cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

"2160×1200 at 90Hz split over dual displays"

sneakypoo
Honored Guest
https://www.oculus.com/blog/powering-the-rift/

On the raw rendering costs: a traditional 1080p game at 60Hz requires 124 million shaded pixels per second. In contrast, the Rift runs at 2160×1200 at 90Hz split over dual displays, consuming 233 million pixels per second. At the default eye-target scale, the Rift’s rendering requirements go much higher: around 400 million shaded pixels per second. This means that by raw rendering costs alone, a VR game will require approximately 3x the GPU power of 1080p rendering.
157 REPLIES 157

tineras
Honored Guest
So are these the same panels as the Vive?

"Dual 1200 x 1080 Panels refreshing at 90Hz that “..that fills your field of vision in all directions”"
http://www.roadtovr.com/htc-vive-tech-s ... on-sensor/

If so, that seems like good news for VR from a compatibility standpoint. Also, why is no one else responding to this thread yet and flipping out? :shock:

ThreeDeeVision
Superstar
"tineras" wrote:
So are these the same panels as the Vive?

"Dual 1200 x 1080 Panels refreshing at 90Hz that “..that fills your field of vision in all directions”"
http://www.roadtovr.com/htc-vive-tech-s ... on-sensor/

If so, that seems like good news for VR from a compatibility standpoint. Also, why is no one else responding to this thread yet and flipping out? :shock:


People aren't flipping out on this thread, because like many other threads on this forum, this discussion started in another thread before this thread was created.

And if you look closely, it looks like the Vive (dev kit) is a little wider and a little shorter, but the same amount of pixels. 1200x1080 x2 = 2400x1080 = 2592000 vs 2160x1200 = 2592000
i7 5960X @ 3.8 GHz | Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 PC2800 | GTX Titan X Pascal | Win 10 64 bit | Asus ROG PG348Q | EVGA X99 Classified

RonsonPL
Heroic Explorer
Just as expected, just as I feared from a long time ago.

Great job Oculus with that Samsung deal you said was beneficial because of display technology.
2016 and display from 2013. GREAT. :evil:
Money from FB was not worth spending on PC VR, was it?
Deal with Samsung brought NO benefits for the Rift, did it?

We all know the answers.
Go choke on that mobile. I guess this ends the agony of PC VR that was promised.
On the bright side - at least it ended. No more hopes with that painful though "you know you are too optimistic, it's gonna hurt...".
Just 90Hz.
Basically the same res as DK2 after "CB has better res than DK2".
Give a bonus to your Dellusion Department. I mean PR. A mean marketing. I mean whoever came up with that nasty strategy.
Not an Oculus hater, but not a fan anymore. Still lots of respect for the team-Carmack, Abrash. Oculus is driven by big corporation principles now. That brings painful effects already, more to come in the future. This is not the Oculus I once cheered for.

GalaxyDollVR
Honored Guest

tineras
Honored Guest
"ThreeDeeVision" wrote:
"tineras" wrote:
So are these the same panels as the Vive?

"Dual 1200 x 1080 Panels refreshing at 90Hz that “..that fills your field of vision in all directions”"
http://www.roadtovr.com/htc-vive-tech-s ... on-sensor/

If so, that seems like good news for VR from a compatibility standpoint. Also, why is no one else responding to this thread yet and flipping out? :shock:


People aren't flipping out on this thread, because like many other threads on this forum, this discussion started in another thread before this thread was created.

And if you look closely, it looks like the Vive (dev kit) is a little wider and a little shorter, but the same amount of pixels. 1200x1080 x2 = 2400x1080 = 2592000 vs 2160x1200 = 2592000


I think you've got your horizontal and vertical backward. They said 2160x1200, so 1200 is the vertical.

ThreeDeeVision
Superstar
"tineras" wrote:
"ThreeDeeVision" wrote:
"tineras" wrote:
So are these the same panels as the Vive?

"Dual 1200 x 1080 Panels refreshing at 90Hz that “..that fills your field of vision in all directions”"
http://www.roadtovr.com/htc-vive-tech-s ... on-sensor/

If so, that seems like good news for VR from a compatibility standpoint. Also, why is no one else responding to this thread yet and flipping out? :shock:


People aren't flipping out on this thread, because like many other threads on this forum, this discussion started in another thread before this thread was created.

And if you look closely, it looks like the Vive (dev kit) is a little wider and a little shorter, but the same amount of pixels. 1200x1080 x2 = 2400x1080 = 2592000 vs 2160x1200 = 2592000


I think you've got your horizontal and vertical backward. They said 2160x1200, so 1200 is the vertical.


Read a little closer, no I don't. Vive = 2400x1080. Rift = 2160x1200. Meaning the 1080 is the vert on the Vive, and 1200 is the vert on the Rift. So the Rift has a little more vert and the Vive has a little more width.
i7 5960X @ 3.8 GHz | Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 PC2800 | GTX Titan X Pascal | Win 10 64 bit | Asus ROG PG348Q | EVGA X99 Classified

tineras
Honored Guest
"ThreeDeeVision" wrote:


Read a little closer, no I don't. Vive = 2400x1080. Rift = 2160x1200. Meaning the 1080 is the vert on the Vive, and 1200 is the vert on the Rift. So the Rift has a little more vert and the Vive has a little more width.


I thought you were talking about the oculus. Anyway, do you know the orientation of the screens in the Vive? My guess is that it's the same as the Rift. http://www.wareable.com/vr/htc-vive-vr- ... specs-7929 ("This gives the Vive a total resolution of 2160 x 1200 pixels"). This seems to verify what I'm saying.

ThreeDeeVision
Superstar
"tineras" wrote:
"ThreeDeeVision" wrote:


Read a little closer, no I don't. Vive = 2400x1080. Rift = 2160x1200. Meaning the 1080 is the vert on the Vive, and 1200 is the vert on the Rift. So the Rift has a little more vert and the Vive has a little more width.


I thought you were talking about the oculus. Anyway, do you know the orientation of the screens in the Vive? My guess is that it's the same as the Rift. http://www.wareable.com/vr/htc-vive-vr- ... specs-7929 ("This gives the Vive a total resolution of 2160 x 1200 pixels"). This seems to verify what I'm saying.


Hmm, it seems we have conflicting articles: http://www.roadtovr.com/htc-vive-tech-specs-revealed-dual-1200x1080-panels-90hz-plus-laser-position-...

The article you found seems to have more details, and it matches the CV1 specs, so you are probably right.
i7 5960X @ 3.8 GHz | Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 PC2800 | GTX Titan X Pascal | Win 10 64 bit | Asus ROG PG348Q | EVGA X99 Classified

ThreeDeeVision
Superstar
This leads to an interesting discussion. If you had the choice for more vertical or more horizontal, what would you choose? I think I would go with horizontal, for more peripheral vision.
i7 5960X @ 3.8 GHz | Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 PC2800 | GTX Titan X Pascal | Win 10 64 bit | Asus ROG PG348Q | EVGA X99 Classified