• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Absolutely immersive VR isn’t right around the corner, AMD says in new white paper

Gregster

Gregster

Gregster

Caporegime
Joined
24 Sep 2008
Posts
38,284
Location
Essex innit!
With computers and graphics cards purpose-built by AMD for VR applications already in development, the White Paper on Immersive VR instead focuses on the methods of thinking and planning that will lead to more sophisticated development. Rather than dealing exclusively in the resolution, headsets need to be thought about in terms of field of view degrees, as well as pixels per degree, or PPD. In addition to the center of our vision where we focus both eyes, modern VR needs to take the full range of our peripheral vision into account.
In addition to reconsidering how we view and measure displays, the resolution also has to be much higher than any that we have access to now. The AMD white paper explains that the human visual system is incredibly detailed and sophisticated, and accurately reproducing graphics at the quality required to fully harness that would require a 116 megapixel display, 29 times the resolution of current 4K monitors.


Read more: http://www.digitaltrends.com/comput...er-amd-says-in-new-white-paper/#ixzz3inflrOgf
Follow us: @digitaltrends on Twitter | digitaltrendsftw on Facebook
Click to expand...

AMD pick up on a few points that I have read from users who have used VR and something that makes sense. The display and latency are the biggest things that worry me and I am saddened to say that I have not tried VR since the early 90's but something I am excited for.

I am interested in what those who have tried the latest VR headsets have to say on this and what their thoughts are.
 
I think VR will primarily be used in conjunction with Low Abstraction API's. Since latency is key as has been stated.

I think it is why AMD's Liquid VR is built on top of Mantle. to keep latency as low as possible.
 
VR doesn't hugely interest me just yet, I find trackIR to be fine for now, particularly given the kind of games (arma) that i play require a huge number of keys and periferals to play the way I like, being able ot see my desk is kinda handy.

I'm happy to wait for it to reach the right stage.
 
Gotta be 20 years away minimum for that kind of detail suitable for the human eye. You never know they may figure out a way to just bypass the eye and stream to the visual cortex one way or another.

In the meantime we have graphical quality akin to what we have on our monitors, which isn't so bad is it?
 
That is all well and good, but it's like saying decent graphics are a long way off because we only use 1080p monitors, and even 4k is not good enough. We have what we have and people are being wowed at the HTC vive, they say yes you can see pixels but after 10 mins your brain filters it out and you don't notice unless you specifically look for it. Kind of like when you watch an old film that is not in HD, you don't sit there worrying about the picture quality all the way through it.
 
Mauller said:
I think VR will primarily be used in conjunction with Low Abstraction API's. Since latency is key as has been stated.

I think it is why AMD's Liquid VR is built on top of Mantle. to keep latency as low as possible.
Click to expand...

If LiquidVR is built on mantle, and GameworksVR is a set of tools for DX12, which do we think is going to be more widely adopted?
 
andybird123 said:
If LiquidVR is built on mantle, and GameworksVR is a set of tools for DX12, which do we think is going to be more widely adopted?
Click to expand...

Except GameworksVR is not multivendor OR Directx12. It only supports Nvidia cards and DX11.

But both could be ported to DX12 in the end. And LiquidVR could be ported sooner than later since it is already coded for a low abstraction API.
 
Mauller said:
Except GameworksVR is not multivendor OR Directx12. It only supports Nvidia cards and DX11.

But both could be ported to DX12 in the end. And LiquidVR could be ported sooner than later since it is already coded for a low abstraction API.
Click to expand...

how is mantle multi vendor?

and yes the beta SDK was just released for DX11, with this in the notes
We will be bringing support for these features to OpenGL, D3D12, and Vulkan.
Click to expand...
 
One of the amd guys at the fury unveiling said something like vr would need a gpu capable of a petaflop of performance to get good framerates for vr.
 
Mauller said:
Except GameworksVR is not multivendor OR Directx12. It only supports Nvidia cards and DX11.

But both could be ported to DX12 in the end. And LiquidVR could be ported sooner than later since it is already coded for a low abstraction API.
Click to expand...


GameworksVR exists for DX11 because that is what currently exists. GamesworksVR will use DX12 very soon.

Whether Gamesworks goes multivendor will depend on a lot of factors, but there is nothing stopping it.
 
Gregster said:
AMD pick up on a few points that I have read from users who have used VR and something that makes sense. The display and latency are the biggest things that worry me and I am saddened to say that I have not tried VR since the early 90's but something I am excited for.

I am interested in what those who have tried the latest VR headsets have to say on this and what their thoughts are.
Click to expand...



From the problm is that although the human vision is only about 1-2Mp per eye (so standard 1080p) the way humans view the world is by raoidly shifting the high resolution central retina across the image looking for features of interestlike faces, cars, edges, dogs. An imae is then formed by combinging multiple subimages across the field of view into a coherent representation of the word.

although there is eye tracking technology it doesn't really helpbecause you still need the screen to be able to offer that high resolution over msot of the fieldof view.


But then I think there is just a lot of work to do with graphcis in general before VR becomes incredibly realistic.
 
For anyone interested you should check out YouTube for vsauce, What is the resolution of the eye. Remember watching it ages ago really interesting especially now with all the VR talk.
 
KelDG said:
For anyone interested you should check out YouTube for vsauce, What is the resolution of the eye. Remember watching it ages ago really interesting especially now with all the VR talk.
Click to expand...

Been said its around 8k so 16k is needed per eye to be photo realistic. :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom