cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

The "Why I Still Love My Oculus Rift CV1 in 2024" Thread

RuneSR2
Grand Champion

6mitq22myy1i.jpg

I've gotten slightly tired of repeating all the awesome stuff about the Oculus CV1 on Oculus Subreddit and in here - so why not try to collect all the great arguments for still using the Rift CV1 in a thread? 

1. It's oled. Even with the oled mura (SPUD) Rift CV1 is still a lot darker than lcd hmds. It may not matter to all, and sure you can live just fine with lcd, but for those of us wanting to experience a really dark night in Skyrim, wanting to have true night vision in Saints and Sinners (and not constantly needing a flashlight) - and to enjoy all the very dark horror games - oled is still king. Although Rift CV1 and the original Vive aren't completely the same, they both use oled panels - and these results indicate differences in blackness comparing oled (Vive) and lcd (Index) hmds:

"Black level in nits:

  • Index: 0.153

  • Vive: under 0.02 with true blacks turned off via black smear compensation (default).

  • Vive: 0 with true blacks turned on, black smear compensation disabled via running the headset in secondary display mode."

 

In a few games, like Saints and Sinners - and Westworld Awekening - I found some very dark locations where I basically can see nothing using the Index (lcd), while I clearly can make out objects using Rift CV1. In those cases Rift CV1 provides true night vision, while lcd cannot show very poorly illuminated objects making everything vanish into a grey lcd-fog of pure nothingness 😉 That's probably why all the otherwise dark tunnels in Alyx are lit up with so many lamps, because you need light to create great blacks using lcd, and Alyx was made for lcd (Index). Also having oled or not in extremely dark games like Phantom Covert Ops is the difference of being able to see all the awesome tiny ripples and subtle reflections in the surface of the water or not. 



2. Sound is second to none using the CV1, primarily the deep bass, thanks to the awesome Rift CV1 headphones. Even Index cannot provide the same bass as CV1 - at all. It's very easy to test. Try the song Embers in Pistol Whip and compare CV1 with whatever hmd you'd like. Even Index has close to no bass in that song, while the CV1 is simply perfect - the difference is close to day and night:


Also the larger Oculus exclusive games took years to make, like Asgard's Wrath, Stormland, Defector and Medal of Honor: Above and Beyond. Although such games were launched when Rift-S and Quest 1-2 hmds were available, these games were primarily developed using Rift CV1 hmd. In short, if you do not use Rift CV1 for these games, you're not experiencing sound effects and music exactly like the devs intended. This may mean you're getting too much or too little bass, and that may affect immersion. Maybe casual gamers don't care about this and might even accept the extremely poor piped-audio quality of Rift-S and Quest hmds, but getting the optimal sound experience should matter to audiophiles and enthusiasts.


3. Rift CV1 Touch controllers are built like tanks. Using Oculus subreddit, the amount of photos showing broken Rift-S and Quest controllers are numerous, and there have been many statements about the poor quality of newer controllers, also including Valve Index controllers. The new Reverb G2 controllers do not get a lot of love too, but more due to design and weight distribution. Instead, old Touch are still considered the reference when it comes to quality, design and durability. Batteries may even last for months - while some never controllers (like for the Reverb G2) may eat up batteries like there's no tomorrow 😉


4. Tracking. Although having sensors is quite a hassle for those needing to set them up for each VR session, permanently placed sensors provide next to no inconvenience and provide a level of tracking probably only beaten by the base stations used for Vive and Index hmds. Having used the Valve Index for 19 months, I really do not notice much difference between CV1 and Index tracking, which is a testament to the awesome tracking provided by the CV1. Although CV1 isn't included here, Index tracking was scientifically measured to be extremely much better than what inside-out solutions provide: 

Results - tracking accuracy - lower scores are best (hint: Cosmos did not win ;))

 mwoqickliahz.jpg
https://forums.oculusvr.com/community/discussion/91998/mirror-mirror-on-the-wall-which-one-has-the-b...

I would be very surprised if Rift CV1 is much worse than Index. Using Rift CV1 360 degrees tracking (needs at least 3 sensors) you can hold your hands on your back for as long as you'd like - you'll never lose tracking. And you can play in a totally dark room, you do not need any light for perfect tracking. Also @kojack  compared CV1 tracking here to both HP Reverb G2 and the Quest 2 - I hope he doesn't mind quoting him here:

"Tracking seems fine on the (HP Reverb) G2, it just has way worse coverage. It's too easy to lose sight of the controllers below or near the headset. Hold your hands out in front and they seem ok. While moving around the WMR home scene, there's big panels to look up at and I kept the controllers at waist level. The laser pointers on the controllers made it obvious every time the position tracking dropped out when I tilted my head up a little.
CV1 tracking is great, I prefer it to anything else. Q2 (Oculus Quest 2) tracking seems ok, but also has worse coverage than CV1. For example in Audica, if I try to throw the guns underarm from a resting position, they just release from my hands and float at my side, while on the CV1 they'd be thrown correctly."



5. Using temporal antialiasing (TAA) does not create a blurry image with the Rift CV1. Some may not be aware of this - and that's entirely plausible for those never having tried using an oled hmd. In games like for example Ark Park, Robinson the Journey, Asgard's Wrath and Stormland, enabling TAA using a lcd hmd easily creates a very blurry image quality. Like having your eyes dropped with liquid butter - or something. Using TAA with Rift CV1 you get super-sharp image quality, maybe due to the screen-door effect (SDE) fooling our brains to experience a holistic and sharp image by filling out the blanks (blanks = the black stripes between rows of lit pixels which essentially make up the SDE). Furthermore, compared to other kinds of antialiasing like MSAA, TAA does not cost a lot of gpu performance. Having to replace TAA with 4xMSAA (or worse) may provide ok-ish image quality by severely reducing frames per second (fps), especially when combined with high levels of super sampling (ss). 


6. Some games profit from the SDE and reduced res of the Rift CV1. Although many are annoyed with the Rift CV1 due to the low res and especially the SDE, sometimes the SDE can be a friend. Using high res lcd hmds with tons of subpixels may provide clarity so far ahead of the Rift CV1 that there's really no comparison. Unfortunately such clarity may also reveal tons of flaws and shortcomings in many (older) VR games. Using high-res lcd hmds, low res textures may easily be spotted and may reduce immersion. The advantage of the Rift CV1 SDE may in many cases be like having scanlines in MAME games (MAME = Multiple Arcade Machine Emulator) - or just an interlaced image quality. Remember how some games looked on lcd monitors, when some of us switched from using CRT monitors (or TVs)? The difference in image quality using Rift CV1 or a newer high-res lcd hmd may easily be like:

Image quality with scanlines (like CV1 SDE)
nuqd4iaq8jk8.jpg

Image quality with no scanlines (like modern high-res lcd hmds)
0wpwosiikqm1.jpg
 

There are many games where low-res textures look so much better thanks to the Rift CV1 SDE, while everything looks a lot more pixelated using high-res lcd hmds. Again a game like Phantom Covert Ops comes to mind - that game looks great using Rift CV1, but using Index you can easily see all the ugly low-res textures. Even a game like Arizona Sunshine looks so much better using Rift CV1 due to lack of jaggies and it's much harder to notice any low-res textures. One thing that amazed me in that game was the thorns on the cactus plants which looked very real using Rift CV1 ss 2.0, but using Index it's so easy to see the low-res 2D thorns on the plants which now looked incredibly fake and thereby broke the immersion. 


7. Physical interpupillary distance (IPD) slider. With the Rift CV1 you do not just have one big panel like in Rift-S and Quest 2, but you have two separate oled panels. One for each eye that can be physically moved. This allows for simply perfect IPD adjustment (or close), covering IPDs from about 58 to 72 mm, probably only beaten by the original Vive hmds allowing for up to 73-74 mm. Rift S is more or less locked to 64 mm, while Quest 2 has three locked positions (58, 63 and 68 mm). 


8. Comfort. This is a matter of individual preferences, but it's my impression that many still find the comfort of CV1 as second to none. Personally I do find CV1 comfort a lot better than the Valve Index, even though the Index is great. With the small weight of 470 grams and the way you wear the CV1 hmd, I rarely notice it's on my head when I'm using it. 


9. Using high levels of super sampling, visual acuity may be a lot better than many persons seem to believe. Having tested the Rift CV1 with high levels of super sampling I found some quite surprising results. This is a comparison of how many meters you can go back from a text and still be able to read it - note that higher res provides increased ability to zoom out while still sharply seeing objects and textures:

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

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

Source: https://forums.oculusvr.com/community/discussion/91907/testhmd-fov-sde-res-super-sampling-the-rift-s...


I consider these results quite amazing, and they prove that increasing levels of super sampling has a profound effect on Rift CV1 image quality. I've heard several CV1 users say that you don't benefit from more than ss levels 1.3 to maybe 1.5 using Rift CV1. That's why we need science and to test subjective experiences thoroughly. Properly testing the Rift CV1 there's even a noticeable difference comparing ss 2.0 and 2.5. Going from ss 2.0 to 2.5 will probably require a RTX 3080/3090 or better to get 90 fps in many games, and the difference between 2.0 and 2.5 is more subtle than going from 1.5 to 2.0. For many it may come as a great surprise that perceived sharpness and ability to read signs etc. (=visual acuity) may really not be much different using Rift CV1 ss 2.0 or Valve Index res 200% - even though persons subjectively may feel that the res is so much better using a lcd panel with tons of subpixels, like the Index. 


10. Many games were made for oled hmds - thus using an oled hmd may be the only way to play these games "the way it's meant to be played". This is one issue I've become more and more aware of since I got the Index. Many games made for Rift CV1 simply don't feel "right" using other solutions than the Rift CV1. Chronos may be a nice example. Chronos plays nicely using the Valve Index, but even forcing res 200% I can still see some jaggies and pixel crawling. And the blacks, textures and colors are nice too, but seem to lack something here and there. Now, using the Rift CV1 ss 2.0 there's simply no doubt I get the vision the devs intended to provide. I no longer see jaggies, and blacks and colors look the way the should - and I no longer notice any textures I think would benefit from a slightly higher res. Same with Mage's Tale: using lcd many surfaces look fake, like made of melted plastic - gold surfaces look fake - but using Rift CV1 everything looks so much more real, even including the gold. In short, there are still many of reasons to love the old Rift CV1. Even if the competition is fierce these days, there are many games and apps where the old Rift CV1 stands tall and bows to no one. 

I've probably missed something - do let me know in a post below, if there're even more reasons to still love/like the Rift CV1! 🙂

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"

120 REPLIES 120

If you ever decide to upgrade your PC, like me, to a i9 13900k/rtx4090/32Gb 5200 ram, then I think you'll notice a bit of a difference, lol! 

For now you just need to ignore the Oculus desktop app warning about it not being compatible.  Even with win11 it seems to be working ok, for me anyway.  Cheers.

i9 13900K water cooled, RTX4090, Z790 MB w/wifi6e, 32Gb 6400 ram, 2x2TB SSD, 1000W PSU, Win 11, QPro, Q3, w/Link and Air Link, Vive Pro1 with Etsy lens mod and Index Controllers

RuneSR2
Grand Champion

Btw, seems the old king still can impress. According to a scientific investigation, Rift CV1 is the master of motion to photons latencies, at least it's much faster even than Index:

link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-022-01983-5

And Index in 80 Hz is the worst, 144 Hz is better, but still no match the Rift CV1, also CV1 beats Rift S and HTC Vive.

One quote: "This indicates that the HMD with the lowest latency was the Oculus Rift, and the HMD with the highest latency was the Valve Index operating at 80 Hz. The Valve Index operating at 144 Hz was only marginally better than the HTC Vive (90 Hz) and worse than the Oculus Rift (90 Hz) and Rift S (80 Hz), despite having a much higher refresh rate than these HMDs. The measured latency was consistent between recordings for all HMDs, with the highest between-video standard deviation being 1.75 ms for the Oculus Rift S."

Lowest is best:

13428_2022_1983_Fig6_HTML

____________________________________________________________________________________

 

13428_2022_1983_Fig4_HTML.png

 

So there's that too 🙂 The lower the latency the better for immersion, and it's believed that low latencies may cause less motion sickness. That said, I never had any issues with the Index, the latencies above are so small that these will not be consciously perceived, but can of course still have an impact on the brain. 

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
Grand Champion

Just ran a few tests to check on my Rift CV1's motion-to-photon lantencies - and when the gpu has sufficient headroom, I can confirm the 20 ms latency:

OculusScreenshot1674998596.JPG

OculusScreenshot1674998859.JPG

Did see 18-19 ms a few times too. I'm running both games using ss 2.5, so this is 27 mill pixels per frame, and the gpu is under some stress - but not that much with about 50-60% headroom. 

 

But latency is no constant, it changes depending on the gpu burden. See what happens in Red Matter 1 - where my headroom is lower:

OculusScreenshot1674998744.JPG

Here 43% headroom - and latency rising to 26 ms. Going down to 4% headroom in Phantom Covert Ops we see: 

OculusScreenshot1674998254.JPG

Now only 4% headroom - and 31 ms latency. And if I break the 90 fps, things get worse:

OculusScreenshot1674998047.JPG

OculusScreenshot1674998385.JPG

Thus 20 ms is surely obtainable with the CV1, but only when you get 90 fps with at least 50% headroom. If you want the lowest latency, might be a good idea checking that you've got at least 50% headroom, or otherwise lower the res (or in-game settings). 

Personally I would choose res before latency though 😉

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"

elevator3
Explorer

I will forever love this headset. I got it back in 2020 when i was 12 but I always loved it (i even made my dad take me to best buy too look at the rift display when it first came out lol) but now ive got a q2, valve index, and an og vive and i still prefer my rift cv1 over all of them. might just be nostalgia but all the other headsets just didn't feel right, it always felt like something was missing but when i switched back to my cv1 it just felt like a way better experience. anyways i just absolutely love this headset and i cant see me switching to anything else any time soon.

Agreed, also I've got the PSVR2, which is oled like CV1, but the PS5 is too slow, and the software res is too low and blurry.

If I could just run Call of the Mountain, Resident Evil 8 and Gran Turismo 7 in 90 fps with my CV1 and RTX 3090 I seriously would not need the PSVR2, but I do need the oled for Resident Evil 8, some levels are truly pitch black and will not work with lcd (unless devs add light sources).

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"

JohSm67
Rising Star

Still the favorite one for me, best comfort and controllers.

JohSm

Sean5861
Honored Guest

What a great headset the CV1 is, ahead of its time for sure.  The resolution and FOV are my biggest gripes, but I've been looking at every headset that's come out since and I just can't justify the expense so long as my CV1 is still working.  Not that I'm willing for it to break, but I will probably replace rather than repair. 

The sensors and their bandwidth requirements are annoying, but so would be tracking issues which I don't get.  The construction quality of the controllers is truly admirable, I have thunderclapped them to many times to count.  There is also something sentimental about owning the first consumer VR headset to make it to mass-market. 

I'm out of depth with the scientific analysis in this thread, but if it explains why I'm not terrible at Beatsaber unlike most other games, I'm all for it!

Got the PSVR2 Feb 22 along with Call of the Mountain. Rift CV1 has 1080x1200 res per eye, PSVR2 has 2000x2040. That 3.15 times higher res for the PSVR2. Both are oled. Still I'd so much love getting to play the Sony PSVR2 exclusives with the Rift CV1 and the RTX 3090. Why would any sane person want that? Because Rift CV1 with tons of super sampling looks much better than PSVR2 with very high res and subsampling (=low software res, much lower res than the PSVR2 panel res).

 

What's best? 

Rift CV1 low-res panels with tons of super sampling?

PSVR2 high-res panels with no super sampling (but "under-sampling"/subsampling)

 

Many PSVR2 games look like CV1 ss 1.0 - 1.2 software res displayed on the PSVR2 high-res panels. And it does not look good - already 10 feet away the blur starts. But using CV1 ss 2.5 (27 mill pixels per combined frame) I feel I can see clearly miles away - especially when moving and SDE goes away.

I would much rather play Call of the Mountain using Rift CV1 ss 2.0 in 90 fps - than the current blurry (=subsampled) PSVR2 version only using 60 fps with reprojections. 

Personally I do not consider Rift CV1 with supersampling worse than PSVR2, in fact I'd prefer CV1 in most games - and that even includes Resident Evil 8 Village and Gran Turismo 7. 

So enjoy the oled, the grass is not necessarily greener on the other side. Btw, PSVR2 has mura - it looks much like the CV1 SPUD, the PSVR2 mura really lights up when it gets dark - just like the CV1 SPUD. 

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"

Ya, pretty hard to beat oled screens, that's for sure mate.  My good old cv1 did a great job with my rtx3090 and 2-2.5xSS.  I gotta say that I think my +3yo OG Vive Pro1 with Etsy Gear VR lens mod and Index controllers is a bit of a step above though.  I've ended up running a dual VR headset setup with a Quest Pro (mainly wireless PCVR with Air Link) and a wired Vive Pro1.  Between the VP1 link box on/off button and the OTT audio/runtime switching features it's very easy to switch back and forth between these headsets. 

I recently upgraded my PC to an i9 13900k/rtx4090 and the performance with all my PCVR games/sims is at least 50% better than with my previous i9 9900k/rtx3090 (which was about 50% better than my older gtx1080ti).  I ended up selling that pc to a local friend for less than what I paid for the rtx3090.  In Australia we call that 'Mates Rates', lol!  The main benefit for me going to the rtx4090 was with my flight sims, like msfs.  If it were not for me wanting to get better PCVR performance with flight sims, I probably could have just stuck with my rtx3090 for general gaming imho. 

I moved my cv1 a while ago to my old retired (now home office pc) Alienware 17r4 laptop with a gtx1060 6Gb gpu and it still works fine.  The audio gave up the ghost a while ago and I just mirror to the laptop speakers.  It still plays all the old cv1 titles that were included with the touch controller combo 4-5 years ago.  Pretty hard to push it much past 1.0-1.2x SS though, lol!  

For fun, a couple of weeks ago I asked Meta support if they still had any old warranty stock that I could buy and I was surprised that they said that they would arrange a replacement headset.  They sent me prepaid shipping labels and I sent off the headset/earphones back to them.  I just got a note earlier this week saying that my replacement was being processed and should be shipped back to me soon.  Anyway, pretty unbelievable support for a +4yo headset eh! 

When I get it I may be temped to try it out with my new rtx4090 pc but I suspect that the results won't be much better than with the rtx3090 since you can really only super sample so much before getting diminishing returns. 

Anyway, I'm always glad to hear that you and others are still enjoying their cv1's.  Cheers mate.

i9 13900K water cooled, RTX4090, Z790 MB w/wifi6e, 32Gb 6400 ram, 2x2TB SSD, 1000W PSU, Win 11, QPro, Q3, w/Link and Air Link, Vive Pro1 with Etsy lens mod and Index Controllers

RuneSR2
Grand Champion

035a49b7a31f7017f2867e40f4d8e803_original.jpg

Funny that we're still seeing games made for Rift CV1 today. This tells the story of the very long time it takes to make high-quality VR content. HMDs may be made in 1-2 years, while games like Alyx and Lone Echo 2 may take about 4 years to make. That means when developers are done with the game, few users may use the hmds the developers intended for the game. 

7e103ad447395b03871a13f4e4f2731c_original.png

Agony VR is a new VR game using tons of TAA (temporal antialiasing), which looks really bad/blurry with lcd like Index, but looks perfectly with the Rift CV1. Some have complained the game is too dark for lcd - I'm confident this game was made for oled hmds like Vive, Vive Pro and Rift CV1. Sound does not always work with SteamVR, but the game support native Oculus drivers, and works af if you bought the game in the Meta Rift Store. All indicates to me this game was made for the Rift CV1. 

yrxq2zale65apenqrwij.jpg

 Note: this is a game for the mature audience, you're basically in Hell and get to see the sights and horrors:

The game is here: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1654170/Agony_VR/

There's a playable demo to try too. The game feels like early access, but plays fine enough - like a simple adventure game or close to a walking sim. Trailers:

 

Here's the uncensored announcement trailer:

Spoiler

System requirements:

RECOMMENDED:

    • Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
    • OS: Windows 10
    • Processor: Intel Core i7-11700K / AMD Ryzen 7 5800X equivalent or greater
    • Memory: 16 GB RAM
    • Graphics: RTX 2070 or equivalent
    • DirectX: Version 11
    • Storage: 13 GB available space
    • VR Support: Oculus headsets (Oculus SDK), HTC and Valve (SteamVR SDK)

 

A few screenshots:

Spoiler
ss_ca0d0c986e65dbb6b2f8ef943c83a72cbf00be1d.1920x1080.jpgimage-asset.JPGss_8c0ee93ad3f614017547cd3e74fdd6b4cf80b28c.1920x1080.jpg

   

The performance is great with the Rift CV1 - I'm mostly getting 90 fps with ss 2.5. Performance is worse using SteamVR and Index. even when using same software res, and the image quality is very blurry. This game is worthless to me without the Rift CV1. 

The game was launched in 2D in 2018, and the VR versions began it's development in 2020 - so it took more than 2 years to turn the 2D version into VR. 

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"