that whould be nice if frame drops below 90. ive got a g sync monitor and if the frames drop from 120 to 80 it is almost not noticeable...that whould be nice for the rift. greez 🙂
G-Sync wouldn't really work with head-tracking, and you would end up with judder. But we have time warp, which is a better method to tackle the same problem.
VR is trying to avoid variable frame rates, not adopt it. At the moment FPS is at it's minimum required 90FPS, whereas conventional games can do with 30FPS and over. Different solutions for different problems.
G-sync would add $100-$200 to the price of the cv1. You can see this in current monitors, a g-sync monitor can cost $200 more than the exact same monitor with freesync. This is because g-sync requires custom hardware to be added to the display, which you need to license from nvidia.
Also g-sync does nothing for AMD users. I'm sure a lot of people would be pissed off if the rift's price was raised to $799 for a feature that they couldn't even use.
You cannot have low persistence and g-sync at the same time. J. Carmack was asked about this. He said it's so complicated that it seems impossible as of now. There are huge brightness changes for example. I think Carmack would like to have it, but since it's a few years since he was asked about it, and no progress - I think it won't ever be possible.
Not that I think it's really, really required. On the other hand, I'd like to see simple-graphics VR games for 240Hz PC HMD. There is no issue with v-sync at this rate anyway 😉 Some time in the future something 240Hz will hit the market. Much more likely than g-sync with LP mode.
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.
