ANNOUNCEMENT January Update - Beta Announcement

prove otherwise. with science please
We don't see in 2k or 4k resolutions. The details our eyes can resolve depends upon angular resolution, which is about one arc minute. When it comes to TVs and displays, the maximum resolution we benefit from depends more the effective distance we are from that screen. Here's a diagram that shows the relationship between screen size, distance, and effective resolution:



How does this apply to VR? Simple. Because the "distance" of the display in current generation VR headsets is "infinity," we simply need to know the pixel density over its field of view. Anything over sixty pixels per degree is effectively wasted, due to the pixels starting to blur together. My Vive, for example, has an effective field of view of about 110 degrees. That means that it can use a display 6600 pixels wide, or somewhere between 4k and 8k. Keep in mind that each eye's field of view overlaps quite a bit, so the equivalent of an 8k monitor would be ideal.

The reason why I'm personally skeptical about 8k VR headsets isn't that our eyes can't take advantage of the pixel density. It's because of the huge graphic processing requirement for screens that large, while the fovea (which is where the light sensing cells are densest) is so small, with a field of view of only 5 degrees. Until foveated rendering and eye tracking become the norm, this size screen won't really be viable for widespread use.
 
We don't see in 2k or 4k resolutions. The details our eyes can resolve depends upon angular resolution, which is about one arc minute. When it comes to TVs and displays, the maximum resolution we benefit from depends more the effective distance we are from that screen. Here's a diagram that shows the relationship between screen size, distance, and effective resolution:



How does this apply to VR? Simple. Because the "distance" of the display in current generation VR headsets is "infinity," we simply need to know the pixel density over its field of view. Anything over sixty pixels per degree is effectively wasted, due to the pixels starting to blur together. My Vive, for example, has an effective field of view of about 110 degrees. That means that it can use a display 6600 pixels wide, or somewhere between 4k and 8k. Keep in mind that each eye's field of view overlaps quite a bit, so the equivalent of an 8k monitor would be ideal.

The reason why I'm personally skeptical about 8k VR headsets isn't that our eyes can't take advantage of the pixel density. It's because of the huge graphic processing requirement for screens that large, while the fovea (which is where the light sensing cells are densest) is so small, with a field of view of only 5 degrees. Until foveated rendering and eye tracking become the norm, this size screen won't really be viable for widespread use.
Is the correct answer.

There is also the fact that VR screens are magnified so we can see the pixels. The higher the res the more dense the pixels are the less SDE we will get.

My pimax 5k+ is great, but there is screen door effect albeit very small. My 2070 just about copes with it. A pimax 8kX would ruin my GPU.
 
.
8k is even more pointless then 4k lol , the human eyes have only enough light receptors to see in 2k , so next time you look at a 4k vid or 4k tv and say " WOW that is so much better "........It isn't =-P

Lol you obvious don't have a clue do you? It's not about the the resolution other than with the 8kx there is no screen door effect it's so good they dont have to upscale in the software or so so it's easier for the gpu to handle. I mean I am not a res hog and still game in 1080p but for VR it really does matter and you really do see a difference. Oh and 8kx is the actual name of the HMD so when someone say 8kx they are not really focusing on the res anymore than when I say vive I am focusing on the res.

Oh and if you think there no difference between a 4k tv and and regular 1080p tv you need glasses mate and a real 4k content source. I have a old standard 1080p samsung tv and I can tell you there a huge difference between watching Justice League in 1080p on my tv and in 4k on my brother in laws tv..it's like watch something live so much that the effects look kind of meh in 4k so I actually prefer the lower res of my old 1080p. With 4k distance from the tv doesn't matter, with 1080p it really does unless you like seeing the pixels and a poopooty looking image.
 
Last edited:
Is the correct answer.

There is also the fact that VR screens are magnified so we can see the pixels. The higher the res the more dense the pixels are the less SDE we will get.

My pimax 5k+ is great, but there is screen door effect albeit very small. My 2070 just about copes with it. A pimax 8kX would ruin my GPU.

The pimix has a much bigger FOV than all the other HMD so it needs more density thus more res to be good. Also your off about the 8kx destroying your gpu. Your gpu needs lots of upscaling, in the software settings due to the low res... the 8kx doesn't so you can lower that down and have still have a much clearer image and no sde.

Frankly I have given pimax lots of poopooe about some stuff but right now we are still in gen 1 vr hmd including the index and reverb...the pimax 8kx might possibly the first true next gen vr hmd.

 
Last edited:
The pimix has a much bigger FOV than all the other HMD so it needs more density thus more res to be good. Also your off about the 8kx destroying your gpu. Your gpu needs lots of upscaling, in the software settings due to the low res... the 8kx doesn't so you can lower that down and have still have a much clearer image and no sde.

Frankly I have given pimax lots of poopooe about some stuff but right now we are still in gen 1 vr hmd including the index and reverb...the pimax 8kx might possibly the first true next gen vr hmd.

You can downscale and have either minimal or no SDE but downscaling can make the picture look fuzzy. You will want it as sharp as possible.

I would say my Pimax 5k+ is gen 1.5. it's a massive step up from the original rift and vive and I am very pleased with it. Software could be a bit more stable though.
 
You can downscale and have either minimal or no SDE but downscaling can make the picture look fuzzy. You will want it as sharp as possible.

I would say my Pimax 5k+ is gen 1.5. it's a massive step up from the original rift and vive and I am very pleased with it. Software could be a bit more stable though.
Yes but with the 8k+ and 8kx you wont get that fuzzy because of the res at least that's the reports so far. Obviously we need some proper unbiased reviews, since sweviver works for pimax now, once people actually receive their units and start sharing their experiences.

I feel that all the current HMD are gen one as they all sacrifice something to achieve something, they all have pros and cons so while there have been improvements I don't feel it's true gen 1 to gen 2 improvements.

The new pimax might be the first hmd not to have to sacrifice one thing to get another, it looks like it could be the first hmd to be able to have a big or more normal fov, sharpness and no sde while all the previous hmd sacrifice one of those for the other. It also looks like it wont necessarily be harder to run than a current 8k hmd. Though I have no doubt that current gpu wont be running them at max potential.

I just think they are a right next step into VR actually getting it all together finally, hopefully they also work out the casing cracking issues their current hmd are having.

Which brings me full circle...if this turns out even partially accurate then fdev really need to give pimax some support otherwise they just look like uninformed amateurs.
 
Last edited:
Yes but with the 8k+ and 8kx you wont get that fuzzy because of the res at least that's the reports so far. Obviously we need some proper unbiased reviews, since sweviver works for pimax now, once people actually receive their units and start sharing their experiences.

I feel that all the current HMD are gen one as they all sacrifice something to achieve something, they all have pros and cons so while there have been improvements I don't feel it's true gen 1 to gen 2 improvements.

The new pimax might be the first hmd not to have to sacrifice one thing to get another, it looks like it could be the first hmd to be able to have a big or more normal fov, sharpness and no sde while all the previous hmd sacrifice one of those for the other. It also looks like it wont necessarily be harder to run than a current 8k hmd. Though I have no doubt that current gpu wont be running them at max potential.

I just think they are a right next step into VR actually getting it all together finally, hopefully they also work out the casing cracking issues their current hmd are having.

Which brings me full circle...if this turns out even partially accurate then fdev really need to give pimax some support otherwise they just look like uninformed amateurs.
Agreed. That's why I called my Pimax 5k+ gen 1.5. Its.certainlyna big step up, just not enough to be called gen 2. But the 8k+ and 8kx can.be though. But I will need to try them out myself first.

But I can't see myself upgrading for a number of years though. I am contented with my 5k+ for the time being and have no rush.
 
Because this, apparantly, is what the community asked for. It's not just bug fixes, they never claimed it was just bug fixes, here is the text;



The "longstanding issues" refers to issues that the players were unhappy about and felt needed rebalancing/fixing before new content was introduced, so yes the marker system and FSS problems fit neatly into that category.

Whereas storing cargo in stations, which doesn't currently exist as a "thing", would be "adding a new feature" and not fixing an existing feature that has problems. This is completely separate from the fact the FDEV currently has no plans to add station storage, so this is more a request or complaint rather than a longstanding issue or bug.

Now whether it was right or not to delay FC's is beside the point, some people would rather they weren't delayed but that's not part of this discussion.
Actually fixing bugs and delaying Fleet Carriers to achieve that end was what they said, AND, the community did not ask for a mining nerf. I think, given that HUGE amount of problems new content and/or adjusted non-broke content has caused in the last few patches, this patch should have only been bug fixes. For example, they adjust the market to make it "Real" and then there is no demand for Painite or LTDs anywhere or max sale price SO rare - no longer worth it. So fleet carriers is firmly embedded in this discussion, and I sure I am not alone in that thinking. Furthermore, I sure I am not alone in the thinking that nerfs are not what is needed in this game at this stage. I love the game, but I am gonna call a Spade a Spade.
 
Actually fixing bugs and delaying Fleet Carriers to achieve that end was what they said, AND, the community did not ask for a mining nerf. I think, given that HUGE amount of problems new content and/or adjusted non-broke content has caused in the last few patches, this patch should have only been bug fixes. For example, they adjust the market to make it "Real" and then there is no demand for Painite or LTDs anywhere or max sale price SO rare - no longer worth it. So fleet carriers is firmly embedded in this discussion, and I sure I am not alone in that thinking. Furthermore, I sure I am not alone in the thinking that nerfs are not what is needed in this game at this stage. I love the game, but I am gonna call a Spade a Spade.
To be fair there were concerns voiced on the forums about the huge prices paid for some of the core mineable materials from when they were first in the game.
 
Having to 'find' a station paying 'peak' price, rather than tripping over so many with zero demand paying high, isn't actually 'nerfed' - all it is doing is along the lines of that we currently do, look for, and go to, a station offering the 'best' price. About the only change (which could be considered 'nerf') is that as demand lessens prices will fall, but being the game it is, it is equally likely that at another station/outpost none too distant demand will rise...
 
Having to 'find' a station paying 'peak' price, rather than tripping over so many with zero demand paying high, isn't actually 'nerfed' - all it is doing is along the lines of that we currently do, look for, and go to, a station offering the 'best' price. About the only change (which could be considered 'nerf') is that as demand lessens prices will fall, but being the game it is, it is equally likely that at another station/outpost none too distant demand will rise...
Seems to me it's more of a realism pass. If you've monitored the way the prices currently shift, seems to be connected to some arbitrary 12 hour tick that updates market state and provides price peaks that can suddenly bottom between checking inara, plotting course and arriving to sell your haul if you miss time it.

The new system will probably still create peaks with a steep attack on the tick, but a market driven decay.
 
We don't see in 2k or 4k resolutions.
I have not dug into it scientifically that much but I can clearly see that even the 5K+ could benefit from better resolution, and e.g. the HP Reverb offers better resolution (but a terrible FoV) and I tried the new 8K+ once which practically eliminates the SDE (better than the Index or Reverb - cannot comment on sharpness, details etc. because I literally only had the 8K+ on for about 15 seconds and they had a driver issue, it was a pre-production model).

However, there clearly is room for further improvement - if you would just try some VR headsets you'd see it for yourself...

In terms of giving you more of what you like to read:

 
Last edited:
The human retina has somewhere in the ballpark of 120-130 million photoreceptor cells, with the majority of the ~6 million cones clustered in the fovea which has maybe an 18 degree FOV. Since the eyeball moves and the screen generally doesn't follow it or have a variable resolution, you need a fairly enormous number of pixels to fill a wide angle view well enough to not be able to pick out individual pixels, and even more to remove the ability to perceive pixels at all.

Anything over sixty pixels per degree is effectively wasted, due to the pixels starting to blur together.
That's not waste, within reason, that's anti-aliasing. If I can distinguish individual pixels, the resolution is far too low for the distance I am from the screen.
 
Top Bottom