HP Reverb now or wait for Pimax 8K X

review

#62

Yes, it is very tempting, I agree :beers:


#63

It’s quite similar to the lenovo in many respects ie fov , weight etc

I think I will return mine due to ipd and wait for another one with an adjustable ipd , The longer I use it the more annoyed I get with hp for cheaping out with no ipd adjustment.


#64

Yes, I also decided to wait for the release of all the interesting headsets this year.
Still, the transition from a large FOV to a small one (like Lenovo) confuses me a little, especially without the IPD adjustment.


#65

Surely some company will realise that the middle ground is best here , high res panels with 135-145 horizontal fov and ipd adjust
Why pimax still insist on chasing 200 fov is beyond me , I bet most pimax users are on normal or small settings


#66

Yes, Normal FOV is pretty good in most cases.
Even a small FOV is joyful enough for Pimax compared to all other headsets :+1:


#67

By the way, controllers are needed there, as far as I remember, with a gamepad I could not use it :roll_eyes:


#68

they are some good settings. i use something similar but on normal fov and the clarity is outstanding.
need to try small fov see what difference it makes.


#69

I would say making a wide FOV headset with basically HP Reverb SDE (or better, who knows) doesnt prevent you from using it in 150 or even 120 degrees FOV. But it allows you to do 170 degrees, if you want. Is that really so bad? :slight_smile:


#70

Not at all if it’s possible

Re the reverb , I cannot bring myself to send it back , shouldn’t have taken a last minute look at the clarity lol


#71

Well, lets face it.

HP Reverb:
2160x2160 pixels per displays which renders close to 100 degrees each.
2160/100 = 21,6
Thats 21,6 pixels per degree (if the full panel is utilized)

8K X:
3840x2160 pixels per display, with each panel rendering maybe 130-140 degrees horizontally.
FYI: 3840 minus 2160 gives us 1680 extra pixels horizontally on the 8K X. Thats 43% more pixels for the 40 degrees extra.

Anyways, If each panel renders 140 degrees, then:
3840/140 = 27,5
Thats 27,5 pixels per degree. (if the full panel is utilized)

So yeah in THEORY its fully possible to get a much better SDE than HP Reverb, despite using 170 degrees.

Lets hope Pimax make it happen :slight_smile:


#72

They’re using the whole 100% panel in the reverb , I can see the square of it with my 8mm thick face mask , a consideration though is getting the signal to the 8KX the reverb’s cable is very heavy duty , only 4m long and heavy , wondering what sort of cable pimax will need not to mention gpu power


#73

I think there is something wrong here…

Why would you devide with 140 and not 170.


#74

panel resolution not total fov
maybe the hp reverb 100 degree figure is wrong though


#75

Yes I know, hence the lower vertical FOV on Reverb.

But lets get deeper :slight_smile:

We have 3840 pixels horizontally on the 8K X.
If Pimax aims to have a identical SDE on the 8KX as the HP Reverb, then it should have 21,6 pixels per degree.
And from 3840 pixels. 21,6 pixels per degree gives us 177 degrees FOV per eye. Of course, the 8K X wont render 177 degrees per eye, but maybe 135-140. Lets say 140 again.

Now 140/177 gives us 0,79 which means we have 21% of the panel to waste here. Which means (correct me if Im wrong), even if Pimax 8KX does not use 21% of each of the full panel horizontally, giving us roughly 80% (or 79%) horizontal panel utilization, the visible SDE on the full 140 degrees per eye should be equal to HP Reverb, which is 21,6 pixels per degree.


#76

It should be very similar ppd either way
lets hope they can do it at a reasonable price


#77

Because each panel on the current Pimax headsets is not rendering a full 170 degree horizontally. I gave you an example if each panel renders approx 140 degrees. But thats also not correct.

140+140 = 280 minus around 100 degrees of stereo overlap gives us 180 degrees horizontally in total. Which in practice is 165-170 degrees on Pimax, so that means each panel renders around 135 degrees horizontally.

135+135 = 270 minus 100 degrees stereo overlap. And what we get is around 170 degrees total horizontal FOV.

Now if we use that number, 135 degrees per panel on 8K X, this means the Pixel Per Degree is even higher now :slight_smile: 3840/135 = 28,4 PPD max (if panel is fully utilized, which it wont be for sure).


#78

So to simplify this:

If Pimax 8K X has a horizontal panel utilization of 80%, it will have more or less the identical SDE as HP Reverb, but on 170 FOV.


#79

Still, I’m a little confused by your calculations.
If 8KX uses 80% of the panel, then this is already obtained = 3840–20% = 3072 horizontal resolution.
3072/170 degrees = 18 PPD


#80

lol I make it 3072/135 =23ppd


#81

3072/135 degrees = 22,7 PPD

Each panel is 3840x2160 and each panel renders only 135 degrees, giving a total of 170 degrees horizontally.

Edit: This is why you get a stereo overlap (binocular overlap) of around 100 degrees.