Oculus Rift

I think I'm going to do this TBH. I'm certainly in the first batch for the Vive so if I can turn a 50% profit on the Rift just by flipping it I'll do so.
 
The amount of eBay threads I see on here for issues with selling hardware, I'll just keep it. Would prefer to not have an issue with getting paid, then have an issue of not being able to buy another one for how ever long.
 
Quite glad I'm in a later batch - June as I get to see if how the first few months of Vive vs Oculus play out before I decide. Id be over the moon if I was going to be receiving one in a few days though.
 
chef-borjan said:
Honestly, I'm going to keep it in the unopened box and do just this. Going to wait until I have it actually in my hands though before listing it, don't feel right getting others to sign up for a pre-order haha.

Just need to make sure I take all the precautions against scummy buyers, I've sold a lot on eBay but high value items always stress me out!
Click to expand...

I would do collection only otherwise the buyer could just say you sent then a box that weighs the same, no way you can prove otherwise, scammers, scammers everywhere :D
 
Pretty confident I wil be able to play Alien Isolation on the CV1 now. 1440p maxed with AA the GTX 980Ti averages around 200fps. If 1440p is more pixels than the CV1 then 90fps+ should be do-able

Isolation pic
dHbN5xc.png
 
Guest2 said:
Pretty confident I wil be able to play Alien Isolation on the CV1 now. 1440p maxed with AA the GTX 980Ti averages around 200fps. If 1440p is more pixels than the CV1 then 90fps+ should be do-able

Isolation pic
dHbN5xc.png
Click to expand...

it is and it isn't, VR apps over-render to be able to do the warping thats needed to account for the lenses
I can't off the top of my head remember what the render target is for the CV1

multi-resolution-rendering would cut this down but not read of anyone actually implementing it yet

Edit; don't quote me on this but a quick Google suggests the render target for CV1 is 2830x1566
 
Last edited:
I remember reading an article on the warping too actually but it was some time ago. That sounds about right actually (the res required)

Thats 1.2x 1440p so going on that Isolation should be playable at 166fps. Obviously sometimes it will dip to say 100fps at the lowest. Taking that into account the lowest on the CV1 would be 83fps causing judder. Thats presuming the lowest is actually 100 (I played for 10 mins and it didnt go below 160fps - remove some of the stuff like AA and it should be fine.

God knows how those with lesser cards than a clocked 980Ti will cope. I guess not with standard game, just ones that look a bit cack that a built for VR.

Playstation 4 VR games will have to look like Nintendo Wii games to be playable at 120fps/hz!
 
PSVR will looklike absolute toenail in that case! Ultra low or something

I think its crap how settings are removed. Surely those who have super high end rigs like SLI 980Ti or Tri/ Quad SLI will be capable of having all settings on still - so why remove then? My only guess is that everyone else would be upset at not being able to max all settings so would be more annoyed
 
Without GPU-per-eye multicard settings implemented, traditional SLI/Crossfire will add a load of latency, so not sure it would really help

Both Nvidia and AMD have solutions for it, but no one has implemented yet
 
I just had to cancel my Oculus, a bit gutted as I think it was in the first batch (28th March)

Just had a shocker of a car insurance increase, and happen to be going away for the first half of April anyway, so wouldn't even have been around to use/sell it on.
 
VincentHanna said:
I just had to cancel my Oculus, a bit gutted as I think it was in the first batch (28th March)

Just had a shocker of a car insurance increase, and happen to be going away for the first half of April anyway, so wouldn't even have been around to use/sell it on.
Click to expand...

You shouldnt have. I would have had it off you or anyone else would have too I expect.
 
Oculus call it asynchronous timewarp (AST) but warn that the artefacts it produce as a side-effect can make the user feel nausea.

However, I believe Sony's implementation also aims to reduce these artefacts - by means which escape me as I've lost my developer conference notes on this. EDIT: the breakout box handles processing for this task, that's I remember.

Interestingly (if this is still correct), I believe that the Vive has not settled on a way of implementing reprojection/AST, as they are more focussed on frame optimisations to maintain high FPS, as well as a different kind of prediction method which I am unfamiliar with.

EDIT:
u/Radix_88 said:
During the presentation Alex Vlachos talked about predicting the position and orientation of the user based on current movement and synchronizing the prediction with the presenting the frame.

A rule of thumb for prediction is that the shorter time you have to predict the closer to correct your prediction will be. Oculus also does prediction but in tandem with time warp. With time warp Oculus has correct sensor data about 5ms before the frame is presented versus Valve's about 18ms.

But Valves approach, though inherently less accurate, is not without its merits. Without time warp many of pixels around the fringe of the FOV becomes unnecessary and doesn't need to bee rendered. This allows Valve to use a stencil mesh that excludes these from the pipeline, effectively reducing the number of pixels that needs to be rendered on the Vive with 17% resulting in a huge performance gain. With time warp, these pixels might be put in view of the user and so they have to be rendered.

It's a trade of between correct and efficient, the jury is out on which approach is the better.
Click to expand...

Taken from r/oculus - Valve Opts out of time warp
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom