Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Friday September 22 2017, @03:43PM   Printer-friendly
from the nauseatingly-fun dept.

The China-based VR company Pimax has launched a Kickstarter for what they call "8K" and "5K" VR headsets. The cheapest version of the "8K" headset is listed at $500 and the company has more than quadrupled its funding goal. The Pimax 8K has a 3840×2160 resolution per eye for a total resolution of 7680×2160 and 32:9 aspect ratio (an actual 8K resolution would be 7680×4320). The field of view (FOV) for the headset is 200°, and is similar in design to the StarVR headset which has an FOV of 210°. By comparison, the latest HTC Vive and Oculus Rift headsets have a 110° FOV.

While the headsets have a listed refresh rate of 90 Hz, Pimax claims that its "Brainwarp" software technique can effectively double the perceived frame rate:

You may be asking yourself how a VR-ready gaming computer could possibly drive these sorts of graphically demanding resolutions. Pimax's answer is a software technique they call 'Brainwarp', which renders a 4K image only on a single display at time, doing it 150/180 times per second. Pimax says users "perceive a complete 8K at 150/180 Hz with high frame rate," and that it "boosts refresh rate, reduces latency and decreases GPU pressure for Pimax 8K."

Pimax showed off its headset prototypes at CES in January. The company is also developing modular accessories for its headsets.

Just 4.73 times more pixels to reach the "ideal" resolution.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @09:22PM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @09:22PM (#571827)

    what the hell is the "real 8K" comment supposed to mean?
    Are we completely giving up on the meaning of "kilo"?
    8K = 8000.
    2K = 2000. not 1920.

    use 4HD if you really want to have a cool looking number letter thing.
    or use 16HD.

    Actually, if you want to get picky -- and you clearly do:
    8K = 8192 and 8k = 8000
    7.5K = 7680 and 7.68k is 7680
    4K = 4096 and 4k = 4000
    3.75K = 3840 and 3.84k is 3840

    Cinematic 4K lives up to the label as the horizontal resolution. (Why the switch to horizontal when everything to this point as been vertical?)

    What they're selling you at Sprawl-Mart as 4K (small print: "UHD") is not 4K, it's nono-HD -- 3HD, using your label suggestion, not 4HD. (Remember, folks: what we all know and love as HD is "full HD" while plain old HD is only 1280x720. 3840/1280=3 and 2160/720=3, so UHD is 9xHD.)

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @02:57AM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @02:57AM (#571963)

    It's k and ki or K and Ki(B?)

    It's Kilo versus Kibi, the former have been implied as base 2 since computer began almost, with the latter being a marketing ploy by hard disk manufacturers in order to keep using MB/GB etc while actually giving you 1000/1024's the space you would have previously had under old marketing and technical nomenclature.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @12:33PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @12:33PM (#572086)

      It's Kilo versus Kibi, the former have been implied as base 2 since computer began almost

      Kilo being quite explicit in it's meaning of one thousand (in numbers: 1000) since decimal system began almost. I'll guess you grew up on freedom units?

    • (Score: 2) by rleigh on Saturday September 23 2017, @03:46PM (2 children)

      by rleigh (4887) on Saturday September 23 2017, @03:46PM (#572120) Homepage

      K is Kelvin (temperature)
      k is kilo (1000)
      Ki is kibi (1024)

      Use the appropriate prefix for the job. The literal meaning of "kilo" is "one thousand". If you mean 1000 use k, and if you mean 1024 use Ki. Simple.

      • (Score: 2) by Bot on Saturday September 23 2017, @07:37PM (1 child)

        by Bot (3902) on Saturday September 23 2017, @07:37PM (#572155) Journal

        Simple and wrong. The informal definition of kilo meatbags instinctively used before a marketing droid decided to make their hd look bigger was "kilo is base^n where n is the lowest exponent that yields a result nearest to 10^3". Used for decades by scientists and gaming kids, without incidents.

        If the international system has been unable to formalize the historical use of kilo and megabyte at the expense of usability, that does not entail the historical use was wrong, it means the international system is full of useless bureaucrats who bent over and made tons of already written documents confusing, only to please a bunch of idiot managers who pushed base 10 measures for data.

        Now the damage is difficult to revert, one has to specify k or ki, but try uttering kibi among greybeards.

        PS: n00b

        --
        Account abandoned.
        • (Score: 2) by rleigh on Saturday September 23 2017, @10:25PM

          by rleigh (4887) on Saturday September 23 2017, @10:25PM (#572180) Homepage

          No, it's not wrong. K (kelvin) and k (kilo) have long been standardised as SI units. Ki (kibi) by the IEC (ISO).

          The only problem here is that computing people (k) which has been long establised to mean 1000, and then used it to mean something completely different (1024) which was "convenient" but insane because it ignored established practice in every other field.

          All these units *are* standardised. The historical bad practice in computing needs to end, and use the units as standardised.