Well known that Samsung has Radeon GFX partnership. Being that Samsung is the king of displays and has been more then quiet on the VR front for ever, could a Quest 2/3 killer be in the wings? I don't see super gaming phones being the strategy here.
Uh? Are you up on this or just throwing out?I wouldn't say the silence has to mean much since Samsung slept for years on the gaming monitor market as well. But it wouldn't surprise me either - they had a quick glimpse into VR with the "successful" Gear VR so why shouldn't they try it themselves?
I would be really nice to finally see some competition in this price range.
Perspective --Problem with that is useable emulation on a lower powered platform has never been successfully done.
There is nothing in the mobile space as of now that is even remotely close to a GTX 1070 8GB in capability. A game may look the same on different platforms, but that is not to say the under laying HW is comparable.Even Quest 2 already likely has the computing power to run Half Life Alyx at low detail if you see the visuals of Star Wars: Tales from Galaxy’s Edge that has similar open-world visuals of Half Life Alyx at low detail. Some of these standalone VR games on Quest 2 can equal-render some GTX 1070 PCVR games now — it is downright impressive how much graphics now can be done on some mobile GPUs with good VR programmers. Now imagine upgrading it one major mobile GPU generation better.
The bold text is the thing what counts. In the end the hardware doesn't mean anything, it is all about how things are perceived in a game. It is downright impressive.There is nothing in the mobile space as of now that is even remotely close to a GTX 1070 8GB in capability. A game may look the same on different platforms, but that is not to say the under laying HW is comparable.
Theoretically they could actually use x64 like Steam Deck and run full-on PCVR games standalone, as they alluded to Steam Deck being relevant to their future standalone VR plans. A real Windows 10 x64 embedded OS could actually run directly on the headset. But they could just as easily decide to do the ARM route instead.
That may be, specs sheet wise.There is nothing in the mobile space as of now that is even remotely close to a GTX 1070 8GB in capability. A game may look the same on different platforms, but that is not to say the under laying HW is comparable.
I think you are confussing the chips CPU capability with a GPU or the intergrated GPU of an ARM chip. It is a vast amount of difference between a GTX 1070 and ANY ARM gfx.I think we’re closer than you think, considering M1 type chips greatly outperform Snapdragon XR.
Most PCVR games are also configurable to run on 2015-era gaming PCs, especially with very clean optimized Windows installs. Many GTX 980 VR games were able run perfectly smooth on 780 when resolution was configured lower (blurryvision) - a simple change, though sometimes needs override with sub 1.0 scaling values in software such as 3rd party Oculus TrayTool utility to override default VR resolution. Like 1280x720 VR resolution. The 780 was made in year 2013.
Which can then, in a proper implementation, be re-enhanced by DLSS/FidelityFX-like algorithms. 720p back to 1440p. Boom. Big problem solved. Mobile implementations of DLSS/FidelityFX-like algorithms also now exist too — reportedly, Steam Deck supports it without needing the games to support it.
The OS of a standalone headset has far less crud, so you can lop off a whole generation of requirement, especially with Vulkan API games.
All the above combined, plus “easy low lying apple optimizations”, lops about two GPU generations backwards to PCVR-port viability in a standalone. There are multiple engineering paths to get there sooner than you think.
Moreover, frame rate amplification technologies such as FidelityFX/DLSS 2.0 did not exist in 2015. And it will be version 3.0 DLSS / 2.0 FidelityFX by 2023.
My prediction is two years, ala 2023, for a true Quest 2 competitor with Alyx low/medium visuals. This includes minor HLE overheads, if any.
Possibly visuals of standalone VR in 2023 can reach similar to 2019-era Alyx med-high detail setting via a newer >3:1+ framrate amplify of DLSS 3.0 algorithm like those alluded in Blur Busters Area 51 Research section. Especially with minor mobile-specific dev optimizations of a company of Valve’s budget, and avoiding HLE “emulation” overheads via a native port instead, as Alyx was apparently pre-emptively coded in a way to be easily ported to other platforms. 3rd generation frame rate amplification technologies enables about a 4x resolution increase at same framerate with the same fully-loaded GPU shaders with no easily noticed oddnesses. But let’s be pessimistic and just assume Steam Deck like framerate amplification technology performance multipliers only.
Though could slip to 2024 due to parts shortages.
No, I am not.I think you are confussing the chips CPU capability with a GPU or the intergrated GPU of an ARM chip.
Yes, but talking real world results rather than spec sheets. Do you have a Quest 2?It is a vast amount of difference between a GTX 1070 and ANY ARM gfx.
Valve now earns billions per year revenue from Steam -- Valve has the Steam application store, which would be a side revenue stream that allows them to stay close to the approximate $499 level. Though they have a mixed record of hardware, their app store is wildly successful, and their Index VR product is reasonably successful.Valve can possibly release a VR headset using identical specs to the mid-tier Steam Deck, running Windows, for $499. I doubt they can make the $399 pricing, but we'll have to see. Valve hasn't demonstrated inside-out tracking yet, no idea how much that'll drive up cost. And Valve isn't in a position to be able to eat a loss on every unit sold, since they don't have any tie-in products.
I see potential in Apple and/or Samsung making a super sleek, lightweight headset and driving it with one of their phones. If the person already carries a phone on them at a more coinvent place vice weighing down the headset with the needed processing power, I think that would be a more affordable/cheaper route with the flexibility of a smartphone interface, Wifi, 5G, bluetooth already built in capability, app stores etc. I would say Facebook would be the one trying to catch up.Well known that Samsung has Radeon GFX partnership. Being that Samsung is the king of displays and has been more then quiet on the VR front for ever, could a Quest 2/3 killer be in the wings? I don't see super gaming phones being the strategy here.