What's new
Carbonite

Welcome to Carbonite! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

VR chat

1ofmanyof1

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
39
Reaction score
13
Points
185
Age
34
Out of interest, aside from the latency, were there any noticeable visual artifacts/compression artifacts?
I also assume there is a bit of a performance hit because the PC has to take the stream, compress it, send it to the headset, which then decompresses it. Maybe not an issue for easy to run games, but might make a difference for some (and unlike monitor gaming 1 or 2 fps can make the difference between native 90hz or 45hz with ASW (does rift even have ASW... wonder how it works with the link).
Visually like EDU1997 said it was kind of hard to compare. Latency is definitely the primary factor here. I however didn't see any visual artifacts.

Its going to come down to managing your use cases. I will will be using it standalone for fast paced games (rhythm and fast paced shooters) and on link for simulation and platformers (elite dangerous, project cars, moss etc) where latency isn't going to be a deal breaker (for me at least).

I see some reviewers have shown footage of them playing Half Life Alex on the Q2 link but with no further details. There are a few videos of people playing Alex on the Q1 with link and on 5G. Varying degrees of success especially with 5G but most seemed relatively satisfied with the experience...and more importantly had fun.
 

AndyPants

Lurker
Rating - 100%
26   0   0
Joined
Sep 13, 2016
Messages
528
Reaction score
219
Points
1,155
Visually like EDU1997 said it was kind of hard to compare. Latency is definitely the primary factor here. I however didn't see any visual artifacts.

Its going to come down to managing your use cases. I will will be using it standalone for fast paced games (rhythm and fast paced shooters) and on link for simulation and platformers (elite dangerous, project cars, moss etc) where latency isn't going to be a deal breaker (for me at least).

I see some reviewers have shown footage of them playing Half Life Alex on the Q2 link but with no further details. There are a few videos of people playing Alex on the Q1 with link and on 5G. Varying degrees of success especially with 5G but most seemed relatively satisfied with the experience...and more importantly had fun.
Interestingly - Carmack said Wifi 6 won't actually make much difference in latency - he says it's the wifi data congestion levels that causes the latency not really the frequency standard - so I wonder what special sauce the Vive wireless adapter then actually implements to get good latency

40seconds in
 

1ofmanyof1

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
39
Reaction score
13
Points
185
Age
34
I had a quest and recently replaced it with a rift s. I wouldn't say that there is much, if any compression artifacting with the link, and comparing the performance of the two devices is very difficult to do as they have different resolution displays.

My biggest gripe (other than terrible comfort) with the quest 1 and link had to be latency - visuals and controller tracking. It made it next to impossible to play higher difficulty beat saber maps.
Which link cable were you using for interest sake? I was using a 3rd party cable and have always wondered about its impact since reviews from the likes of Tomshardware showed only slight latency differences with main concerns being refresh rate over latency...
Oculus Link Tested: Awesome, But Don’t Sell Your Rift Yet
 

Montezuma

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Sep 10, 2018
Messages
643
Reaction score
256
Points
1,085
Age
38
That's pretty much the only negative review I've found (won't link to all of them but there are quite a few google will find for you). All the others are moderately to highly positive. It seems to me like the arstechnica reviewer has a real beef with the whole facebook integration and privacy issue, which is not to say that it shouldn't be an issue and one should just ignore it, but on a purely technical level the headset appears to be pretty decent.

For my part though I'll wait to see what the upcoming (from what I gather) improvements to the link will bring in terms of latency etc.

So far my Odyssey+ has served me very well!

Seems like I'll be looking elsewhere when I'm ready to upgrade from the Rift S (Rift line is being discontinued):
 

1ofmanyof1

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
39
Reaction score
13
Points
185
Age
34
Interestingly - Carmack said Wifi 6 won't actually make much difference in latency - he says it's the wifi data congestion levels that causes the latency not really the frequency standard - so I wonder what special sauce the Vive wireless adapter then actually implements to get good latency

40seconds in
Its the HTC special sauce. They have a part
 

1ofmanyof1

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
39
Reaction score
13
Points
185
Age
34
*have a partnership with intel for the
Its the HTC special sauce. They have a part
*They have a partnership with Intel for their proprietary WiGig tech that transmits between PC (via a PCIe card) directly to the headset at 60Ghz
 

ENDU1997

VIP
VIP Supporter
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Jul 18, 2017
Messages
130
Reaction score
61
Points
1,235
Age
23
Location
Durban

AndyPants

Lurker
Rating - 100%
26   0   0
Joined
Sep 13, 2016
Messages
528
Reaction score
219
Points
1,155
*have a partnership with intel for the

*They have a partnership with Intel for their proprietary WiGig tech that transmits between PC (via a PCIe card) directly to the headset at 60Ghz
The XR2 supports WiGig 60GHz 802.11ay so I don't see why the same can not be done for Quest 2
 

BARGUILD

Well-Known member
Rating - 100%
57   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2016
Messages
1,381
Reaction score
196
Points
1,555
Location
Randburg, Johannesburg
Haven't actually read any of the reviews yet. Been a bit busy. Wasn't planning on getting another Oculus headset (was going to go full Index or maybe the G2), but now that I see Ubisoft is working on a Splinter Cell VR exclusive to Oculus (don't much care for Ass Creed VR) I am likely to try get a Quest as a secondary device.

My OG Rift is seriously starting to feel long in the tooth now, so seriously need something. What do you suggest? Do you think I find a second hand Rift S (just for Splinter Cell basically) or do I get a Quest 2? Still going to get an Index or maybe a G2 regardless, but as secondary what do you guys feel would be better? Rift S or Q2?
 

Montezuma

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Sep 10, 2018
Messages
643
Reaction score
256
Points
1,085
Age
38
Haven't actually read any of the reviews yet. Been a bit busy. Wasn't planning on getting another Oculus headset (was going to go full Index or maybe the G2), but now that I see Ubisoft is working on a Splinter Cell VR exclusive to Oculus (don't much care for Ass Creed VR) I am likely to try get a Quest as a secondary device.

My OG Rift is seriously starting to feel long in the tooth now, so seriously need something. What do you suggest? Do you think I find a second hand Rift S (just for Splinter Cell basically) or do I get a Quest 2? Still going to get an Index or maybe a G2 regardless, but as secondary what do you guys feel would be better? Rift S or Q2?


My thoughts would be that, since you're already going to be getting and Index or G2, getting a Rift S would be superfluous. Most Oculus exclusives should work just fine through Revive anyway but for the few that don't I would suspect the Q2 would be just fine. Doesn't make sense to me to have two tethered headsets unless it's for 2 or more PCs that people can use simultaneously.
 

BARGUILD

Well-Known member
Rating - 100%
57   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2016
Messages
1,381
Reaction score
196
Points
1,555
Location
Randburg, Johannesburg
My thoughts would be that, since you're already going to be getting and Index or G2, getting a Rift S would be superfluous. Most Oculus exclusives should work just fine through Revive anyway but for the few that don't I would suspect the Q2 would be just fine. Doesn't make sense to me to have two tethered headsets unless it's for 2 or more PCs that people can use simultaneously.

And I am guessing if I ever wanted to jam some multiplayer with mates or something I could just Link cable that thing and it should be fine?
 

Montezuma

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Sep 10, 2018
Messages
643
Reaction score
256
Points
1,085
Age
38
And I am guessing if I ever wanted to jam some multiplayer with mates or something I could just Link cable that thing and it should be fine?

Do you mean on the same PC simultaneously? I don't know if that's possible, maybe, but I suspect there would be some hoops to jump and performance wouldn't be great (not to mention you would need to run 2 separate instances of the same game, which probably means two accounts and two purchases of the game).

If you mean on 2 separate PCs, yeah, don't see why not.
 

BARGUILD

Well-Known member
Rating - 100%
57   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2016
Messages
1,381
Reaction score
196
Points
1,555
Location
Randburg, Johannesburg
Do you mean on the same PC simultaneously? I don't know if that's possible, maybe, but I suspect there would be some hoops to jump and performance wouldn't be great (not to mention you would need to run 2 separate instances of the same game, which probably means two accounts and two purchases of the game).

If you mean on 2 separate PCs, yeah, don't see why not.

On two PCs lol XD, yeah. I might even keep the OG Rift. Can do some solid local multiplayer Echo Arena which would be dope I rate.
 

Qui_Illustrati

VIP
VIP Supporter
Rating - 100%
186   0   0
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
2,403
Reaction score
1,376
Points
3,915
Location
Cape Town
I'm hoping the new Quest will be able to eventually be tethered to the PS5/Series X :)

I'm calling it - it's going to happen!
 
Last edited:

Evacol

Member
Rating - 100%
17   0   0
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Messages
416
Reaction score
46
Points
635
Age
27
Haven't actually read any of the reviews yet. Been a bit busy. Wasn't planning on getting another Oculus headset (was going to go full Index or maybe the G2), but now that I see Ubisoft is working on a Splinter Cell VR exclusive to Oculus (don't much care for Ass Creed VR) I am likely to try get a Quest as a secondary device.

My OG Rift is seriously starting to feel long in the tooth now, so seriously need something. What do you suggest? Do you think I find a second hand Rift S (just for Splinter Cell basically) or do I get a Quest 2? Still going to get an Index or maybe a G2 regardless, but as secondary what do you guys feel would be better? Rift S or Q2?

Are you going to be using it as a stand alone device or planning to use it tethered to PC? If you never plan on using it as a standalone then go Rift S
 

BARGUILD

Well-Known member
Rating - 100%
57   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2016
Messages
1,381
Reaction score
196
Points
1,555
Location
Randburg, Johannesburg
Are you going to be using it as a stand alone device or planning to use it tethered to PC? If you never plan on using it as a standalone then go Rift S

Well, I plan on getting a G2 or Index anyway as my PC tethered device. The Oculus device will be purely so I can play the Oculus exclusives. I jam BeatSaber quite a lot as well so maybe the Q2 as a supplementary headset for travelling Beat Saber is the way to go.
 

Qui_Illustrati

VIP
VIP Supporter
Rating - 100%
186   0   0
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
2,403
Reaction score
1,376
Points
3,915
Location
Cape Town
Rift S is a deprecated product. Makes no sense going that route considering Quest 2 pricing and features. No updates for Rift/S in the pipeline and it will just fall further and further in to obscurity at a very rapid pace from here on out I reckon.
 

1ofmanyof1

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
39
Reaction score
13
Points
185
Age
34
Haven't actually read any of the reviews yet. Been a bit busy. Wasn't planning on getting another Oculus headset (was going to go full Index or maybe the G2), but now that I see Ubisoft is working on a Splinter Cell VR exclusive to Oculus (don't much care for Ass Creed VR) I am likely to try get a Quest as a secondary device.

My OG Rift is seriously starting to feel long in the tooth now, so seriously need something. What do you suggest? Do you think I find a second hand Rift S (just for Splinter Cell basically) or do I get a Quest 2? Still going to get an Index or maybe a G2 regardless, but as secondary what do you guys feel would be better? Rift S or Q2?
Go Q2.

People give the Q2 issues because it only has 3 IPD settings. The rift S had none (only software IPD adjustment), that thing made me extremely nauseous.

Like Qui said the Rift S is dead. In the life of the quest (which isn't over yet) it saw hand tracking and link added. For the Q2 they will be enabling 90 Hz beta by launch (rift S had 80 Hz) and John Carmack mentioning the devices panel has the potential to output 120 Hz (though I doubt they will push anywhere that high due to power efficiency). But who knows what they can still get out of the device. Just like a console, the best it has to offer is still to be found as long as it is supported and developers keep pushing the hardware. They won't be doing that for the Rift S (as was seen with hand tracking).

Edit: We don't know the exact FOV of the Q2 yet but Tyriel Wood noted it was the same as the Q1. Based on MRTV's "Complete FOV Comparison" video that puts it at 92/116 degrees vs 86/110 degrees on the Rift S. This will obviously be dependent on your IPD position and whether you wear glasses.
 
Last edited:

Montezuma

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Sep 10, 2018
Messages
643
Reaction score
256
Points
1,085
Age
38
Something to keep in mind about Quest with Link is that there is a performance overhead (not sure if CPU/GPU or both) because of the need to compress the visuals and then transmit down USB.

 

Qui_Illustrati

VIP
VIP Supporter
Rating - 100%
186   0   0
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
2,403
Reaction score
1,376
Points
3,915
Location
Cape Town
Something to keep in mind about Quest with Link is that there is a performance overhead (not sure if CPU/GPU or both) because of the need to compress the visuals and then transmit down USB.

I'd say wait for the Quest 2 reviews on Link improvements. There are bound to be improvements on release and in the pipeline. Not to mention the plethora of improvements new gen GPU's offer when it comes to having less CPU dependence etc as well as better wifi standards.
Having played many AAA VR titles on Quest link, performance overhead was not a concern ever.
Each to their own though, the future of VR is certainly not in the antiquated tethered experience of the Vive/Reverb/Rift/Pimax/Index types.
It is indeed an evolving technology and the cabled experience is not going to be a part of that evolution I'm certain.
Rumor even has it the best production VR headset, Index, is on track to going cable free.
It's inevitable.
 

1ofmanyof1

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
39
Reaction score
13
Points
185
Age
34
Something to keep in mind about Quest with Link is that there is a performance overhead (not sure if CPU/GPU or both) because of the need to compress the visuals and then transmit down USB.

You can't really compare VR headsets using those values, it even says so in the disclaimer he reads (1:24- 1:59) for the benchmark software. Adjustment for variation in headset resolution is not made.

I took the values from his benchmarks and normalized the frame rates relative to the total pixels (not exactly scientific but neither was the data). If we then look at it we see the Rift S actually has a lower normalized frame rate compared to the quest. The rift was after all pushing 62% of the pixels the quest had to. Still very interesting results in the video, it seems the Vive and Valve headsets are less hardware intensive.

P-XP-YPixelsFramesEffective Resolution*Normalised Framerate
G2
2196​
2152​
4725792​
27​
100%​
27.00​
G2 (50%)
1552​
1520​
2359040​
49.76​
50%​
24.84​
Quest
2064​
2272​
4689408​
24.7​
99%​
24.51​
Vive Pro
2016​
2240​
4515840​
34.84​
96%​
33.29​
Valve Index
2016​
2240​
4515840​
35.39​
96%​
33.82​
Rift S
1648​
1776​
2926848​
37.55​
62%​
23.26​
Rift CV1
1344​
1600​
2150400​
46.11​
46%​
20.98​
Odyssey
1444​
1804​
2604976​
51.84​
55%​
28.58​
HTC-Vive
1512​
1680​
2540160​
56.15​
54%​
30.18​
*Relative to G2
 

jaxx

Cannon Fodder
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
111
Reaction score
25
Points
1,245
That's pretty much the only negative review I've found (won't link to all of them but there are quite a few google will find for you). All the others are moderately to highly positive. It seems to me like the arstechnica reviewer has a real beef with the whole facebook integration and privacy issue, which is not to say that it shouldn't be an issue and one should just ignore it, but on a purely technical level the headset appears to be pretty decent.

For my part though I'll wait to see what the upcoming (from what I gather) improvements to the link will bring in terms of latency etc.

So far my Odyssey+ has served me very well!

I hear you, but I think my concern is the move away from PCVR.
I use VR for sim titles, and was looking forward to ASW2.0, eye tracking, foveated rendering etc. I don't see these features being too much in demand from the new mobile VR titles. Effectively I see the Oculus turning into a mobile gaming platform, when I'm interested in higher realism PC gaming.

Dont get me wrong - I think it will be great for anyone wanting to get into VR cheaply, but I have a feeling that's where it ends.

It is also not helping that FB has been up to some questionable practices in the VR space recently:
 

Qui_Illustrati

VIP
VIP Supporter
Rating - 100%
186   0   0
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
2,403
Reaction score
1,376
Points
3,915
Location
Cape Town
I hear you, but I think my concern is the move away from PCVR.
I use VR for sim titles, and was looking forward to ASW2.0, eye tracking, foveated rendering etc. I don't see these features being too much in demand from the new mobile VR titles. Effectively I see the Oculus turning into a mobile gaming platform, when I'm interested in higher realism PC gaming.

Dont get me wrong - I think it will be great for anyone wanting to get into VR cheaply, but I have a feeling that's where it ends.

It is also not helping that FB has been up to some questionable practices in the VR space recently:
What are you on about? Are your opinions actually based on experience at all?
Quest is perfectly capable of PCVR - the Quest 2 would undoubtedly be even more so.
What questionable practices exactly have FB been up to in the VR space?
Strangely they are making VR even more mainstream and knocking down barriers for entry.
So what if you need a FB account to use it. Most folks log in to all sorts of other places with their FB accounts sans a thought in the world. Also, privacy is overrated. I couldn't give 2 shits my Oculus sending telemetry data on my VR porn collection and which I watch more than the rest or any other sort of data come to think of it. You walk around all day every day with a device that sends and receives all sorts of behind-the-scenes data without a care in the world anyway.
 

jaxx

Cannon Fodder
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
111
Reaction score
25
Points
1,245
What are you on about? Are your opinions actually based on experience at all?
Quest is perfectly capable of PCVR - the Quest 2 would undoubtedly be even more so.
What questionable practices exactly have FB been up to in the VR space?
Strangely they are making VR even more mainstream and knocking down barriers for entry.
So what if you need a FB account to use it. Most folks log in to all sorts of other places with their FB accounts sans a thought in the world. Also, privacy is overrated. I couldn't give 2 shits my Oculus sending telemetry data on my VR porn collection and which I watch more than the rest or any other sort of data come to think of it. You walk around all day every day with a device that sends and receives all sorts of behind-the-scenes data without a care in the world anyway.

I'm on about the fact that the needs of PCVR differs from standalone VR, and Facebook is clearly focusing on mobile VR.
 

1ofmanyof1

Junior Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
39
Reaction score
13
Points
185
Age
34
I hear you, but I think my concern is the move away from PCVR.
I use VR for sim titles, and was looking forward to ASW2.0, eye tracking, foveated rendering etc. I don't see these features being too much in demand from the new mobile VR titles. Effectively I see the Oculus turning into a mobile gaming platform, when I'm interested in higher realism PC gaming.

Dont get me wrong - I think it will be great for anyone wanting to get into VR cheaply, but I have a feeling that's where it ends.

It is also not helping that FB has been up to some questionable practices in the VR space recently:
Agreed. Was also looking forward to some advancements, was really hoping for a 5G chipset.

The problem is that although the PC gaming industry is big money a look at steam user hardware shows that just under 10% of users have hardware sufficient for a good VR experience. And of those who have the hardware, as I've seen with my friends , just don't care enough about VR.

Step 1 is going to be to get it into the hands of the masses. From there the other companies can try and lure the then larger user base into more advanced and niche avenues.

As for the privacy issues lets keep this a tech discussion. There are other threads for bashing Facebook
 

Qui_Illustrati

VIP
VIP Supporter
Rating - 100%
186   0   0
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
2,403
Reaction score
1,376
Points
3,915
Location
Cape Town
I'm on about the fact that the needs of PCVR differs from standalone VR, and Facebook is clearly focusing on mobile VR.
You're wrong.
FB is focusing on an all-encompassing experience. Look at their evolution, well - sort of their evolution. Where it started and where it is.
From the DK1 to the Quest 2. Quite the testament to an ever evolving product.

My first VR headset was this back in 1996


We have come a long way in a very short time considering the massive hiatus in the technology from the VFX1 days to the DK1.
Having had the DK1, DK2, CV1, Rift S, Quest, Deepoon, Vive, Pimax and a few other niche headsets along the way, I can honestly say it's all well and good throwing numbers around and comparing apples with pears, the proof is in the actual experience though.

Best review of something is actually trying it for yourself.

You keep blabbering on about PCVR but you miss the point that the Quest 1 and Quest 2 are very much PCVR capable and extremely proficient at it. The Quest 2 is a replacement for the Rift products. There will be no further development on the antiquated way of doing it from FB.
It's good news. Just a matter of time before the 'tethered' experience as you define it will be deprecated from all manufacturers too I reckon.

If you're chasing arbitrary numbers though and giving up on the actual experience of it before trying it - then perhaps you're right, it may not be for you and sticking with what you think you know would probably be best.
 
Last edited:

jaxx

Cannon Fodder
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
111
Reaction score
25
Points
1,245
You're wrong.
FB is focusing on an all-encompassing experience. Look at their evolution, well - sort of their evolution. Where it started and where it is.
From the DK1 to the Quest 2. Quite the testament to an ever evolving product.

My first VR headset was this back in 1996


We have come a long way in a very short time considering the massive hiatus in the technology from the VFX1 days to the DK1.
Having had the DK1, DK2, CV1, Rift S, Quest, Deepoon, Vive, Pimax and a few other niche headsets along the way, I can honestly say it's all well and good throwing numbers around and comparing apples with pears, the proof is in the actual experience though.

Best review of something is actually trying it for yourself.

You keep blabbering on about PCVR but you miss the point that the Quest 1 and Quest 2 are very much PCVR capable and extremely proficient at it. The Quest 2 is a replacement for the Rift products. There will be no further development on the antiquated way of doing it from FB.
It good news.

If you're chasing numbers though and giving up on the actual experience of it before trying it - then perhaps you're right, it may not be for you and sticking with what you think you know would probably be best.
Fair enough, I should reserve my judgement until I have tried it for myself.

But do you really see something like foveated rendering coming to the Quest line? This is key to achieving high FPS at high res in racing / flight sim titles, on a mid range machine.
 

Top Donors

$320.00
$255.00
$210.00
$185.00
$182.00
Top