SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @04:41PM (1 child)
It just seems like the world doesn't really need this; am I getting old?
(Score: 3, Touché) by jcross on Friday September 22 2017, @05:30PM
Yes, it's clearly for porn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @06:20PM (1 child)
Most can't handle the real reality in front of them. Do we need this fake reality? Let's fix the real one first.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday September 22 2017, @08:03PM
Let me flip that on u. We can't handle the real reality, so we should train in the fake reality. Or live in fake reality for eternity.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @08:39PM (8 children)
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.
whatever.
but please don't give in to the marketters misusage of "K".
please.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Friday September 22 2017, @08:47PM (1 child)
Cinematic 4K = 4096 × 2160. The 8K equivalent would be 8192 × 4320.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @03:01AM
That is sure what it sounds like to me.
What is old is new again.
Oh wait, I'm still running interlaced hardware in my house. Hell, I bet the courthouse where you'd overturn this patent still has a TV in the basement or somewhere you could use for an example :)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @09:22PM (5 children)
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)
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
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)
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)
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
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.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @03:27PM
The specs had my interest piqued. But holy fuck, that thing is huge! Anyone remember that old meme when Xbox controllers entered the market? HUEG! Thar she blows! Etc...
If they're using COTS hardware, I don't see them realistically improving on size, let's hope they can minimize the weight at least.
(Score: 2) by rob_on_earth on Tuesday September 26 2017, @07:47AM
I have been working with an HTC Vive and it only takes a few days for you to start seeing the pixels and the interlace lines. Once you have see them you cannot un-see them.
If they can truly keep the 90fps then this could be real improvement, but anything less and the lag gives me a headache, and I would guess a large number of people.
I want to see what the new cheap Hololens can do. Is it really as clear as all the demos show? Do virtual objects stick enough to real real world areas so that the affect is unnoticeable?
What is the difference between the two generations and why is it so cheap?