Dynamic Foveated Rendering: Time to go to an Aero, or wait for next gen?

[Voyager]

Seeing more flight sims getting support for eye tracked foveated rendering, and with DCS joining the mix, I'm wondering if it time to start looking at going to something like an Areo, or giving it another year or so to see if anyone puts out a headset with a significantly higher center peak pixel density? 

I've been running a Vive Pro 2, which has a 20ppd range, so being able to run at a 35ppd focus zone would be a step up. But I know human vision tops out at around 60-70ppd. On the other hand, I've got enough GPU to comfortably drive 2800*2800 for the forseeable future, and who knows what Blackwell or RDNA4 are actually going to turn out like, so it could easily be another several years before a GPU exists that could comfortably drive a 70ppd headset. 

Thoughts? 

[Mr_sukebe]

I understand that dynamic FV works in the Civ sim.  I don’t believe that it’s currently working with DCS.  I’m hoping that it’ll arrive with Vulkan.

[dburne]

8 minutes ago, Mr_sukebe said:

I understand that dynamic FV works in the Civ sim.  I don’t believe that it’s currently working with DCS.  I’m hoping that it’ll arrive with Vulkan.

Yes with @mbucchia software DFR with eye tracking works beautifully in DCS with the Aero. My performance went way up.

https://github.com/mbucchia/Varjo-Foveated/wiki

I believe currently it only works with the Open Beta.

Edited April 9, 2023 by dburne

[A Hamburgler]

I’m waiting to see how the pimax crystal performs. It’s hard to justify spending 2k on the Aero when pimax is offering a higher PPD for less. From my understanding the crystal will also come with eye tracking so hopefully it can also utilize DFR.

[Voyager]

56 minutes ago, A Hamburgler said:

I’m waiting to see how the pimax crystal performs. It’s hard to justify spending 2k on the Aero when pimax is offering a higher PPD for less. From my understanding the crystal will also come with eye tracking so hopefully it can also utilize DFR.

I've heard bits and pieces about the Crystal. Do we know when we should expect to see it go live? 

It does sound like it should have better resolution and field of view, but I've heard enough horror stories about PiMax quality control and software weirdness that I'm skeptical about their products. And having done both inside out and outside in tracking, I prefer the base station setup. 

I see the advantages of it, but I'm also concerned about the potential drawbacks: will it perform as advertised, and will it be reliable? Don't know yet. 

[Supmua]

While it is a nice competitor for the Aero based on specs, Pimax’s math is a bit odd here. Both the Aero and the Crystal headsets use similar screen pixels (Aero has a tad less vertical pixels but exact same horizontal pixels), yet the Pimax headset that has higher FOV somehow also yields higher PPD as much as 42?  It sounds like marketing to me.

Even the Aero’s touted 39 PPD is only achievable via DFR and that PPD isn’t true across the entire FOV. 

[motoadve]

Pimax, never again, horrible company to deal with.

Whatever they make I wont buy it.

Varjo right now will give you the best performance and visuals of any headset in DCS. 

Beta version with foveated rendering and MT.

No need to wait.

Edited April 9, 2023 by motoadve

[Supmua]

4 hours ago, Mr_sukebe said:

I understand that dynamic FV works in the Civ sim.  I don’t believe that it’s currently working with DCS.  I’m hoping that it’ll arrive with Vulkan.

DFR in DCS is currently only possible via Varjo’s unique quad view rendering mode which is not offered by other headsets (i.e. nonstandard way of implementing DFR).  The target applications also have to support this mode in order for Varjo DFR to work, and currently DCS is the only one besides Varjo’s native apps. 

[A Hamburgler]

You can still use the base stations with the crystal. But I was and early backer of the 5k plus and got it when it first released years ago. I still use the the 5k plus and never had any issues. I do see pimax as having lower build quality but that’s why I’m going to wait for the reviews. I have heard some terrible issues with pimax but I have not experienced any yet. 

Edited April 9, 2023 by A Hamburgler

[Parrotnut]

 

[Supmua]

I don’t think anybody will be disappointed with the image quality aspect of Crystal, but that’s only a part of the equation.  Software that uses to drive it as well as tech support are also as important. How it performs in the real world, how well it operates without glitches, how durable it is, how accessible the tech support is whenever it needs to be repaired or replaced...those remains to be seen. 

With the Aero, the software side didn’t really catch up until almost a year later and only via a 3rd party intervention that we now have DFR with DCS.  I sure hope Pimax have some brilliant software engineers on their side or a lot of these touted specs might be in hibernation for a long time when it comes to real world usage. 

Edited April 9, 2023 by Supmua

[mbucchia]

57 minutes ago, Supmua said:

DFR in DCS is currently only possible via Varjo’s unique quad view rendering mode which is not offered by other headsets (i.e. nonstandard way of implementing DFR).  The target applications also have to support this mode in order for Varjo DFR to work, and currently DCS is the only one besides Varjo’s native apps. 

Nothing stops other vendors to implement Varjo quad views in their OpenXR runtime though. I am currently adding support for it in my OpenXR runtime for Pimax, so that hopefully it's usable with Crystal as well (and I'm making it an option to force foveated rendering even if the app doesn't ask for it, so users on Pimax won't even need the extra Varjo-Foveated software to enable it).

All this stuff is relatively small development efforts, but for a fairly small number of users (whether Varjo or Pimax). I believe that's the excuse developers (both engine and platform) are hiding behind when not implementing these features. There probably isn't sufficient ROI from giving you better performance

[A Hamburgler]

Your a legend! That was one of my biggest concerns was that the crystal would not get DFR. 
 

It’s just going to be a wait and see situation. I so badly want to get a better headset but might as well wait a little longer. 

Edited April 9, 2023 by A Hamburgler

[Voyager]

3 hours ago, Supmua said:

Even the Aero’s touted 39 PPD is only achievable via DFR and that PPD isn’t true across the entire FOV. 

That's why I had not being considering it before DFR in DCS and MSFS. I can run at acceptable frame rates with a 2800*2800 per eye, but there was likely no GPU for the forseeable future that could drive 39ppd without it. 

After doing some math, it looks like my desktop setup is about 40ppd, so I'm thinking holding out for a 70ppd system probably is not worth it. 

Going to do a bit more research on the Aero vs Crystal and probably go for one of them, and not wait to see if what the Pimax 12+ or if Varjo does an Aero successor. Right now I'm leaning towards the Aero, but will see how the user reviews on the Pimax turn out. Would also probably need to get the Steam VR face plate for it too. (No point in wasting a perfectly well set up Lighthouse set.) 

Thank you all. This has been very helpful. 

[Mr_sukebe]

I’d forgotten about the Aero solution for DCS.  That really is very cool.

 

I’m hoping that we’ll see something similar for the Quest Pro, which is getting a lot of positive noise at the moment and is half the price of the Aero

 

 

[mbucchia]

18 minutes ago, Mr_sukebe said:

I’m hoping that we’ll see something similar for the Quest Pro

I'm not going to implement this on Pro. The Pro is too low resolution to benefit from the quad views. When doing some quick math earlier, it looked like the gains on Pro would be perhaps one quarter of the gains of Aero/Crystal. Doing quad views on the Pro isn't worth the development effort. Their compositor doesn't support fovMutable which makes the task even harder.

[Slick Twitchy]

With technology, it's always a complex algorithm. I LOVE my aero-I have been looking for that balance for clarity and smoothness, and I find the aero works great. But there will always be a better solution later on. It comes down to money, and patience. I don't have super problem with spending money on the stuff that makes me happy and gives me something to look forward to doing. And I am a little short on the patience side.

I really don't think you'd be disappointed with the aero (as long as your other components (GPU/CPU) are also top tier. But again, if you wait there will be something better. I am hotly anticipating the holodeck option, but I'll take the aero for now. 

[A Hamburgler]

2 hours ago, Slick Twitchy said:

With technology, it's always a complex algorithm. I LOVE my aero-I have been looking for that balance for clarity and smoothness, and I find the aero works great. But there will always be a better solution later on. It comes down to money, and patience. I don't have super problem with spending money on the stuff that makes me happy and gives me something to look forward to doing. And I am a little short on the patience side.

I really don't think you'd be disappointed with the aero (as long as your other components (GPU/CPU) are also top tier. But again, if you wait there will be something better. I am hotly anticipating the holodeck option, but I'll take the aero for now. 

The patience is my issue too haha. I’m trying to remain strong here. Knowing my luck I would get the aero and the crystal would release and have amazing reviews. 

[dburne]

4 hours ago, Voyager said:

That's why I had not being considering it before DFR in DCS and MSFS. I can run at acceptable frame rates with a 2800*2800 per eye, but there was likely no GPU for the forseeable future that could drive 39ppd without it. 

After doing some math, it looks like my desktop setup is about 40ppd, so I'm thinking holding out for a 70ppd system probably is not worth it. 

Going to do a bit more research on the Aero vs Crystal and probably go for one of them, and not wait to see if what the Pimax 12+ or if Varjo does an Aero successor. Right now I'm leaning towards the Aero, but will see how the user reviews on the Pimax turn out. Would also probably need to get the Steam VR face plate for it too. (No point in wasting a perfectly well set up Lighthouse set.) 

Thank you all. This has been very helpful. 

 

I tend to be hesitant these days in singing praises too loudly for a particular device, especially one as expensive as the Aero. I will say this from my experience - coming from Rift, Rift S, Index, Reverb G2, and Vive Pro 2. The Aero especially with now it's Dynamic Foveated Rendering with eye tracking in DCS blows them all away - by far. IMHO of course. The performance I am getting now with my Aero in DCS would have been unheard of a couple of months ago. And most of my gaming is in DCS.

I do have some bias though - I will never spend a dime on anything Pimax. I have loathed them from the start in how they market their products and how they never seem to deliver what all they promise and certainly never in the time frame they promise. So in my case when considering headsets, Pimax will never be on my list. I do give them credit for still being in the run though, the more that are the better for VR overall.

[Nodak]

I'll wait for Apple and Samsung's reveals right around the corner, just may equal or beat anything current, we'll see shortly.  Both will utilize XR format, no not openXR, but true pass thru high res blending known as extended reality, XR.  Should be able to clearly see your controllers or real world knee board.  How they're going to do it remains to be seen.  Watch a few vids on the Varjo XR-3 in action with their version of implementation, make you drool, but that price point is out of range and we aren't the targeted customer.

[GunSlingerOZ]

It appears that even with DFR, a 4090 still can't push enough pixels to maintain the Aero at 90fps in anything other than simple missions. As a result, I'm gonna sit it out until the 5090 comes out. 

[Voyager]

21 hours ago, GunSlingerOZ said:

It appears that even with DFR, a 4090 still can't push enough pixels to maintain the Aero at 90fps in anything other than simple missions. As a result, I'm gonna sit it out until the 5090 comes out. 

Have you checked if it is your GPU or CPU exploding the timeline? If it is mission complexity, that sounds like a CPU limit rather than GPU, and some really wild CPUs are coming out in the next year. 

[GunSlingerOZ]

11 minutes ago, Voyager said:

Have you checked if it is your GPU or CPU exploding the timeline? If it is mission complexity, that sounds like a CPU limit rather than GPU, and some really wild CPUs are coming out in the next year. 

I haven't actually tried since MT came out. However, it seems like it's still a GPU issue, as it seems most VR users are experiencing GPU bottlenecks during the busier missions. 

[Voyager]

14 hours ago, GunSlingerOZ said:

I haven't actually tried since MT came out. However, it seems like it's still a GPU issue, as it seems most VR users are experiencing GPU bottlenecks during the busier missions. 

Not sure if the Aero can do SteamVR and OpenXR at the same time, but if so it may be worth firing up fpsVR to find out.

[GunSlingerOZ]

7 hours ago, Voyager said:

Not sure if the Aero can do SteamVR and OpenXR at the same time, but if so it may be worth firing up fpsVR to find out.

Why are you asking about SteamVR and OpenXR? Will that lower GPU bottlenecks?