Valve Index

1440x1600 ay lamo

fuck off with the vr shit

>same resolution as Vive Pro
>not OLED
>$1000
Nope

Yeah. The 120hz is a big plus for me and while having higher resolution is better I really don't mind the resolution of even the windows headsets. Original vive had to much sde and pro is just unnecessarily expensive.

>1000 freedom dollars
Fucking dead on arrival

Really want to buy it.

But no way I'm gonna pay over 1000 yuro-bucks for this piece of shit.

>VR
people are still pretending this shit is relevant?

>a THOUSAND fucking dollars for a midrange VR headset
lmoa

seems like valve is deliberately trying to kill their VR division and be able to say "lol at least we tried"

Attached: 1547962015045.jpg (395x401, 59K)

Was seriously considering it since I figured it was going to be in the $400-500 price range, but $1000?!? lol fuck that.
I want to like VR but I've just got better places to spend that kind of cash (when you own a house there is always something that needs to be improved/replaced)

Literally the greatest invention ever made by mankind

the wheel?

Sell your house and buy a hut, then live in a VR mansion.

Not wireless is a downgrade since there are wireless kits for the HTC Vive and they are a huge step up.

You might be on to something user...

htc vive wireless kit is only for intel
it crashes on 90% of amd systems and htc will not be fixing it.

i expect valve will do better

I own a vive, amd system and a wireless adaptor

>1079€

Attached: Jasonbomb+rolled+a+random+image+posted+in+comment+3+at+_4a80881e72147c25bd762ad362c17b8c.jpg (399x286, 19K)

Has nothing on the implications of VR

>midrange VR headset
This is not midrange, it is the best model on the market save for $5000+ devices like the Varjo VR-1 or something. It is better, yet cheaper, than the latest flagship, Vive Pro

>$1000
I held off buying a Vive for that?

I'm glad HTC isn't the only one with high end hardware. The knuckles should have the spotlight. You can flip people off properly now.

Is that for both the HTC one and the third party? I don't know anyone who can afford a HTC and not Intel.

the third party one sucks dick. not worth the compromise

>there is a leader, the PSVR,
PSVR isn't shouldn't be compared to PCVR, in my humble opinion.

>they begged for him to stop

Attached: 215ft.jpg (1152x648, 89K)

I want one

Exactly

Attached: image008.jpg (496x648, 60K)

>no video presentation talking about all the new shit
>just a shit tier website
fuck off.

>no eye tracking for FOVeated rendering
WHAT THE FUCK????

>LCD panels
Can't wait for the comically poor contrast and black depth.
Anyone have any more info on the LCD panels being used?
I can't believe they went with LCD just to avoid black smear. TN/IPS problems are both infinitely worse than black smear. Going with LCD to avoid OLED issues is like driving over a cliff to avoid a fender bender.

the whiskers are kinda cute

>wanting to watch a mundane video presentation because you can't read

Attached: 1536754124478.jpg (607x607, 28K)

>midrange
Name one headset with better specs.

1440x1600 at 144hz is undeniably the king.

>LCD

Attached: 1554985460427.jpg (700x479, 42K)

On the plus side: more linux support!
On the negative: still too expensive for me even if I had a computer to support it and plenty of money. Not mature enough tech.

Id be fine with the £920 pricetag all in if it was either 2000x2000 pixels or had foveation.

Without knowing how much that rgb sub pixel arangement improves on the screen door im not going to pre order.

I guess the assumption could be made that its better than the vive pro, as it has more subpixels, higher refresh rate.

Was kind of hoping this was going to be comparable to the HP reverb in res and vive pro eye in features.

My worry is in 2020 we end up with an index pro that does 2000 x 2000 per eye.

i have the option of just buying headset only for like 450 though, as i already own a vive.

I have to admit, this kind of sucks for non VR or other non vive headset owners.

That RGB panel better be impressive.

Official announcement is likely tomorrow

>i have the option of just buying headset only for like 450 though
The headset is the least interesting part, as it's barely different from the existing vive pro. You'd be much better off just using the Index controllers with your vive.

144hz is experimental meaning they'll lower the resolution or color bit values to achieve that. Still, 120hz is good and has been needed for a while

Considering the current lineup of vr compatible games, I'm not sure why anyone would buy this unless you bleed money.

so what kinds of smash titles and shit can do with those?

3d porn? turns out real life is also 3d ...

Attached: 0bd8443f71.jpg (473x469, 130K)

I've been using a normal Vive for about half a year now and I've never felt like there's not enough games to keep me well entertained

They talk about the displays in the Tested hands-on review. The actual display model is not known, but it has more advantages over f.ex. the ones in Vive Pro or Oculus Quest than just black smear, such as:
1) Refresh rate up to 144Hz, which makes a big difference from 90/80Hz.
2) extremely low persistence, like an order of magnitude lower than existing models, resulting in less smeared motion.
3) 50% more subpixels due to RGB stripe layout.
4) RGB stripe layout also has way better fill ratio, practically eliminating screendoor effect.

Also, they said that while the black levels were a little bit higher than OLED, it's not a huge problem. He played Beat Saber which has plenty of black, and it "felt like Beat Saber", it didn't bother him even though he was used to OLED VR devices.

I actually dont mind the wands too much, i cant fucking stand the screen door on the vive though, its made many games unplayable long term.

I love Onward for example but you cant see shit past about 25m away.

Id buy the headset first, i just want to know how much better than the vive pro it is, and how much worse than the hp reverb.

Are valve going to put out a pro version in 2020 that does eye tracking and foveation and has a 2k x 2k screen.?

Norm from tested said it has perhipheral screen tearing in 144hz mode, its considered beta atm.

120hz is much much better than 90hz though, he compared it to the 90hz headsets feeling like you are groggy and the 120hz after having coffee and being alert and awake.

games are an issue, but as a vive owner its not the biggest issue, the biggest issue is the screen door effect.

>In addition, the fill-factor is three times better than OLED, greatly reducing “screen door” effect
Ok this is finally epic. We're pretty much at Gen 2 I think.

>RGB stripe layout also has way better fill ratio, practically eliminating screendoor effect.

Yeah i really need to see some clips on this shit, i guess its comparable to a 2000x2000 oled screen, but has less gpu overhead.

>Refresh rate up to 144Hz, which makes a big difference from 90/80Hz
>extremely low persistence, like an order of magnitude lower than existing models, resulting in less smeared motion.
These statements don't make sense because when lowering display persistence on an OLED going from even 60hz -> 144hz should make no difference for anything besides backlight flickering and I'd wager most people would not notice a different there when going from 90hz-144hz. The display persistence is a matter of how they tuned the backlight and not a property of the panel used. Not unless you start pushing refresh rates far exceeding 144hz and not lowering display persistence rather but relying upon the high refresh rate to display motion better. OLED panels have a distinct advantage in displaying motion in instantaneous pixel response time. TN and IPS are both a joke compared to OLED in this regard. TN is better than IPS but has abysmal contrast and black depth compared to IPS however IPS is also a joke in this regard. VA is superior and I'd wager a VA panel tuned specifically for VR use could have low enough response times to be acceptable but alas, no such panel exists.
>Also, they said that while the black levels were a little bit higher than OLED, it's not a huge problem
I find that hard to believe. TN and IPS black depth and contrast are abysmal. Certainly not acceptable. VA is the bare minimum.

They may be right about the subpixels and screendoor effect but this would be preferably mitigated with higher resolution displays and a better panel type.

all the info is scattered between small panels in different pages and they're not even detailed.

>I'd wager most people would not notice a different there when going from 90hz-144hz.
Nigger the difference between 60Hz and 144Hz on a normal screen is night and day, and between 100Hz and 144Hz is still noticeable. That's on a normal 24'' 1080p screen sitting two feet in front of me.
On an HMD taking up your entire field of view, I can bet everyone will notice the increase from 90 to even 120, let alone 144 (assuming they can sort out the "beta" issues and it's not just a hardware deficiency).

>Nigger the difference between 60Hz and 144Hz on a normal screen is night and day
It's not night and day actually its a few MS and neither is anywhere near close enough to display motion clearly. That's why lowering display persistence by flickering the backlight is used. A 60hz display single strobe can provide 1ms of motion blur, a value low enough that the vast majority of people would not be able to detect motion blur however there would be significant flicker hence why higher refresh rates are used. While some people experience side effects from flicker in upwards of 18,000hz, a good many are comfortable around 90hz.

>1k USD
>i have a Rift for 350$ and bought the last one in stock at my best buy
feels good, but man am i going to hate going full body tracking for vrchat

>not waiting for gen 2/3

but I need a VR kit by June.

Attached: 1546988717151.png (529x612, 37K)

>not inside-out

Attached: 1556324822462.png (395x599, 457K)

Just buy a Rift S if that's what you want. Inside out tracking is still inferior for now though.

>VR

Can't believe this is still a thing.

I also forgot to add that running at 144hz comes with a strict disadvantage in that it's going to require a far more powerful system to maintain a steady 144hz. The advantage of lowering display persistence is in that you can use a much, much, MUCH lower refresh rate while reaping the benefits of perfect motion clarity whereas you'd need 1000hz, 1000fps in order to equal the motion clarity of a properly tuned 60hz flickering backlight at 60fps.

You see in order to have the motion display fluidly without artifacts the framerate must match the refresh rate at pretty much all times. So now you're going to need to be able to do so at 144hz = 144fps locked. A 90hz display only needs 90 fps to achieve the exact same motion clarity as a 144hz display when using a flickering backlight to lower display persistence.

Advanced in what Mark Rehjon has coined as "Frame Rate Amplification Technologies" will eventually allow us to use HALF the required FPS to match the refresh rate. Oculus Rift already has a rudimentary version of this technology in Asynchronous Timeward where you can run 45fps at 90fps to achieve the required matched refresh rate of 90hz for perfect motion clarity. Eventually this technology will become a requirement as display persistence lowering techniques will fall out of favor to high refresh rate displays but we're a ways off. The fastest displays on the market available to consumers is a mere 240hz and we don't have the technology readily available to amplify framerates just yet.

tech illiterate poster from /x/ here, will a gtx 1060 be good enough for this thing?

they say a 970 is min spec
look up valve index on steam and run the "am i ready" thing

Me too. Wanted to upgrade for years now, but it feels like such a waste of money. For 500$ I get maybe 25% - absolute max 50% more performance which is completely ridiculous two generations later. I wouldn't even have a problem spending 1000-2000$ on a new graphics card if the performance increase would be worth it. But it's not.

>nabour

1060 is good enough for most VR but I'd be surprised if it can do max resolution and max refresh that Index supports.

alright, thanks anons.

$500 for the HMD, $280 if you want the knuckles controllers, $300 for the lighthouses ($150 each). If you already own Vive controllers and the lighthouses, you would only need $500 to upgrade the HMD. Alternatively, if you're new to VR, you could just buy the Vive controllers and lighthouses, then buy the valve HMD.
God this thread is full of poorfags.

Attached: file_0.png (720x960, 876K)

you should read up on this before making stupid judgments. They chose the new LCD for VR technology because it is better than OLED for VR, simple as that. These are not simple TV or computer monitor panels and they face different problems with VR.

>SteamOS
>Linux
I'm pumped.

I have such a boner for this. Luckily I already own a Vive. Might upgrade though when this comes out.

Why not just get the knuckles?

I will get the knuckles as soon as there is at least one game for it that I really want to play. I have pre-ordered the original Vive and I doubt I used it for more than 50 hours. I don't regret the purchase, but there is not enough content out there that I really like. Currently the only game I play is Beat Saber. I own about 20 games, most I haven't even finished. If Valve would have announced a single major franchise game with the Index I would pre-order everything. But currently I'm only thinking of maybe buying the HS for Spice and Wolf, if the game is fappable enough.

>Dual 1440 x 1600 LCDs
Standard
>80/90/120/144Hz
Good
>Stereo 960 x 960 pixel, global shutter, RGB (Bayer)

The finger tracking sounds promising, but it would only work with haptic feedback.
Good

I already know the problems they face
LCD is still fucking garbage for VR

>Free as in freedom VR

What a time to be alive.

Attached: 1556260277678.jpg (960x936, 61K)

I've been saving up my YangBucks for this kit. Just put the preorder in.

Have you seen boneworks? The controllers are the major improvement with this set.

Yup. Rocking Fedora30 kde on the desktop with silverblue on the lappy.

Im set.

I just let them talk in their retarded speech, it's so funny when they think they actually matter.

Boneworks better drop open source or it's curtains.

They could at least go the unity route and allow you to pay for source code access but if you can't modify the engine then fuck 'em.

>I find that hard to believe
Have you actually used an OLED VR headset? Because the "black" in my Rift is more like a murky green-ish tint with per-eye differences and random bright spots. You can't see this unless the scene is very dark, but you are most certainly not getting actual black (as in pixels turned off) and the uniformity issues suck. There's some shit you can change in the registry which fixes uniformity, but you still don't get actual blacks and instead everything (even bright scenes) get a magenta tint.

A good LCD panel shouldn't be too far behind on black levels compared to what I see in my Rift, simply because avoiding black smear means the pixels cannot actually turn off, which then introduces brightness uniformity issues at very low brightness levels.

Yeah, Boneworks looks great. The controllers are indeed a major improvement but I still think games are going to be baseline targeted at wands/Oculus Touch, so it'll probably be a while until their improved tracking is properly used.

>no eye tracking
Not buying it.

>A good LCD panel shouldn't be too far behind on black levels
The only LCD panels that have acceptable black levels are VA's and they're too slow for VR. TN and IPS have awful black depth. OLED has perfect black depth. If you're seeing anything else it's because the OLED panels they used are trash. Contrast on TN and IPS is shit. Also OLED's have near instantaneous CRT like pixel response time. TN is fast, no where near as fast as OLED but it has the worst blacks and contrast of all panel technologies as well as suffers from color and contrast shifts. IPS doesn't suffer from these color and contrast shifts but it's also slow, poor black depth and contrast.

OLED is the best technology available and the fact you have to use LCD just shows VR is no where near ready yet.

Vrsmash

Why bother?
Quest will beat everything so far and attract AAA devs

Attached: ign.png (1085x389, 415K)

>These statements don't make sense because when lowering display persistence on an OLED going from even 60hz -> 144hz should make no difference for anything besides backlight flickering and I'd wager most people would not notice a different there when going from 90hz-144hz.
Have you even tried VR before? It makes a HUGE difference. You cannot compare it to normal screens. The difference between 60Hz and 90 Hz in VR is night and day, 60 Hz is simply not enough to look realistic. I haven't tried 120 Hz but 90 Hz still had much room for improvement so I can't imagine it will be anything less than a big improvement.

> The display persistence is a matter of how they tuned the backlight and not a property of the panel used.
Up to a point, yes, but it depends on the display how low you are able to go. If you try to flash the screen as short as they do on the Index, with other panels like in the Rift or Vive, it wouldn't work.

Apples and oranges. The Quest is convenient but it's far too weak to run anything other than arcade-style shit

>The difference between 60Hz and 90 Hz in VR is night and day, 60 Hz is simply not enough to look realistic
My guess is you used a VR headset that was not low persistence that was 60hz like one of the old developer Rifts or some shitty smartphone cardboard VR and you used a low persistence display, like the Rift, that was 90hz and thus concluded the difference is the refresh rate. There is no night and day difference when lowering display persistence between 60 and 90hz provided the method achieves 1ms MPRT in both instances the motion blur from persistence will be literally the same.

>My guess is you used a VR headset that was not low persistence that was 60hz like one of the old developer Rifts or some shitty smartphone cardboard VR and you used a low persistence display, like the Rift, that was 90hz and thus concluded the difference is the refresh rate. There is no night and day difference when lowering display persistence between 60 and 90hz provided the method achieves 1ms MPRT in both instances the motion blur from persistence will be literally the same.
I have f.ex. used both DK2 and CV1 rift, both have low persistence of about 2ms, only difference is refresh rate, 75 Hz vs 90 Hz. And even in those 15 Hz there was definitely a difference.
It's not about motion blur. It's about motion smoothness. When you are moving your head, a lower refresh rate would make you miss out of a lot of intermediate angles during that movement, the image would just update from one angle to another angle so far apart that your brain knows that something is wrong. Not like in real life where the stream of vision is uninterrupted and everything feels smooth no matter how fast you move your head.

Provided they both had 2ms display persistence anything you saw had to do with the qualities of the panel and not the refresh rate. There is no difference in display persistence. 2ms is literally the measurement of it. What you're saying is 2ms is not 2ms.

Lighthouse tracking IS inside out.

You keep saying that the persistence is the only thing that matters but it is absolutely not true. You cannot see more intermediate angles during movement unless you increase the refresh rate.