Re:VR
by kurthr on Friday January 13, 2017 @04:32PM
(#13394879)
You're absolutely right... But by rendering separately the high resolution and low resolution views (each at 1k, but one 4x upscaled) we could do 60Hz today. It only requires 2 FHD renders (which is less than a 4k 2eye view at UHD) so 60Hz is very reasonable... possibly 90-120Hz. It also cuts the bandwidth by 8x (2/16) without compression.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
There are so many new rendering tricks popping up all the time... new APIs also give less overhead, which is nice.
Either way...
580 gtx gflops: 1581
1080 gtx gflops: 8228
7 years. 420% increase in float calc perf.
Re:VR
by intrasight on Saturday January 14, 2017 @01:59PM
(#13399915)
And you only need high resolution and high color at the fovea. Eye tracking will be the key to making VR/AR low-power and high-quality.
It won't, no worries. Eye tracking in an HMD, whether AR or VR is hugely complicated from engineering point of view. There is a reason why an HMD eye tracking kit costs several thousands of USD.
Moreover, from the rendering point of view, foveated rendering is a fairly complex thing to integrate into a 3D engine too. It is definitelly not "free".
Foveated rendering is certainly no panacea.
Re:VR
by intrasight on Monday January 16, 2017 @10:40AM
(#13410536)
No panacea but another important piece of the puzzle. The software part may be complex - but it is just software, and once done, we all benefit from 10x battery life. Eye tracking hardware is complex but Lots of ongoing R&D - the outcome of which will be sensor chips which can be added to HMDs.