3 ms·
I assume there would be concerns about latency and throughput.
by naravara 3y ago
I assume there would be concerns about latency and throughput.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- GeekyBear 3y agoThat seems reasonable. Also, wireless bandwidth would be an issue with so many sensors running at the same time. You would need to stream all the sensor data in one direction while also streaming two 4k display streams in the other direction.
- ethbr1 3y agoThat seems like a really tight latency budget to run through even an optimized wireless stack. Working backward: frame needs to be received by headset in time to refresh, which means it needs to be sent by host device in time to make its way through the headset wireless phy and be decoded. And working forward: headset needs to encode sensor values, send across wireless, be decoded on host, before frame can start to be generated. Which leaves the time in-between those for actually doing all the processing and frame generation. Ditching the wireless phy and low-level steps seems like an easy trade-off for more processing time.
- naravara 3y agoEven wired that seems like it’d need a lot of copper. The power cable connector right now is pretty pliable. Most thunderbolts cables are not as much. And who knows if it would need to be even thicker than that.
- fancy_pantser 3y agoPlus nobody wants hot pockets.
- dag11 3y agoWell, I do now. I'm hungry.
- sleepybrett 3y agoAlso, judging from the cable on the valve index ... a much heavier and harder to manage cable...
- bpye 3y agoYou could do something like an active optical cable if you wanted - adds expense but given the price tag of this, probably not insurmountable.