4 ms·
Article sez Carmack's first big fight was convincing Samsung that a two frame delay was too long. WAY too long. And it was important enough that he wrote an "ob
by ctdonath 12y ago
Article sez Carmack's first big fight was convincing Samsung that a two frame delay was too long. WAY too long. And it was important enough that he wrote an "obscene workaround" to avoid that "pretty short" latency.
I've been casually following Carmack & Occulus for a while; recurring theme is "X ms delay is too long". IIRC (corrections please?), wasn't until latency got down to 20ms that the nausea etc subsided. That doesn't leave much room to both render a high-res complex image and display it by anything more than the shortest transmission time conceivable.
- omellet 12y ago2 frames at 60Hz is about 33ms, which is way more than 1ms latency from a wireless hop.
- ctdonath 12y agoReconsider: 2 frames at 60Hz was an intolerable 33ms too long, he needed it down to 16ms total. Your optimistic 1ms latency cuts into that maximum refresh time by 7%, time that will (or is already) in high demand by meaningful/viable applications. You're also assuming a highly customized/optimized scenario for the wireless hop, nigh unto a straight analog signal. Digital processing will extend that, likely adding at least one full frame delay - again, something Carmack severely objected to and fought mightily against.