolution displays, especially two. Oculus wants to make an inexpensive HMD, compatible with most games.
1440р for CV1, 4K for CV2, I think.

Here are a couple of quotes from Palmer Lucky:

"This deal is going to immediately accelerate a lot of plans that were languishing on our wishlist, and the resulting hardware will be better AND cheaper. We have the resources to create custom hardware now, not just rely on the scraps of the mobile phone industry. There is a lot of good news on the way that is not yet public, so believe me, things will become a lot more clear over time."

"You are right that screens with big lenses in front of your eyes is essentially a brute force design, a design that relies on utilizing the scraps of the mobile phone industry to provide a good VR experience at the cost of performance and form factor. Doing better requires insane resources, which we now have."

http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/21lu33/introducing_michael_abrash_oculus_chief_scientist/cge...

And Michael Abrash, Oculus Chief Scientist:

"The final piece of the puzzle fell into place on Tuesday. A lot of what it will take to make VR great is well understood at this point, so it's engineering, not research; hard engineering, to be sure, but clearly within reach. For example, there are half a dozen things that could be done to display panels that would make them better for VR, none of them pie in the sky."

Hmm so lets see if we can make a list of six customizations that can be done to display panels that are not "pie in the sky".

Here is my attempt in order of decreasing probability:
Low persistence
2:1 aspect ratio
Increased resolution (non standard resolution as many as they can fit in the area)
2 square panels, more adjustable ipd faster refresh speed.
Up to 4 driver chips per panel for increased refresh speed.
Stacked transperent RGB oleds for reduced screendoor, increased brightness allows even lower persistence.

Leaving in the more pie in the sky category:
Large area Oled on silicon.
Barrel distorted panel.
Barrel and chromatic corrected stacked Oled.
Hemispherical screens.

[jab]

"JaMiR" wrote:
Maybe he meant fill ratio? Increasing fill ratio is one thing that really matters and it's true that it is good enough for mobile phone use(50% or less maybe?) but they can make it better for sure. DLP's have quite good fillratio(90%+ vs LCD 50%-60%) and it really shows.

Sorry, yes I meant fill ratio..

[mrjazz]

"mrmonkeybat" wrote:
Here are a couple of quotes from Palmer Lucky:

"You are right that screens with big lenses in front of your eyes is essentially a brute force design, a design that relies on utilizing the scraps of the mobile phone industry to provide a good VR experience at the cost of performance and form factor. Doing better requires insane resources, which we now have."

Does this mean Oculus will develop a totally new HMD-type?? :shock:
But what could be an alternative to screens with big lenses? :?

[Zackarios]

"mrjazz" wrote:

"mrmonkeybat" wrote:
Here are a couple of quotes from Palmer Lucky:

"You are right that screens with big lenses in front of your eyes is essentially a brute force design, a design that relies on utilizing the scraps of the mobile phone industry to provide a good VR experience at the cost of performance and form factor. Doing better requires insane resources, which we now have."

Does this mean Oculus will develop a totally new HMD-type?? :shock:
But what could be an alternative to screens with big lenses? :?

Wow, that quote is very, very interesting. I don't know what they could do in the time frame between now and launching CV1 that would be as drastic a change as Palmer seems to be saying, but if they can, holy sh*t that would be awesome!

Palmer also said with the FB acquisition, the Rift becomes a product of no compromises. Stringing these quotes together...you can't help but get excited!