By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
SvennoJ on 12 July 2017
Edit Thread
Captain_Yuri said:
SvennoJ said:

I gathered that the consensus was that psvr has less screendoor effect due to the higher density of pixels, for example
https://www.vrheads.com/playstation-vr-vs-oculus-rift-virtually-comparable

OR has 1080x1200 per eye, RGBG configuration, 2592000 subpixels. Over 110 degrees, 19.6 subpixels per degree (horizontally)
PSVR has 960x1080 per eye, RGBRGB configuration, 3110400 subpixels. Over 100 degrees, 28.8 subpixels per degree (horizontally)
OR can display slightly more detailed grey scale information, PSVR beats it in color.

PSVR games natively run at 60fps vs upto 90fps on OR. (There are 2 120 fps games on PSVR, exception) PSVR however always reprojects the image to 120fps to get very low latency headtracking. With a fast PC OR will generally generate 1.875x the game pixel throuhput of psvr (1.25x render resolution, 1.5x base fps) In practice PSVR can keep up pretty well with OR afaik.

OR needs a lot more grunt, but discards half the color info in the headset. That's actually normal with video (chromo subsamping) however with the image blown up so much RGB is a noticeable difference. For comparison 20/20 vision is comparable with 60 pixel per degree, while these headsets on average are close to 10 pixels per degree.

Yea but in pratice, it sounds like it is very reviewer dependent since some say that the screen door effect is fairly similar, others say its better for oculus, others say its better for psvr.

I see, so it's not really "120 fps," for most games but rather a technique used to get better head tracking?

Indeed. PSVR takes the existing image and shifts it slightly to get the lowest latency possible for headtracking when moving and or turning your head. It's even lower latency than a native 120fps game as I notice the difference between Polubius (native 120fps) and regular games while turning my head. With reprojection when you shake your head quickly and concentrate on the edges of the screen you can see where info is missing. However normally you don't notice the few pixels that aren't there at the outer edges while moving/turning.

The low lateny reprojection makes it a lot more comfortable in practice. There is a very noticeable difference between physically turning your head (at 120hz) and using the analog stick to turn with runs at 60fps. (It's not motion interpolation like on tvs so game updates still run at 60fps) PSVR has no 90fps games (the headset does support it, just nobody has used that mode yet) so I can't say how that sits between 120fps reprojection, native 120fps and 60fps turning.


OR might also be lowering its price in anticipation of the windows mixed reality headsets. They boast a higher resolution for a lower price, yet no OLED.

https://uploadvr.com/vr-spec-sheet/

No clue if the mixed reality headsets are pentile or RGB, nor how well the inside out tracking compares to current headsets. LCD is going to be a big downgrade compared to OLED though. Plus OR already has tons of games to choose from, mixed reality isn't out yet, no clue what it will support.

Some interesting comments from actual users at that link as well. There's more things to come into play when comparing headsets, lens quality, comfort, and for me how glasses fit underneath. Anyway VR is too awesome to get too worked up about the minor differences between gen 1 products. Once you start playing you forget about the screendoor, glare and whatever. Perhaps OR is the better choice as the only really immersion breaking thing is wonky tracking. (AZ Sunshine on psvr needs a patch, aiming through the sights the game gets the aim controller and headset mixed up, result jittery gun. AZ Should take a note out of Farpoint's book which handles it much better) Those kind of issues are rare though.