10 ms·

Powering the Rift

71 points by Impossible 11y ago

dankohn1 11y ago
I'm very supportive of Oculus deciding to focus on one platform. Though I'm a Mac and Linux user, I want Oculus to be a success, and deciding to say "no" to non-dominant options maximizes that chance. Relatedly, can anyone give an estimate about how many years behind integrated graphics chips like Intel's are from Rift-compatible performance?
- Strom 11y ago
  Lets do some basic math to get some clue of the future. I welcome others to provide more detailed analysis to adjust my calculations. The nVidia GTX 970 has 3494 GFLOPS[1] of single precision processing power. The strongest currently available Intel integrated GPU (Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300, GT3e) seems to have around 1000 GFLOPS[2] and is from November 2013. The September 2012 Intel Iris Pro 5200 has 832 GFLOPS[3], and the April 2012 Intel HD Graphics 4000 has 333 GFLOPS[4]. The pace of improvement seems to have slowed down for Intel. Given a generous 25% YoY growth, Intel will have a 3500 GFLOPS integrated GPU somewhere around 2020. There is high demand for mobile performance though, so with additional investments, perhaps a 33% YoY growth for performance-per-watt can be achieved? Then a 3500 GFLOPs integrated GPU could arrive as soon as end of 2018. Even so, if VR is even mildly successful, I can imagine nVidia & AMD pumping out even bigger behemoths than the currently available 6144 GFLOPS[1] nVidia GTX Titan X. These giants will also receive annual performance gains, so the gap between heavily cooled desktop beasts and cool mobile parts will probably remain similar. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_900_series#GeForce_900_.289xx.29_series http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_900_series#GeForce_900_... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_HD_and_Iris_Graphics#Broadwell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_HD_and_Iris_Graphics#Broa... [3] http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/2 http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graph... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_HD_and_Iris_Graphics#Ivy_Bridge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_HD_and_Iris_Graphics#Ivy_...
  - dankohn1 11y ago
    Super helpful, thanks.
notjustanymike 11y ago
What'll be interesting is the state of VR in a couple of years. The current system of consoles will still be well within their lifespan, but unable to handle complex VR. The current specs will be considered entry level, making desktops the best place for this style of gaming. The "Rift" is well named, since we may well see a split become couch gamers and immersion gamers.
- shostack 11y ago
  Interesting that you noted "desktops." I used to be a big gamer when I was younger and went through a phase of having two "gaming laptops" (really more portable desktops...those things could fry your nuts if you put it on your lap). I now have a massive Origin desktop box that weighs ~100lbs and is an absolute beast. However as I get older, I'm realizing that I'd rather have that square footage for other home things and instead switch to a gaming laptop since they are much nicer and smaller now. I wonder if gaming laptops of the near future will be able to sufficiently handle VR systems like the Rift. Having a truly portable VR experience like that is a very different scenario than being bound to sitting at a desk. Sure it might be clunky at first, but you can technically strap the laptop to a harness of some sort and have mobile VR. You can't do that with a desktop.
rasur 11y ago
It'll be interesting to see how the Linux & Mac communities react to this, considering their line about concentrating on Windows for the moment. No ETA for Linux/Mac development restarting.
- perardi 11y ago
  They're suggesting an Nvidia GTX 970 for a good experience. I'd wager very few Macs have a GPU of that power right now. The big sellers are the 13-inch MacBook Pro and the MacBooks Air, all of which run Intel integrated graphics. And iMacs have mobile GPUs. Besides the cylinder Mac Pros, and older Mac Pros with new cards shoved in them, the entire line is short on GPU punch.
  - ptomato 11y ago
    I'm pretty sure GTX 970+ cuts out everything that's not a hackintosh, even the workstation cards in the current Mac Pro.
    - wlll 11y ago
      I've run Elite: Dangerous on a top of the line Mac Pro (Windows 8.1 bootcamp), it's not great. That said, simpler games with a focus on gameplay instead of graphics work just fine, such as Windlands. I'd suspect Job Simulator would be similar.
    - perardi 11y ago
      Well, if Apple would spend less time crafting delightful metal bracelets, they could pop in a Haswell CPU and a contemporary GPU into the current Mac Pro. (Sorry. Bitter, Hackintosh-using "power user" rant.)
- agildehaus 11y ago
  If there is truly a difference in the level of support from Oculus, expect to see Valve/HTC be very embracing of Linux/Mac and have yet another advantage over the Rift.
mahyarm 11y ago
Would a lower spec card in SLI / Crossfire work? Like 2 AMD 280Xs instead of an AMD 290
- Cushman 11y ago
  It might "work" in the sense that it might not make you ill, but it's very unlikely that Oculus will support it any time soon. They're focusing on pushing the boundary for rendering latency, which current multi-GPU solutions don't handle well.
- wlll 11y ago
  There are issues with SLI and VR. It works for some people, for others they need to disable all but one card. There's details on the oculus subreddit if you want to search for it.
outworlder 11y ago
I can get the video card requirements. The system RAM, not so much.
- angersock 11y ago
  Possibly to prevent paging or swapping that might introduce hitches in performance. Noisy neighbors chugging my VR process would be annoying.
- Cushman 11y ago
  It's the recommended spec, not a requirement. And they're just following the industry. The bang-for-buck point for gaming PCs has been 8GB for a while now: The price difference is not great, and while some modern games won't use more than 4 gigs, some will. It's nice to have.
- genericuser 11y ago
  Yeah, the system RAM requirement does seem a bit low. I mean 8 GB currently is basically just saying 'No you can't hook this up to that laptop which was designed for the day to day use of an average web surfing, Netflix watching, and video chatting individual.' I mean it should be basically a non-requirement for people working in computer graphics or interested in this for gaming.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
Htsthbjig 11y ago
Windows requirement in 2016? Seriously? It looks like 1996 with companies working for free for Microsoft and doing things like Windows only modems. I was going to buy a Rift, now this will force me to buy a Steam machine with the VR set of Valve.
- angersock 11y ago
  So, based on your presumably vast experience in soft-real-time systems, 3D graphics programming, cross-platform development, and virtual reality UX, what do you propose is the alternative? Hint: the reason they're probably looking at Windows--and that you are looking at Steam machines--is that there is a much more controllable environment for deployment. Having to deal with all the crazy of, say, X11 and OpenGL and nutzo drivers and everything when you really just want to install a super-low-latency path for your system is just a fool's errand.
  - yarrel 11y ago
    Windows was founded on nutzo drivers. That's why they're specifying the environment so carefully.
  - fossuser 11y ago
    Just to jump in here too, Bill Gates and Windows appealed to games and being the platform to support them in the 90s when Carmack and Doom were pushing things forward back then too. Currently reading Masters of Doom and it's really good in case people are interested. Here's the Promo video shown at a Microsoft event back then (cringe warning): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dVAhFYjp9c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dVAhFYjp9c
- swalsh 11y ago
  Windows is still the dominant operating system for non console gaming. It really shouldn't be a surprise that's what they would target.
- electronvolt 11y ago
  As someone who prefers to use Linux as much as possible and has a DK2, it's disappointing to me, but it makes a lot of sense. If I was told to develop an extremely high performance, low error rendering pipeline for such a product, you can bet I'd focus where the largest number of users are (PC gamers) and just try to build as robust an API as I could with eventual porting to Linux/Mac in mind. (E.x. As linux applications and mac hardware caught up.)
angersock 11y ago
It's sad to see them scaling back on development support for Linux, though it makes a great deal of sense given how disorganized the ecosystem is.
TY 11y ago
There'll be a lot of negative feedback from OSX and Linux developers. No surprises here for me though. After struggling to get DK2 and Unreal Engine on my Macbook Air running smoothly, I bit the bullet and bought a Windows gaming box just for the Rift. Considering that I bought my current Macbook for iOS development in the process replacing my Samsung laptop running Ubuntu, this makes sense - platforms are just tools to get things done. If budget does not allow all 3 of them, then choose whatever system makes most business sense for you. This should not be an emotional decision.
- JoshTriplett 11y ago
  > There'll be a lot of negative feedback from OSX and Linux developers. There already was; the Rift SDK license is one of the most hostile I've seen in a long time, and utterly incompatible with Open Source.
- pera 11y ago
  I don't think they will even receive any feedback at all: people will just buy Valve's Vive this year and completely forget about the Rift...
  - alexqgb 11y ago
    That may be easier said than done, given that FB has already invested $2 billion in making Oculus happen, and have openly set their sites on getting a billion users into VR within a decade.
    - Artemis2 11y ago
      Valve has a user base and a plan. I'm really curious for the future of Rift vs Vive.
drcode 11y ago
It's surprising to me that Facebook didn't use its financial muscle to sidestep this issue and release a sort of "console" alongside the Rift that is heavily tuned for this particular purpose. I suppose this will happen eventually, and that the first "Rift" is still intended as an "enthusiast" product with a more seamless, mainstream-oriented product to follow.
Rooster61 11y ago
Hmm. I recently upgraded to a GTX 960, and I wonder if it will have enough horsepower. It's a cool, power sipping card for the performance it puts out, but I would wager that many of the techniques used to get those benefits will not take well to the specific demands of those dual screens. Then again, these are "recommended" specs, not required.
- Cushman 11y ago
  Do you have the 2GB or 4GB card? In general, you can get by fine just turning down some effects. But VRAM usage tends to scale with resolution, and the Rift's >HD render target will probably put the squeeze on a 2GB card. Even with a 4GB 960, you might run into memory bandwidth issues, but without running the software I'm just speculating.
- daenz 11y ago
  The higher model number doesn't necessarily mean a more powerful GPU. I have a GTX 680 which competes strongly with many of the GTX 900s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_900_series http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_900_series
- kenrikm 11y ago
  I have SLI 670s which is around the performance of a 970. with graphics cards there can be a variety configs to get to about the same performance.
  - wlll 11y ago
    Right now there are issues with SLI and VR though, there's information about this available online, particularly on the oculus subreddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/ http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/) if you search. Current best advice, use a single card, with SLI YMMV.
Arzh 11y ago
I'm still surprised how many people are mad about the OSX ditch. They think they need a high-end gaming video card, which Apple doesn't support. Apple has never cared about making Macs machines that play games. Why would you want to be on a platform that doesn't care about what you want to do on it?
- kenrikm 11y ago
  The Mac Pro does in fact have a good enough graphics card. But that market is so small I guess they feel it's not worth it.
  - wlll 11y ago
    Kinda. It's OK for simpler stuff such as Windlands, but a "flagship" game like Elite: Dangerous isn't really pleasant to play. This is from my experience using a top of the line Mac Pro booting windows 8.1.
    - function_seven 11y ago
      Serious question: Did you mean to say "MacBook Pro"? Or are the dual GPUs in the Mac Pro severely overpriced? (I don't keep up with the advances in graphics cards)
      - wlll 11y ago
        I really did mean the Mac Pro! I've also done VR on a MacBook Pro and that's obviously much worse even than the Mac Pro. VR doesn't work well with SLI right now, many people end up disabling all but one GPU in a multi GPU setup.
      - tedunangst 11y ago
        The GPUs in the Mac pro aren't strictly optimized for putting triangles on the screen.
- Cushman 11y ago
  Then why not support Linux? Apple devs are used to working around esoteric hardware requirements, they're upset about not getting software support. Regardless of Oculus's sensible reasons for pursuing a one-platform strategy, you're talking about independent devs who have spent months or years building on a beta SDK only to be left hanging in the final runup to release. I'm confused why you're surprised.
ohitsdom 11y ago
Slightly off topic: I didn't realize how excited the graphics card makers must be over VR until reading this post. If VR catches on for mainstream use (not just games), that'd be a huge boon to the industry.
- notjustanymike 11y ago
  The Titan X with 12gb of VRAM is just the beginning...
- rasz_pl 11y ago
  AMD already made a bunch of slides announcing the new GPU line to be VR dedicated
cromwellian 11y ago
400 megapixels/s filtrate requirement is a low end spec. Seriously, this is weaker than current game consoles. it's not high end at all compared to what enthusiasts build on.
- mahyarm 11y ago
  A GTX 970 / AMD 290 is far more powerful than current consoles too, so there is probably more to it than that.
cwyers 11y ago
For those complaining about the lack of OS X and Linux support for now: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey 95.81% of Steam users are on Windows. If anything I suspect this understates the number of Steam users who have Windows -- I suspect some of the Linux and OS X users dual-boot. And I am sure it definitely underestimates the amount of Windows installs among people who have the horsepower to support the specs they're quoting; there's almost no laptops that support the Rift, which means the only thing in Apple's lineup that supports this is the narrow market segment of people who own the Darth Vader Trash Can and use it as a gaming machine, and I guess Hackintosh owners. Resources are not infinite. Every dollar/man-hour/etc. spent on Linux and OS X support are resources not spent on something else. If there was a more competitive market for high-end PC gaming OSes it might make more sense to spend those resources there. But there isn't.
- lloeki 11y ago
  > I suspect some of the Linux and OS X users dual-boot. Hard to tell: how many install Steam under their dual-booting (or dedicated game machine) Windows and don't bother to install it under alt-OS as their games mostly don't run on it because the developer didn't bother supporting it? > there's almost no laptops that support the Rift / the narrow market segment of people who own the Darth Vader Trash Can Given the requirements, be realistic, there's not much PC either. It doesn't matter, as this is a nascent market. It also seems that everyone assumes that the games run must be of the Crysis or whatever the latest heavy-duty shiny AAA thing is. Hearing you all, I wonder how I even can possibly be enjoying gaming on my HD4000† under OSX. Turns out I do, and this is what infuriates me about those requirements. I do understand the requirements about latency and real-time scheduling constraints, yet I am convinced we can build innovative, great VR things satisfying those constraints even on "reduced" hardware. † yes, games can be fun without SSAO, DOF, or even real-time soft shadows.
- SmokyBourbon 11y ago
  Valve's superior SteamVR will have OSX and Linux support.
- Jare 11y ago
  > the only thing in Apple's lineup that supports this is the narrow market segment of people who own the Darth Vader Trash Can Not even that, I think.
curiously 11y ago
I'm glad they ditched OSX and Linux to focus on Windows. OSX and Linux are not serious gaming machines. It makes sense to improve the 95% of users gaming on windows machines and sacrifice the 5% who are simply complaining that their manufacturers/vendors won't support their gaming needs.
bronz 11y ago
I was a very dedicated supporter of VR from 2012 to 2014. Unfortunately I have come to the conclusion that VR will flounder, especially in the coveted "seated experience" category. When the DK2s began to land on the doorsteps of developers and fans, feedback began to pour into the forums. There are two kinds of people: there are people who do not get simulator sickness and those who do. After reading the feedback and stories regarding the DK2 I realized simulator sickness was a much larger problem that I thought, and that it wasn't going to disappear with better tracking, pixel density and refresh rate. Some people simply cannot tolerate VR, and I doubt that even the CV1 will be able to change that. But these are only the people at the extreme end of the spectrum, there are many others who straddle the boundary between being sick immediately and never feeling sick at all. The problem for people on the fence is that lateral movement in the game world is a major trigger for nausea. If your virtual body accelerates from standing to running, your real body expects to feel a sensation of acceleration. What this means is that if you move around too much you get sick. And for people who don't feel sick as soon as they put the head set on, movement is often the tipping point. This is a huge problem because there is no way to simulate that kind of sensation (within practical limits) and almost all of the VR experiences that people want to engage in involve moving around in some way. This conclusion is based solely on rational observations, and it was arrived at in spite of huge optimism and engagement with VR and the VR community.
- KaoruAoiShiho 11y ago
  Simulator sickness is solved? All you need is 1to1 tracking. Of course this means a whole genre of games is impossible (first person action) but every other genre would work fantastically (and I hate FPS anyway). I'm pretty satisfied with it. There really isn't any sickness problem anymore.

71 points by Impossible 11y ago

I'm very supportive of Oculus deciding to focus on one platform. Though I'm a Mac and Linux user, I want Oculus to be a success, and deciding to say "no" to non-dominant options maximizes that chance. Relatedly, can anyone give an estimate about how many years behind integrated graphics chips like Intel's are from Rift-compatible performance?

Strom 11y ago
Lets do some basic math to get some clue of the future. I welcome others to provide more detailed analysis to adjust my calculations. The nVidia GTX 970 has 3494 GFLOPS[1] of single precision processing power. The strongest currently available Intel integrated GPU (Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300, GT3e) seems to have around 1000 GFLOPS[2] and is from November 2013. The September 2012 Intel Iris Pro 5200 has 832 GFLOPS[3], and the April 2012 Intel HD Graphics 4000 has 333 GFLOPS[4]. The pace of improvement seems to have slowed down for Intel. Given a generous 25% YoY growth, Intel will have a 3500 GFLOPS integrated GPU somewhere around 2020. There is high demand for mobile performance though, so with additional investments, perhaps a 33% YoY growth for performance-per-watt can be achieved? Then a 3500 GFLOPs integrated GPU could arrive as soon as end of 2018. Even so, if VR is even mildly successful, I can imagine nVidia & AMD pumping out even bigger behemoths than the currently available 6144 GFLOPS[1] nVidia GTX Titan X. These giants will also receive annual performance gains, so the gap between heavily cooled desktop beasts and cool mobile parts will probably remain similar. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_900_series#GeForce_900_.289xx.29_series http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_900_series#GeForce_900_... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_HD_and_Iris_Graphics#Broadwell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_HD_and_Iris_Graphics#Broa... [3] http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/2 http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graph... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_HD_and_Iris_Graphics#Ivy_Bridge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_HD_and_Iris_Graphics#Ivy_...
- dankohn1 11y ago
  Super helpful, thanks.

notjustanymike 11y ago

What'll be interesting is the state of VR in a couple of years. The current system of consoles will still be well within their lifespan, but unable to handle complex VR. The current specs will be considered entry level, making desktops the best place for this style of gaming. The "Rift" is well named, since we may well see a split become couch gamers and immersion gamers.

shostack 11y ago
Interesting that you noted "desktops." I used to be a big gamer when I was younger and went through a phase of having two "gaming laptops" (really more portable desktops...those things could fry your nuts if you put it on your lap). I now have a massive Origin desktop box that weighs ~100lbs and is an absolute beast. However as I get older, I'm realizing that I'd rather have that square footage for other home things and instead switch to a gaming laptop since they are much nicer and smaller now. I wonder if gaming laptops of the near future will be able to sufficiently handle VR systems like the Rift. Having a truly portable VR experience like that is a very different scenario than being bound to sitting at a desk. Sure it might be clunky at first, but you can technically strap the laptop to a harness of some sort and have mobile VR. You can't do that with a desktop.

rasur 11y ago

It'll be interesting to see how the Linux & Mac communities react to this, considering their line about concentrating on Windows for the moment. No ETA for Linux/Mac development restarting.

perardi 11y ago
They're suggesting an Nvidia GTX 970 for a good experience. I'd wager very few Macs have a GPU of that power right now. The big sellers are the 13-inch MacBook Pro and the MacBooks Air, all of which run Intel integrated graphics. And iMacs have mobile GPUs. Besides the cylinder Mac Pros, and older Mac Pros with new cards shoved in them, the entire line is short on GPU punch.
- ptomato 11y ago
  I'm pretty sure GTX 970+ cuts out everything that's not a hackintosh, even the workstation cards in the current Mac Pro.
  - wlll 11y ago
    I've run Elite: Dangerous on a top of the line Mac Pro (Windows 8.1 bootcamp), it's not great. That said, simpler games with a focus on gameplay instead of graphics work just fine, such as Windlands. I'd suspect Job Simulator would be similar.
  - perardi 11y ago
    Well, if Apple would spend less time crafting delightful metal bracelets, they could pop in a Haswell CPU and a contemporary GPU into the current Mac Pro. (Sorry. Bitter, Hackintosh-using "power user" rant.)
agildehaus 11y ago
If there is truly a difference in the level of support from Oculus, expect to see Valve/HTC be very embracing of Linux/Mac and have yet another advantage over the Rift.

mahyarm 11y ago

Would a lower spec card in SLI / Crossfire work? Like 2 AMD 280Xs instead of an AMD 290

Cushman 11y ago
It might "work" in the sense that it might not make you ill, but it's very unlikely that Oculus will support it any time soon. They're focusing on pushing the boundary for rendering latency, which current multi-GPU solutions don't handle well.
wlll 11y ago
There are issues with SLI and VR. It works for some people, for others they need to disable all but one card. There's details on the oculus subreddit if you want to search for it.

outworlder 11y ago

I can get the video card requirements. The system RAM, not so much.

angersock 11y ago
Possibly to prevent paging or swapping that might introduce hitches in performance. Noisy neighbors chugging my VR process would be annoying.
Cushman 11y ago
It's the recommended spec, not a requirement. And they're just following the industry. The bang-for-buck point for gaming PCs has been 8GB for a while now: The price difference is not great, and while some modern games won't use more than 4 gigs, some will. It's nice to have.
genericuser 11y ago
Yeah, the system RAM requirement does seem a bit low. I mean 8 GB currently is basically just saying 'No you can't hook this up to that laptop which was designed for the day to day use of an average web surfing, Netflix watching, and video chatting individual.' I mean it should be basically a non-requirement for people working in computer graphics or interested in this for gaming.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

Htsthbjig 11y ago

Windows requirement in 2016? Seriously? It looks like 1996 with companies working for free for Microsoft and doing things like Windows only modems. I was going to buy a Rift, now this will force me to buy a Steam machine with the VR set of Valve.

angersock 11y ago
So, based on your presumably vast experience in soft-real-time systems, 3D graphics programming, cross-platform development, and virtual reality UX, what do you propose is the alternative? Hint: the reason they're probably looking at Windows--and that you are looking at Steam machines--is that there is a much more controllable environment for deployment. Having to deal with all the crazy of, say, X11 and OpenGL and nutzo drivers and everything when you really just want to install a super-low-latency path for your system is just a fool's errand.
- yarrel 11y ago
  Windows was founded on nutzo drivers. That's why they're specifying the environment so carefully.
- fossuser 11y ago
  Just to jump in here too, Bill Gates and Windows appealed to games and being the platform to support them in the 90s when Carmack and Doom were pushing things forward back then too. Currently reading Masters of Doom and it's really good in case people are interested. Here's the Promo video shown at a Microsoft event back then (cringe warning): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dVAhFYjp9c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dVAhFYjp9c
swalsh 11y ago
Windows is still the dominant operating system for non console gaming. It really shouldn't be a surprise that's what they would target.
electronvolt 11y ago
As someone who prefers to use Linux as much as possible and has a DK2, it's disappointing to me, but it makes a lot of sense. If I was told to develop an extremely high performance, low error rendering pipeline for such a product, you can bet I'd focus where the largest number of users are (PC gamers) and just try to build as robust an API as I could with eventual porting to Linux/Mac in mind. (E.x. As linux applications and mac hardware caught up.)

angersock 11y ago

It's sad to see them scaling back on development support for Linux, though it makes a great deal of sense given how disorganized the ecosystem is.

TY 11y ago

There'll be a lot of negative feedback from OSX and Linux developers. No surprises here for me though. After struggling to get DK2 and Unreal Engine on my Macbook Air running smoothly, I bit the bullet and bought a Windows gaming box just for the Rift. Considering that I bought my current Macbook for iOS development in the process replacing my Samsung laptop running Ubuntu, this makes sense - platforms are just tools to get things done. If budget does not allow all 3 of them, then choose whatever system makes most business sense for you. This should not be an emotional decision.

JoshTriplett 11y ago
> There'll be a lot of negative feedback from OSX and Linux developers. There already was; the Rift SDK license is one of the most hostile I've seen in a long time, and utterly incompatible with Open Source.
pera 11y ago
I don't think they will even receive any feedback at all: people will just buy Valve's Vive this year and completely forget about the Rift...
- alexqgb 11y ago
  That may be easier said than done, given that FB has already invested $2 billion in making Oculus happen, and have openly set their sites on getting a billion users into VR within a decade.
  - Artemis2 11y ago
    Valve has a user base and a plan. I'm really curious for the future of Rift vs Vive.

drcode 11y ago

It's surprising to me that Facebook didn't use its financial muscle to sidestep this issue and release a sort of "console" alongside the Rift that is heavily tuned for this particular purpose. I suppose this will happen eventually, and that the first "Rift" is still intended as an "enthusiast" product with a more seamless, mainstream-oriented product to follow.

Rooster61 11y ago

Hmm. I recently upgraded to a GTX 960, and I wonder if it will have enough horsepower. It's a cool, power sipping card for the performance it puts out, but I would wager that many of the techniques used to get those benefits will not take well to the specific demands of those dual screens. Then again, these are "recommended" specs, not required.

Cushman 11y ago
Do you have the 2GB or 4GB card? In general, you can get by fine just turning down some effects. But VRAM usage tends to scale with resolution, and the Rift's >HD render target will probably put the squeeze on a 2GB card. Even with a 4GB 960, you might run into memory bandwidth issues, but without running the software I'm just speculating.
daenz 11y ago
The higher model number doesn't necessarily mean a more powerful GPU. I have a GTX 680 which competes strongly with many of the GTX 900s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_900_series http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_900_series
kenrikm 11y ago
I have SLI 670s which is around the performance of a 970. with graphics cards there can be a variety configs to get to about the same performance.
- wlll 11y ago
  Right now there are issues with SLI and VR though, there's information about this available online, particularly on the oculus subreddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/ http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/) if you search. Current best advice, use a single card, with SLI YMMV.

Arzh 11y ago

I'm still surprised how many people are mad about the OSX ditch. They think they need a high-end gaming video card, which Apple doesn't support. Apple has never cared about making Macs machines that play games. Why would you want to be on a platform that doesn't care about what you want to do on it?

kenrikm 11y ago
The Mac Pro does in fact have a good enough graphics card. But that market is so small I guess they feel it's not worth it.
- wlll 11y ago
  Kinda. It's OK for simpler stuff such as Windlands, but a "flagship" game like Elite: Dangerous isn't really pleasant to play. This is from my experience using a top of the line Mac Pro booting windows 8.1.
  - function_seven 11y ago
    Serious question: Did you mean to say "MacBook Pro"? Or are the dual GPUs in the Mac Pro severely overpriced? (I don't keep up with the advances in graphics cards)
    - wlll 11y ago
      I really did mean the Mac Pro! I've also done VR on a MacBook Pro and that's obviously much worse even than the Mac Pro. VR doesn't work well with SLI right now, many people end up disabling all but one GPU in a multi GPU setup.
    - tedunangst 11y ago
      The GPUs in the Mac pro aren't strictly optimized for putting triangles on the screen.
Cushman 11y ago
Then why not support Linux? Apple devs are used to working around esoteric hardware requirements, they're upset about not getting software support. Regardless of Oculus's sensible reasons for pursuing a one-platform strategy, you're talking about independent devs who have spent months or years building on a beta SDK only to be left hanging in the final runup to release. I'm confused why you're surprised.

ohitsdom 11y ago

Slightly off topic: I didn't realize how excited the graphics card makers must be over VR until reading this post. If VR catches on for mainstream use (not just games), that'd be a huge boon to the industry.

notjustanymike 11y ago
The Titan X with 12gb of VRAM is just the beginning...
rasz_pl 11y ago
AMD already made a bunch of slides announcing the new GPU line to be VR dedicated

cromwellian 11y ago

400 megapixels/s filtrate requirement is a low end spec. Seriously, this is weaker than current game consoles. it's not high end at all compared to what enthusiasts build on.

mahyarm 11y ago
A GTX 970 / AMD 290 is far more powerful than current consoles too, so there is probably more to it than that.

cwyers 11y ago

For those complaining about the lack of OS X and Linux support for now: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey 95.81% of Steam users are on Windows. If anything I suspect this understates the number of Steam users who have Windows -- I suspect some of the Linux and OS X users dual-boot. And I am sure it definitely underestimates the amount of Windows installs among people who have the horsepower to support the specs they're quoting; there's almost no laptops that support the Rift, which means the only thing in Apple's lineup that supports this is the narrow market segment of people who own the Darth Vader Trash Can and use it as a gaming machine, and I guess Hackintosh owners. Resources are not infinite. Every dollar/man-hour/etc. spent on Linux and OS X support are resources not spent on something else. If there was a more competitive market for high-end PC gaming OSes it might make more sense to spend those resources there. But there isn't.

lloeki 11y ago
> I suspect some of the Linux and OS X users dual-boot. Hard to tell: how many install Steam under their dual-booting (or dedicated game machine) Windows and don't bother to install it under alt-OS as their games mostly don't run on it because the developer didn't bother supporting it? > there's almost no laptops that support the Rift / the narrow market segment of people who own the Darth Vader Trash Can Given the requirements, be realistic, there's not much PC either. It doesn't matter, as this is a nascent market. It also seems that everyone assumes that the games run must be of the Crysis or whatever the latest heavy-duty shiny AAA thing is. Hearing you all, I wonder how I even can possibly be enjoying gaming on my HD4000† under OSX. Turns out I do, and this is what infuriates me about those requirements. I do understand the requirements about latency and real-time scheduling constraints, yet I am convinced we can build innovative, great VR things satisfying those constraints even on "reduced" hardware. † yes, games can be fun without SSAO, DOF, or even real-time soft shadows.
SmokyBourbon 11y ago
Valve's superior SteamVR will have OSX and Linux support.
Jare 11y ago
> the only thing in Apple's lineup that supports this is the narrow market segment of people who own the Darth Vader Trash Can Not even that, I think.

curiously 11y ago

I'm glad they ditched OSX and Linux to focus on Windows. OSX and Linux are not serious gaming machines. It makes sense to improve the 95% of users gaming on windows machines and sacrifice the 5% who are simply complaining that their manufacturers/vendors won't support their gaming needs.

bronz 11y ago

I was a very dedicated supporter of VR from 2012 to 2014. Unfortunately I have come to the conclusion that VR will flounder, especially in the coveted "seated experience" category. When the DK2s began to land on the doorsteps of developers and fans, feedback began to pour into the forums. There are two kinds of people: there are people who do not get simulator sickness and those who do. After reading the feedback and stories regarding the DK2 I realized simulator sickness was a much larger problem that I thought, and that it wasn't going to disappear with better tracking, pixel density and refresh rate. Some people simply cannot tolerate VR, and I doubt that even the CV1 will be able to change that. But these are only the people at the extreme end of the spectrum, there are many others who straddle the boundary between being sick immediately and never feeling sick at all. The problem for people on the fence is that lateral movement in the game world is a major trigger for nausea. If your virtual body accelerates from standing to running, your real body expects to feel a sensation of acceleration. What this means is that if you move around too much you get sick. And for people who don't feel sick as soon as they put the head set on, movement is often the tipping point. This is a huge problem because there is no way to simulate that kind of sensation (within practical limits) and almost all of the VR experiences that people want to engage in involve moving around in some way. This conclusion is based solely on rational observations, and it was arrived at in spite of huge optimism and engagement with VR and the VR community.

KaoruAoiShiho 11y ago
Simulator sickness is solved? All you need is 1to1 tracking. Of course this means a whole genre of games is impossible (first person action) but every other genre would work fantastically (and I hate FPS anyway). I'm pretty satisfied with it. There really isn't any sickness problem anymore.