4 ms·
3D engines are still extremely limited by single thread performance, at least if you want fast refresh rates. That's the case for VR were Valve as shown with t
by sheepdestroyer 4y ago
3D engines are still extremely limited by single thread performance, at least if you want fast refresh rates.
That's the case for VR were Valve as shown with their headset that 120Hz, and even 144Hz, is a huge comfort and presence improvement over the 90fps standard (or even 72 on Oculus Quest 2) from the rest of the industry.
Hitting the 144fps mark, means a CPU fast enough to consistently clear the main loop, while leaving enough time for rendering (!), in a shared <7ms time budget.
Creation is cool in VR, I've had a lot of fun in tilt brush. Apparently there are ways to be productive building in VR from 3D engines too. Some even try coding even though the resolution is still extremely insufficient.
Meta promises that most work, solitary or collaborative will eventually be better done in VR/AR.
However, while I love VR, I sure won't be spending much time suffering at low FPS.
We're far from not needing faster CPUs anytime soon, there are not enough John Carmack and Michael Abrash able and willing to optimise the shit out of every routine in assembly.
The end of Dennard Scaling is a tragedy.
- cs137 4y agoThis makes sense, but it might be a mercy that progress on VR is slow, given that it's Facebook ("Meta") that is trying to push it. It'll be best for all of us if technology slows, except perhaps for those innovations that reduce energy usage and GHG emissions, until corporate capitalism is overthrown (which may be 50 years or more away). It's actually a good thing, under our current economic system, that technological capabilities are so low compared to what they could be.