4 ms·

I've never been interested in VR headsets and am not very educated about it. Can someone explain why you'd want to actually run things on it instead of having

by rwz 19d ago

I've never been interested in VR headsets and am not very educated about it. Can someone explain why you'd want to actually run things on it instead of having a much lighter screens-and-headphones-only unit that plugs it into a more powerful machine that renders things for it? What's the benefit of having to strap all this extra hot hardware and batteries to your face. Is it just about it being wireless? Surely there are wireless protocols that can stream high-bandwidth videostreams from your PC to VR goggles. Not trying to be snarky or facetious, but genuinely curious.

two_handfuls 19d ago
To be clear, you don't have to run things on it, you can stream wirelessly from your PC. An advantage of a standalone unit is you can take it with you, or for people who don't already have a gaming computer. You're also asking why not have it plug to a more powerful machine. The answer for that is simple: wires get snagged and pulled on, in practice it's a poor experience (remember, you cannot see the wires when you are wearing the headset).
- Wowfunhappy 19d ago
  > To be clear, you don't have to run things on it, you can stream wirelessly from your PC. But the hardware is adding weight and bulk to something that you really, desperately want to be as small and light and possible.
  - m4rtink 19d ago
    Well, there are already devices like that (Big Screen Beyond), Valve has a wired headset (Valve Index) - so it makes perfect sense to do something more modern and future proof.
    - account42 18d ago
      The Index is almost a decade old and has pretty crappy screens compared to what they could use today.
KeplerBoy 19d ago
It's a lot easier for developers to target a known platform.
sheepdestroyer 19d ago
It is designed to stream wirelessly from a powerful computer too
- stouset 19d ago
  I’m shocked that this is performant enough to work in practice. Isn’t the timing window for VR responsiveness extremely tight?
  - yreg 19d ago
    It works, but there is usually a noticeable difference (at least with Quest).
    - m4rtink 19d ago
      I have a dedicated Wifi 6 (not 6e, so just miss/using the 5 GHz band) AP just for VR, directly connected to my PC and it works well Virtual Desktop & Quest 3. Have done quite a lot of quite active stuff (exploration, driving, flying, fighting games) and it really is seamless and I don't notice any lag as long as the game itself manages good FPS. If you really concentrate on the graphics, you can see some compression artifacts in places, but it is unnoticeable when you are actually doing VR stuff, not just looking for it. :) For the Frame, this should all be much better - easier setup, much better available bandwidth (dongle has Wifi 7), efficient foveated streaming, etc. :) I would exect better image quality (more bandwidth, more efficient streaming), better FPS (more efficient rendering) and better image quality (can reduce compression).
      - yreg 18d ago
        Good to know!
  - JohnnyMarcone 19d ago
    They are using foveated streaming where they track where your eye is looking and only stream that part at full resolution. They also have a dedicated wifi stick that directly connects to the frame in addition to using your normal wifi network.
Apes 19d ago
The real question is why did they release this as a standalone unit for $1049 and then claim they couldn't sell it for less due to the RAM shortage - when that implies they could have released a dumb unit that depends on the Steam Deck or Steam Machine for far less?
- gunalx 19d ago
  If it can do innside out tracking its way more data efficent to have compute onboard. And if you already have a decent amount of compute you can scale it up just a little more to have. a fully standalone unit.
  - Apes 19d ago
    I'm not sure going from less than $50 of RAM and a $50 processor for foveated eye tracking to 16 GiB of RAM ($300) and a Snapdragon 8 ($200) is a "slight bump".
    - gunalx 19d ago
      Wait I don't realise ram prices where this bad. Bought my kit for about a tenth of that a while ago. Ouch.
      - m4rtink 19d ago
        Yeah, can't wait for the AI hype bubble to finally end. Hey, we might even get some nice fast repurposed HBM from the scrappers reusing stuff from the bankruptcy auctions. :)
        fragmede 18d ago
        Yeah! Just like we all made out when the cryptocurrency bubble burst too!
        m4rtink 18d ago
rjh29 19d ago
There are two use-cases. Already sitting at a PC and you just pop your headset on - your idea makes sense. But traditional VR means standing up in a dedicated space (2m x 2m) and demands uninterrupted time. That's a high friction activity, and adding setting up a PC and Oculus Link and Steam VR before you start playing makes that friction even higher to the point where it's a niche hobby. Most casual players are doing stuff like VRChat and Beat Saber which can run on low powered hardware, so having a basic game-playing ability is a good idea.
- m4rtink 19d ago
  At least right now, the "mobile" version of VRChat is not that impressive (well, its impressive what can even run when you cut it down this much). All the really impressive Worlds and avatars are still PC only. Ideally, there would be some more seamless performance scaling than the current "do 2 versions, one of them ugly but fast, if even possible". :P Maybe Steam Frame will help this get going by being in a better place to run more advanced stuff, being more powerful than Qeust 3, which was basically the "mobile" VRChat benchmark so far.
paulryanrogers 19d ago
I like wired for the better graphics and unlimited playtime. In practice even a single cable gets wound up, stuck on things, and generally feels in the way. It's a difficult trade off to accept, even with a long and light weight cable.
teravor 19d ago
I suspect the answer is actually very simple, when you compare this device to one that is made deliberately dumber there are far too few actual differences to make it make sense.
rm_-rf_slash 19d ago
When you’re in VRChat you can be your fursona
tikhonj 19d ago
Being able to play without a bunch of setup in your room and without worrying about getting tangled in cables seems great. I have a Valve Index—which is a pretty remarkable device, that I definitely enjoyed—but the hassle of cable management/etc adds some real hassle. And I say this as somebody who actually set up a pulley system to make it work better in my home office :P
chaostheory 19d ago
1. Unless all you play is a sit down driving or flying simulator, the wires will get in your way. You can mitigate it with ceiling and wall pulleys, but it's still a really terrible experience that kills immersion. 2. Fitness. If you're moving and turning a lot, you're just going to hate wires. Your arms will slam into them and you'll almost trip on them and pull your computer down. Wireless to a desktop isn't perfect, but it's doable. Stand alone is ideal if you don't the visuals being turned down a bit.
month13 19d ago
The wires really get in the way, even in a seated context. I often use a Rift S for rally games, and the wire will get caught in the backrest, the wheels, my legs. VR is immersive, so you instantly forget and it's a thick and fragile wire so there's a degree of stress. Not to mention the trip hazard or ripping it out of the PC while playing room-scale games. I concur, given hardware constraints that a far more slimmed down unit would have been appealing, and more future-proof, but I believe there's still a requirement for onboard compute for inside-out tracking and handling disconnection events, at some point making it self-sufficient (at the time) was seen as not much more expense.
GuB-42 19d ago
Unless you are standing still (like sitting or playing Beat Saber), that cable really is annoying. You can't spin around for instance. As for wireless communication. I also thought it would be easy, but the lack of options despite the demand in the Oculus Rift / HTC Vive days proved otherwise. There have been some attempts, some worked, none of them great, and they usually involved hot hardware and batteries. Steam Frame is apparently the best at being a wireless, PC-driven headset. As for standalone functionality, my guess is that a headset hardware powerful enough to deliver a good wireless PC VR experience is powerful enough to work as a standalone headset for less demanding applications.
- Wowfunhappy 18d ago
  I had a TP Link wireless adapter (I think that was the name) for my HTC Vive. I was kind of skeptical going in, but it worked shockingly well--no detectable added latency. The only thing I lost was the ability to use the Vive's camera, which I think was just a software issue of some kind.
MintPaw 19d ago
I'm surprised no one really has answered the implied question. Wireless protocols are hard for VR not because of bandwidth, but because of latency. Head tilt motions have to be processed extremely quickly to not be nauseating. Even with wired systems, the headset often ends up doing all kinds of motion prediction to process motion and shift the image before the game has time to process it, because engines aren't going to round trip input to video output at 120fps/8ms (double buffering doubles your latency!). Of course, that multiplies with bandwidth requirements, which are also quite extreme at 4k 120fps.

by rwz 19d ago

two_handfuls 19d ago

To be clear, you don't have to run things on it, you can stream wirelessly from your PC. An advantage of a standalone unit is you can take it with you, or for people who don't already have a gaming computer. You're also asking why not have it plug to a more powerful machine. The answer for that is simple: wires get snagged and pulled on, in practice it's a poor experience (remember, you cannot see the wires when you are wearing the headset).

Wowfunhappy 19d ago
> To be clear, you don't have to run things on it, you can stream wirelessly from your PC. But the hardware is adding weight and bulk to something that you really, desperately want to be as small and light and possible.
- m4rtink 19d ago
  Well, there are already devices like that (Big Screen Beyond), Valve has a wired headset (Valve Index) - so it makes perfect sense to do something more modern and future proof.
  - account42 18d ago
    The Index is almost a decade old and has pretty crappy screens compared to what they could use today.

KeplerBoy 19d ago

It's a lot easier for developers to target a known platform.

sheepdestroyer 19d ago

It is designed to stream wirelessly from a powerful computer too

stouset 19d ago
I’m shocked that this is performant enough to work in practice. Isn’t the timing window for VR responsiveness extremely tight?
- yreg 19d ago
  It works, but there is usually a noticeable difference (at least with Quest).
  - m4rtink 19d ago
    I have a dedicated Wifi 6 (not 6e, so just miss/using the 5 GHz band) AP just for VR, directly connected to my PC and it works well Virtual Desktop & Quest 3. Have done quite a lot of quite active stuff (exploration, driving, flying, fighting games) and it really is seamless and I don't notice any lag as long as the game itself manages good FPS. If you really concentrate on the graphics, you can see some compression artifacts in places, but it is unnoticeable when you are actually doing VR stuff, not just looking for it. :) For the Frame, this should all be much better - easier setup, much better available bandwidth (dongle has Wifi 7), efficient foveated streaming, etc. :) I would exect better image quality (more bandwidth, more efficient streaming), better FPS (more efficient rendering) and better image quality (can reduce compression).
    - yreg 18d ago
      Good to know!
- JohnnyMarcone 19d ago
  They are using foveated streaming where they track where your eye is looking and only stream that part at full resolution. They also have a dedicated wifi stick that directly connects to the frame in addition to using your normal wifi network.

Apes 19d ago

The real question is why did they release this as a standalone unit for $1049 and then claim they couldn't sell it for less due to the RAM shortage - when that implies they could have released a dumb unit that depends on the Steam Deck or Steam Machine for far less?

gunalx 19d ago
If it can do innside out tracking its way more data efficent to have compute onboard. And if you already have a decent amount of compute you can scale it up just a little more to have. a fully standalone unit.
- Apes 19d ago
  I'm not sure going from less than $50 of RAM and a $50 processor for foveated eye tracking to 16 GiB of RAM ($300) and a Snapdragon 8 ($200) is a "slight bump".
  - gunalx 19d ago
    Wait I don't realise ram prices where this bad. Bought my kit for about a tenth of that a while ago. Ouch.
    - m4rtink 19d ago
      Yeah, can't wait for the AI hype bubble to finally end. Hey, we might even get some nice fast repurposed HBM from the scrappers reusing stuff from the bankruptcy auctions. :)
      - fragmede 18d ago
        Yeah! Just like we all made out when the cryptocurrency bubble burst too!
        m4rtink 18d ago

rjh29 19d ago

There are two use-cases. Already sitting at a PC and you just pop your headset on - your idea makes sense. But traditional VR means standing up in a dedicated space (2m x 2m) and demands uninterrupted time. That's a high friction activity, and adding setting up a PC and Oculus Link and Steam VR before you start playing makes that friction even higher to the point where it's a niche hobby. Most casual players are doing stuff like VRChat and Beat Saber which can run on low powered hardware, so having a basic game-playing ability is a good idea.

m4rtink 19d ago
At least right now, the "mobile" version of VRChat is not that impressive (well, its impressive what can even run when you cut it down this much). All the really impressive Worlds and avatars are still PC only. Ideally, there would be some more seamless performance scaling than the current "do 2 versions, one of them ugly but fast, if even possible". :P Maybe Steam Frame will help this get going by being in a better place to run more advanced stuff, being more powerful than Qeust 3, which was basically the "mobile" VRChat benchmark so far.

paulryanrogers 19d ago

I like wired for the better graphics and unlimited playtime. In practice even a single cable gets wound up, stuck on things, and generally feels in the way. It's a difficult trade off to accept, even with a long and light weight cable.

teravor 19d ago

I suspect the answer is actually very simple, when you compare this device to one that is made deliberately dumber there are far too few actual differences to make it make sense.

rm_-rf_slash 19d ago

When you’re in VRChat you can be your fursona

tikhonj 19d ago

Being able to play without a bunch of setup in your room and without worrying about getting tangled in cables seems great. I have a Valve Index—which is a pretty remarkable device, that I definitely enjoyed—but the hassle of cable management/etc adds some real hassle. And I say this as somebody who actually set up a pulley system to make it work better in my home office :P

chaostheory 19d ago

1. Unless all you play is a sit down driving or flying simulator, the wires will get in your way. You can mitigate it with ceiling and wall pulleys, but it's still a really terrible experience that kills immersion. 2. Fitness. If you're moving and turning a lot, you're just going to hate wires. Your arms will slam into them and you'll almost trip on them and pull your computer down. Wireless to a desktop isn't perfect, but it's doable. Stand alone is ideal if you don't the visuals being turned down a bit.

month13 19d ago

The wires really get in the way, even in a seated context. I often use a Rift S for rally games, and the wire will get caught in the backrest, the wheels, my legs. VR is immersive, so you instantly forget and it's a thick and fragile wire so there's a degree of stress. Not to mention the trip hazard or ripping it out of the PC while playing room-scale games. I concur, given hardware constraints that a far more slimmed down unit would have been appealing, and more future-proof, but I believe there's still a requirement for onboard compute for inside-out tracking and handling disconnection events, at some point making it self-sufficient (at the time) was seen as not much more expense.

GuB-42 19d ago

Unless you are standing still (like sitting or playing Beat Saber), that cable really is annoying. You can't spin around for instance. As for wireless communication. I also thought it would be easy, but the lack of options despite the demand in the Oculus Rift / HTC Vive days proved otherwise. There have been some attempts, some worked, none of them great, and they usually involved hot hardware and batteries. Steam Frame is apparently the best at being a wireless, PC-driven headset. As for standalone functionality, my guess is that a headset hardware powerful enough to deliver a good wireless PC VR experience is powerful enough to work as a standalone headset for less demanding applications.

Wowfunhappy 18d ago
I had a TP Link wireless adapter (I think that was the name) for my HTC Vive. I was kind of skeptical going in, but it worked shockingly well--no detectable added latency. The only thing I lost was the ability to use the Vive's camera, which I think was just a software issue of some kind.

MintPaw 19d ago

I'm surprised no one really has answered the implied question. Wireless protocols are hard for VR not because of bandwidth, but because of latency. Head tilt motions have to be processed extremely quickly to not be nauseating. Even with wired systems, the headset often ends up doing all kinds of motion prediction to process motion and shift the image before the game has time to process it, because engines aren't going to round trip input to video output at 120fps/8ms (double buffering doubles your latency!). Of course, that multiplies with bandwidth requirements, which are also quite extreme at 4k 120fps.