Spec Sheet: Samsung, Dell, Acer, Asus Lenovo And HP’s Windows VR Headsets Compared

by Jamie Feltham • October 18th, 2017

Two weeks from today Microsoft finally launches its grand vision for virtual reality on Windows 10. On October 17th the company will release several new headsets, made in partnership with select companies, running on its new Windows Mixed Reality platform.

But which headset is right for you?

To answer that question, we’ve drafted up the below graph, which gives you an overview of the specs for each device stacked up to their prices and release dates. Take note that, while many of these headsets feature identical specs, their build quality and other ergonomic factors may well have a big impact on the experience they deliver. Which headset do you plan on picking up?

Editor’s Note: This spec comparison originally ran October 3, 2017. It was updated on October 18, 2017 since the headsets were released this week.

What's your reaction?
Like
Wow
24%
LOL
24%
Dislike
6%
  • D3stroyah

    please look if samsung’s it’s going to be rgb or pentile. only thing that matters now

    • Ivan Mike

      +1

      • Adderstone VR

        Hands-on review on RoadtoVR seems to state pentile. Still looking for confirmation from Samsung

        • Luke

          the oculus cv1 is rgb or pentile? thx

          • Adderstone VR

            Both CV1 and Vive are Pentile displays, PSVR is RGB

  • Jonathan Tate

    The Samsung has actually been confirmed (on its site) to have dual 1440×1600 panels, not a single 2800×1600

    • Surykaty

      lmao… dual 1440×1600 stands for total 2880×1600 resolution.. so the spec was correct and you can go cry in the corner

      • Jonathan Tate

        ? What are you talking about? I was just pointing out the way they show every other headset as dual panel but don’t say that for the Samsung when it fact it is also dual panel.

        • Surykaty

          look you are trying to nitpick that the author of the table did not specify that it’s a dual display type.. but if you look at the name of the row it says display resolution so technically it is correct.. so go cry somewhere

          • Jonathan Tate

            Hah, ok… sounds like you’re the one that needs to go cry somewhere. I was just being helpful by providing updated information (since it wasn’t confirmed before today that it was dual panel). Designating every other device as dual panel but that one implies that it is not dual panel. Clarity and having all the facts help people make decisions. No reason to cry about it 🙂

          • Rigelleo

            Your information is interesting. In my opinion, the Samsung visor is really the most interesting of the group because it has a higher resolution in one of the two axes (and this is reflected in a higher FOV), but if it had been a single display, there would have been a loss of resolution in the division area and this would have made it less attractive. With the Samsung visor we have a 25% lower aliasing compared to the current visors (Vive and Rift), the size of pixels perceived by the observer will be 25% smaller! Not bad!

          • ibuprofène

            yea but it use shitty pentile amoled so the result will be equal or inferior to the lcd models and it will be more gpu intensive

          • Rigelleo

            Yes but the Vive’s and Rift’s displays are also pentile amoled.

          • Gonzalo Novoa

            Relax, man, he was just trying to be helpful.

  • Thetrick

    Dell visor is 110 FOV as stated in Dell’s official website. Why are you saying 105?

    • Yang Jia Long

      yeah double this. checked dell website and it showed 110 degrees FOV

    • koenshaku

      This site needs to get it together. Fake news is everywhere now days lol.

  • JesperL

    I dont get it. How will this not just end with 1 that wins, and 5 that fail?

    • dk

      the same way that there r a gazillion monitors on the market and there isn’t 1 winner and fails……..and the hololens and these headsets and all ar/vr/mr hmds will be just tracked monitors for pc and they will all run the same platform/apps/interface……and they won’t be like consoles ….and vive and rift running win mr is just a question of time since it’s just a shell for windows

      • Jeff Axline

        That kind of makes sense, but everyone needs monitors while the VR pool is going to be quite small for a while. My guess is Samsung will be the top dog and one or two others will do OK.

        • dk

          well this is basically the equivalent of the first few monochrome displays that were produced…….it’s basically like saying why would they make more if this one monochrome 5 inch display is the best one

          once there is a spatial computing os hmds will be like monitors and not platforms for different stores……and the stores will be just an app u install on your pc

      • JesperL

        Can’t reall compare to the monitor market can you? There are tons of monitors with different specs, and you choose based on your individual need and PC spec etc.. Its a huge market, therefore there are room for 100’s of variants.
        With VR, the market is small, all needs high end PC, and all the specs are the same except maybe the samsung.
        Here 6 HMD’s are released, all with almost same specs – only real difference is design/looks which looses if 1 is stronger (Samsung)

        • dk

          yes the market of the first few monochrome monitors was also small and there wasn’t a huge variety ….like I mentioned this is only the start …….ar/vr/mr hmds will be much more than a few consoles for selling games

        • ibuprofène

          mr heaset can work with the igpu of the cpu not even need additional gpu so that not a high end pc but low end

  • dk

    interestingly enough 1600×1440 at 3.5 inches is 600 ppi….so 100 less than the other headsets ….but it has the other stuff people r bitching about

    • Joe_HTH

      More BS. The Samsung has 1600×1440 per eye. The Vive has 1080×1200 per eye. The Rift has the same. So explain to me how it has less pixel density than Rift or Vive? Nevermind, we already know the answer.

      • He means than the 700 ppi of the other WindowsMR headsets.

      • Rigelleo

        PPI in VR isn’t important. The really important thing is the number of pixels per degree on the FOV, these visors have more pixels in the same FOV than Rift and Vive, so it is legitimate to expect a good reduction in aliasing and SDE.

        • dk

          u couldn’t be more wrong …ppi is super massively important ……it’s not the only thing but it’s huge
          like John Carmack has explained multiple times the higher ppi the higher the angular resolution is……and the SDE will disappear with an hmd with 180 degrees fov …..when the display is about 16000 by 16000……per eye

          • Rigelleo

            The angular resolution is the number of pixel in the FOV the more the pixel at the same FOV the more the angular resolution. It tuo have a 1000x1000px display in a FOV 100°x100° you have 10px/° regardless the ppi. A 500ppi display and a 800ppi display would be of different sizes and would need different lenses to archieve the same FOV but would have the same angular resolution.

          • dk

            wow u have no idea what ppi means …….ok I’ll be happy to explain….I’ll be your google …jk

            ppi is…………it’s number of pixels in a square inch
            higher ppi …….means higher pixel density in the same area…..and as u said “more the pixel at the same FOV the more the angular resolution”

            the rift and this headset have the same display size per eye 3.5 inches
            and this one has higher resolution in the same size and that is what ppi refers to…….. the number of pixels is more in the same area

            ppi calculator —–> sven DOT de/dpi/ …….to calculate density of pixels u enter the size of the display and the resolution

            cdn2 DOT knowyourmobile DOT com/sites/knowyourmobilecom/files/styles/gallery_wide/public/1/17/ppi.jpg?itok=Gl7_oR0m ……..same size more pixels more ppi

          • Rigelleo

            When you put the visor in front of your eyes it is not important that che display is 3.5″ or 5″, if the FOV is the same (because the tho visors uses different lenses) and the resolution of the displays is the same you would see the same angular resolution. you would not even notice the difference!

          • dk

            yes rift/vive/odyssey …….they have the same screen sizes the same fov ….the Samsung is higher res/ppi
            i.ytimg DOT com/vi/0JqEXBkwZK8/maxresdefault DOT jpg —-> u absolutely notice the difference if the pixels r close to 2 times more in the same area
            higher ppi means less sde…….because higher ppi means higher number of pixels in the same square inch area

          • Rigelleo

            A 30-inch full HD TV has 74 ppi. A 60-inch full HD tv has 37ppi. If you watch the first TV from a distance of 5 feet it will have the same FOV of the second TV viewed from a 10 feet distance. The FOV is the same. The number of pixels per degree is equal, the aliasing is equal, the SDE is exactly the same. You have to understand that what is important is not the number of pixels per surface area, what is important is the number of pixels per degree, screens of equal resolution but of different physical size will need a different lens to get the same FOV but, once obtained that FOV, the visor will have the same number of pixels per degree.

          • dk

            what part didn’t u get from this
            vive/rift——- 3.5 inch 1080×1200 display per eye —–450ppi
            odyssey—— 3.5 inch 1440×1600 display per eyr ——600ppi
            hp/dell and so on—-2.9 inch 1440×1440 display per eye ——700ppi
            pimax 4k —–800ppi
            and u have an image of what 800ppi vs 450 ppi means ——–> i.ytimg DOT com/vi/0JqEXBkwZK8/maxresdefault DOT jpg

            how can u get the same pixels per degree….. if there r literally more pixels in the same space …….u r literally not thinking

            this is lowering the sde not the aliasing how hard is that to get

          • Rigelleo

            For the last time: it is the resolution, not the PPI! It is the bigger resolution that makes the bigger pixel/° at the same FOV not the bigger PPI.This is regardless the screen door. It cannot ve so difficult to understand, maybe you are making fun of me…

          • dk

            yes for the last time ……ppi is density of pixels in the same area …..more ppi is literally more pixels in the same area

          • Rigelleo

            Surface area is different from FOV. I give you an example were two different screens with the same PPI but different resolution, once imagined by different lenses to obtain the same FOV, will have different angular resolution. Imagine that you have two screens, one 1000x1000px and one 1500x1500px, the two screens have the same PPI: 404ppi, so the first screen is 3.5″, the second screen is 5.25″. Now imagine you use two different lenses for each screen to obtain the same FOV of 100°x100°. What will be the angular resolution of the first screen? 1000px/100° = 10px/°. What will be the angular resolution of the second screen? 1500px/100° = 15px/°. Therefore: for the same PPI but different resolution you have, at the same FOV, different angular resolution, the second screen will have lower aliasing and lower SDE and i would prefer that.

          • dk

            yeeeeeees that is why I mentioned that if u have 2 displays same size SAME FOV…………the higher pixel density also known as HIGHER PPI which is just another word for that …..is what affects the sde…..other things also affect it too …but this is a big one

          • Rigelleo

            I said that a better PPI does not necessarily lead to a better angular resolution. You may have a better angle resolution at the same PPI but with a larger screen with bigger resolution, or you may have the same angular resolution even if you have two screens with different ppi but the same resolution. This means that simply telling the PPI it does not tell you anything about the quality of the vision. The aliasing is deeply correlated to the angular resolution, over a certain value of angular resolution your eye doesn’t see aliasing

          • dk

            more pixels in the same area……also known as higher pixel density …..also known as higher ppi …………is higher angular resolution
            600 to 700 might be hard to notice ….and 450 to 700 or 800 is absolutely obvious ……and I linked that example multiple times

            and if the rendering is jagged on a high ppi display or something is jagged because a display has low ppi …..is irrelevant to anything and is completely different thing

          • Rigelleo

            two display: one with PPI 400, one with PPI 800, both have the same resolution: 1000×1000 pixel, one is two times bigger than the other. Using two different lenses to archieve the same FOV of 100°x100° we will have 1000 pixel in 100° in both cases. What will be the angular resolution of the first display? 10px/°, what will be the angular resolution of the second display? 10px/°.Therefore i have confutated your thesis: higher PPI doesn’t necessary lead to higher angular resolution

          • dk

            it’s not 2 times bigger dude why the hell r u not even thinking
            vive/rift——- 3.5 inch 1080×1200 display per eye —–450ppi 110 fov
            odyssey—— 3.5 inch 1440×1600 display per eyr ——600ppi 110 fov

            ppi is the density of the pixels in an inch
            more ppi doesn’t mean bigger screen………….it means more pixels in the same area

          • Rigelleo

            Vive/rift have 1080×1200 display the FOV is rectangular and the horizontal FOV is almost 100° you have 1080 pixels in 100° so the angular resolution is 10.8px/°. The Odyssey has the same FOV and 1440px distribuited in 100° so the angular resolution is 14.4px/°. The biggest angular resolution is due only because of the increased resolution of the display not for the bigger PPI. Infact if Samsung had used a 4.7 inch display with the same increase in resolution (1440×1600) but the same PPI of the Vive/Rift the Odyssey would have had the same angular resolution (using different lenses to archieve the same FOV).

          • dk

            again there is not point to answer to the pointless calculations
            but apparetly I have nothing better to do
            rift vive—-450 ppi —-10.8px/°
            odyssey—-600 ppi—–14.4px/°

            meaning higher pixel density is higher angular resolution…..and u keep saying that it’s not…….and ppi is just the number for pixel density

            also it’s not just the line that tels u what is the angular resolution it’a the area of the base of the cone of 1 degree of your vision

          • Rigelleo

            I have made you a clear example that two displays with different PPI values and equal FOV may have the same angular resolution, I made you note with another clear example that two displays with the same PPI and equal FOV but different resolution may have different angular resolution . This shows that a display with a greater PPI does not automatically imply that angular resolution is greater. The PPI parameter gives you no information on angular resolution. The parameter that counts is the naked and raw resolution, the number of pixels. Your example is the same as saying: all dogs have 4 legs —> the tables have 4 legs —> the tables are dogs.

          • dk

            and I gave u a clear example
            vive/rift–3.5 inch 1080×1200 display per eye 110fov–450ppi
            odyssey–3.5 inch 1440×1600 display per eyr 110fov–600ppi

            and u r saying that more pixels per degree is the one with more pixels per inch ………….but at the same time that ppi doesn’t mean more angular resolution…..and if the second one was even higher resolution and same size ….2000 ppi the angular resolution will also grow with that

            if u r sitting in front of 2 displays both 20 inches one is 1080p the other is 4k……the higher angular resolution …….is the one with the higher pixel density ……it’s that simple

          • Rigelleo

            …but if there is a third display with the same 1080 resolution of the first display and half the dimension (10 inches) it would have the same PPI of the 4k 20 inches display and if you use a 2x magnifier lens to archieve the same FOV of the first two… at that point you would have two displays the second and the third with the same PPI but different angular resolution. Furthermore, and i want that you consider this very well: the first and the third display which have different PPI would have the same angular resolution (number of pixels/FOV), how do you explain that?

          • dk

            10 inches 1080 is the same ppi as the 4k

            and that is irrelevant that with higher ppi same displays same fov u get more pixels per degree

            and u keep saying that 2 exactly the same displays same fov one with higher pixel density is not more pixels per degree

          • Rigelleo

            You forgot the 2x magnifier lens. What you seems to not understand is that with a suitable lens I can always make equal FOVs of two displays whatever their physical dimension (two displays with the same PPI and different resolution have different physical sizes). And once this is done, the angular resolution I get depends solely on the number of pixels of the two screens and the FOV.

          • dk

            I’m not forgetting anything
            vive/rift–3.5 inch 1080×1200 display per eye 110fov–450ppi
            odyssey–3.5 inch 1440×1600 display per eyr 110fov–600ppi
            more pixel density is more pixels per degree

          • Rigelleo

            if within a few months HTC / Oculus will come out with a visor that has mounted two 1.75-inch displays and the same resolution and FOV of the Odyssey. We will have two visors with double the PPI of Odyssey. What will be the angular resolution of this new visor with respect to the Odyssey?

          • dk

            1.7 inch won’t be 110 fov ….it can’t …..u r again not thinking……it needs to be at the same distance as every other display…….in order for u to be able to focus on it ……and at that distance it will have a small fov and it will have the same good high pixels per degree but it will be a smaller part of your fov

            vive/rift–3.5 inch 1080×1200 display per eye 110fov–450ppi
            odyssey–3.5 inch 1440×1600 display per eye 110fov–600ppi
            if u have another one like
            X—–3.5 inch 2160×2160 display per eye 110fov–1800ppi

            more pixel density=more pixels per degree

          • Rigelleo

            No, with the suitable lens you may have a 110° FOV even using a 1.75″ display. It only depends on the focal length of the lens. It is because of this fact that the PPI tell you nothing about the angular resolution.

          • dk

            nooooooo …..u can’t stick half an inch screen on the top of your eye and call it 200 fov ….it always has to be at the same distance from the eye as every other vr screen in order to focus on it……………..the varjo display which is “0.7 inches diagonally that boast 3,000 pixels per inch”…..which when u calculate it a 1080p screen at that size is 3150ppi……so it’s about 1080p 0.7inch screen with small fov ….because u put it at the same distance as every other vr display in order to focus on it
            …….u can’t use half an inch display and get 100 or 200 fov out of it

          • Rigelleo

            With the suitable lens with the suitable focal length tuo can magnifier the even a smaller display to cover the same FOV form the same distance of the bigger displays. It’s a very simple optical knowledge.

          • dk

            u can move a screen forward and back all u want and u can try to get 100 degrees from half an inch of display ….which is impossible because u can’t focus on it
            ……….if u take the daydream view or any phone headset and u stick in it all sizes of phones with any pixel density …….u see that high pixel density is high pixels per degree…….and u r saying that it’s not….which is demonstrably false……………….I don’t care anymore

          • Rigelleo

            DK, it is clear that you lack the necessary knowledge of optical physics to discuss these topics otherwise you would not make these absurd objections. Lenses in the VR viewers have two tasks: bring the screen virtual image at a 5-6 foot distance from the viewer and enlarge it so that its apparent image covers a 100 ° FOV. If the screen is smaller the only thing that changes is that you will need to use a different lens with a different focal length but you can always focus on it and cover the same FOV even by positioning the screen at the same distance as others screens. This is because you use a different lens that enlarges more at the same distance.

          • dk

            it’s clear that that u can’t admit that if u have a headset and all u change about it is the pixel density ……when it grows the pixels per degree increases……and u keep denying

            that is all I was talking about …not about having it 2 meters away or half a millilitre away from your eyes……..I perfectly understand that the perceived resolution changes with distance………..as always …..I was talking only about if u have higher ppi in the same headset u see it

          • Rigelleo

            You have to tell me why you would have to use the same lens. I’m telling you that with the appropriate lens you can increase the dimension of smaller displays and make them have the same FOV of bigger displays. It is possible, independently you believe it or not.

          • dk

            because I am talking about a change in pixel density and absolutely noting anything else …………..and u were like “PPI in VR isn’t important”

          • Rigelleo

            I’m telling you that an increase in PPI does not automatically mean an increase in angular resolution. The only thing you need to know to define the angular resolution is the number of screen pixels divided by FOV size. Just this. It is so true that regardless of PPI I can calculate to the angular resolution of the visor only by knowing the resolution of the screen and the FOV. Are you aware of this? What you see in the visor is independent of the physical size of the screen and therefore is independent of the physical size of its pixels because with the appropriate lens it is always possible to take a display of any size and make it occupy 100° FOV. So at the end of the show count only the number of pixels not their size.

          • dk

            if the monitor u r looking at right now is super low pixel density …….and u change the panel with super high pixel density ……….yes it fucking matters

            and your comeback to that was but if u stand 5 meters away it doesn’t matter ……………….yes I know

            and like I said right now if u disassemble the vive and u replace the screen with the same size screen double the pixel density ………..yes it absolutely matters because at this point vr screens r super low resolution compared with what we need

          • Rigelleo

            Do you want the screen example again? Okay, imagine a 10-inch 4k display and a 20-inch 4k display, both from the same distance but the first display has between you and the display a 2x magnifying glass. The perceived size of the two displays (Field of view) is the same, and both screens have the same number of pixels, so they both have the same angular resolution. the same number of px / °. This even if the PPI of the two display is different.

          • dk

            do u want the example again

            right now ……if u disassemble the vive and u replace the screen with the same size screen double the pixel density ………..yes it absolutely matters because at this point vr screens r super low pixel density compared with what we need

            again …..I know exactly how the perceived resolution changes with distance

            aaaaaaaaaaaand if u double the vive ppi ……yes ppi absolutely affecting vr …..and yes other things CAN affect it……………..I am talking about double the pixel density in a vive or anything reduces the sde

          • Rigelleo

            This is only because, in your example about the Vive, you use the same lens. If You use a 2400×2160 display with the same PPI of the 1200×1080 display of the Vive but double the size and a different lens that makes the same FOV (because magnifies 2 times less than the actual Vive’s lens) you will have two times the angular resolution at the same PPI. How do you explain that?

          • dk

            yeeeeeeeees my example is about increasing ppi of a headset will increase the pixels per degree
            “PPI in VR isn’t important” is demonstrably wrong

          • Rigelleo

            I have made you an example where at the same PPI you may double the angular resolution. This is enought to demonstrate that simply telling PPI and FOV doesn’t dell’ you nothing about angular resolution.

          • dk

            if u don’t change anything and u change ONLY the ppi ………..yes ppi is absolutely affecting it
            “PPI in VR isn’t important” is demonstrably wrong

            by angular resolution I was talking about the amount of pixels in a degree ………..the more pixels/higher pixel density u see in a degree …….improves the sde

          • Rigelleo

            And why if a new visor comes out, does this have to use the same identical lenses as a current visor? The only thing I’m telling you is that simply telling the PPI doesn’t tell you nothing about the angular resolution because it may be a small resolution small display with high PPI magnified by a different lens to archieve the same FOV. Or a big display with a big resolution but with a normal magnification lens that makes the same FOV. In the first case you would have a lower resolution with respect to the second case. The only real information that you need to calculate the angular resolution is the number of pixels and the FOV. You can not deny this truth, it’s manifest.

          • dk

            ok first

            if u don’t change anything and u change ONLY the ppi ………..yes ppi is absolutely affecting it
            “PPI in VR isn’t important” is demonstrably wrong

            2nd

            vive/rift—–110fov 3.5 inch 1080×1200 display per eye —–450ppi
            odyssey—-110fov 3.5 inch 1440×1600 display per eye ——600ppi

            25% more pixels ………..in the same area ………and the same fov ……..and u get more pixels per degree……BY INCREASING THE PPI

          • Rigelleo

            If tomorrow would arrive a Vive 2 headset with a resolution of 1800×1620 pixel at the same FOV I would buy it even if it has a 5.25″ display with the same PPI (450) of the actual 3.5″ 1200×1080 display, this because this visor will have a better angular resolution. If tomorrow would arrive a Vive 2 with a 2.3″ display, better PPI (675) but same resolution of the actual Vive and same FOV. I would not have any reason to buy it even if it has a better PPI, this because the angular resolution will be the same of that of the actual Vive. The real important value to consider is the number of pixel.

          • dk

            soooooo u r saying
            identical headsets
            vive/rift—–110fov 3.5 inch 1080×1200 display per eye —–450ppi
            odyssey—-110fov 3.5 inch 1440×1600 display per eye ——600ppi
            higher pixel density……aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the same fov
            is not more pixels per degree=better looking sde
            and “PPI in VR isn’t important”
            got it

          • Rigelleo

            I am saying: the real difference that is important between the first two and the third headset is the number of pixel, it is only because of this difference that there is an increase of the angular resolution. Infact the same increase in the angular resolution would be archivable also using two display with the same PPI but with the number of pixels of Odyssey. If tomorrow arrives a new headset with 800PPI it is not automatic that the angular resolution of this new headset will be better then the angular resolution of the Odyssey.

          • dk

            yeeeeeeeeeees every one of the 3 is important …….without having any one of those u don’t know anything about the quality of the sde

            I was comparing the same fov and screen size
            because that literally shows that the difference in pixel density is masively important ………just like fov and display size is imortant

            when I hear about high ppi hmds my next step is looking at the fov and display size

            and to say that “PPI in VR isn’t important” is just false ………..without knowing any of the 3……..resolution density INCLUDED ….u don’t know how many pixels per degree u get

          • Rigelleo

            When I say that PPI isn’t impotant is because the angular resolution in uniquely determinated by number of pixels and FOV. You need only these tow parameters to calculate the angular resolution. PPI and FOV alone instead doesn’t tell you nothing about the resolution. Even an increase in the PPI value doesn’t directly mean that there will be an increase in the angular resolution as I explained to you in lots and lots of examples.

          • dk

            yeeeees and with a given fov and display size the more pixels the better
            no one is saying only ppi meters …..I am saying once u have the fov and the display size the more pixels the better
            and when u have a few exactly the same and a few very similar headsets the pixel density is the factor affecting the sde

          • Rigelleo

            If you substitute in the same headset with the same lens one display of the same size with a better PPI you will have a better angular resolution. But this is a particular case, the most general case where you do not know the type of lens used knowing only the PPI doesn’t tell you nothing about the angular resolution. Knowing the number of the pixel in all the general situation is enought to calcolate the angular resolution. It is because of this that for me PPI is not as important as the number of pixels.

          • dk

            yes that is what I am talking about when u have a given fov and screen size and amount of pixels u can calculate the pixels per degree

            and if u have another headset u also have the fov and screen size and amount of pixels and if u have more pixels per degree and the first 2 r the same the more pixels will give u more pixels per degree

          • Rigelleo

            You don’t need to know the screen size to calculate the angular resolution, the only two numbers that you need is FOV and amount of pixels. Screen size (and also pixel size) is useless to make this calculation. This because if you fix the FOV and the amount of pixels tuo may change the size of the display: the angular resolution doesn’t change. Vice versa if you fix the FOV and the size of the display and change the amount of pixels: the angular resolution change. It is right that of you fix the size of the display to 3.5 tuo interesse the angular resolution avete fine tuo increase the PPI. But to calcolate angular resolution from PPI size and FOV you make two calculations: first you multiply PPI and size to obtain amount o pixels, the you divide the amount of pixels and the FOV to obtain the angular resolution.

          • dk

            u were the one talking about 1inch screen stretched to 100 degrees ………what I am saying is when u know the specs of 2 hmds and u have more pixels on one of those when u take in mind their specs ……..higher pixel density is absolutely important that is a fact
            vive/rift—–110fov 3.5 inch 1080×1200 display per eye —–450ppi
            odyssey—-110fov 3.5 inch 1440×1600 display per eye ——600ppi
            higher pixel density affecting the sde is just a fact
            “PPI in VR isn’t important” is just demonstrably false

          • Rigelleo

            Of ypu want to increase angular resolution of the Vive/Rift the only thing that you have do is to increase the amount of pixels. The increase of the PPI isn’t necessary. To double the angular resolution you have to double the amount of pixels. In isn’t important that you archive this goal using a 3.5″ display with double PPI, or (with different lenses) using a 7″ with the same PPI of the actual headset or using a 1.75″ with tour times the PPI. The only thing that is important is doubling the number of pixels.

          • dk

            vive/rift—–110fov 3.5 inch 1080×1200 display per eye —–450ppi
            odyssey—-110fov 3.5 inch 1440×1600 display per eye ——600ppi
            higher pixel density affecting the sde ……is just a fact
            “PPI in VR isn’t important” is just demonstrably false

            “The only thing that is important is doubling the number of pixels.” —–the more pixels u have in a given fov/screen size the higher is the ppi

          • Rigelleo

            if tomorrow in a store you would find two headsets, under the first you see written PPI 800 FOV 100 °, and under the second you see written 4000x4000px FOV 100 ° Which of the two headsets are you sure that have a high angular resolution? Obviously the second headset. This because the first have a high PPI but could have a screen of 1000x1000px, 2000x2000px, 4000x400px, you don’t know! That’s why the number of pixels is more important: because you get the information you need right away. The PPI instead leaves you in doubt.

          • dk

            I told u I don’t look at the 3 things not only fov and ppi

            no one is talking about half an inch 1080p screen with 180 fov stacked on top of your eye……….I am talking about very similar headsets that differ mainly by the pixel density they have……….to improve the vive without touching anything ….all u need is ….like u said more pixels …..how do u get that by making the same display only with higher pixel density

          • Rigelleo

            if you have to choose a headset between these two: Headset number one: FOV 100 ° PPI 400 Resolution 2000x2000px. Headset number two: FOV 100 ° PPI 600 Resolution 1500×1500, what do you buy? I bet you buy the first headset despite having the lowest PPI. And why do you choose the headset number one? Because the parameter that really interests you is the number of pixels because the more pixels are, the higher the angular resolution.

          • dk

            so if u want to improve the vive u got that u need a 3.5 inch screen with higher ppi right
            that’s what I am talking about
            and if u have 50 very similar fovs screen sizes and differ mainly by the ppi of the very similar screen sizes
            that’s what I am talking about we need to increase the ppi of the screen of the rift………………….we need to increase the ppi of the screen of the vive………………….we need to increase the ppi of the screen of any hmd with angular resolution less than apparently 88 is what Carmak was talking about

            any hmd with angular resolution less than 88 needs to update the ppi of the screen they r using until it reaches that angular resolution

          • Rigelleo

            I can improve the Vive with a higher PPI 3.5″ display using the same lens, or I can improve the Vive with a 5″ display with higher resolution but the same PPI using a lens with lower magnification power. It is obviously that at some point if you want to archieve a 8 fold increase in the angular resolution you have to uncrease also the PPI otherwise you would have to use a huge display. But. What I’m telling you is the simple truth that to calculate the angular resolution the only parameter that you need is the amount of pixels. This parameter has to increase and if it increase it is irrelevant how it increase (increasing the PPI at the same size o increasing the size at the same PPI).

          • dk

            like I said I don’t look only at the ppi

            I look at it when the headsets in question r super similar

            when I heard about the Elf headset(I think it was) ….the headlines were 2000ppi or something like that……..and the only other thing mentioned in the articles was the small 70 fov and the display size

            ……and from the 2000ppi and the screen size u can see what is the resolution……..and then calculate the pixels per degree

            I’m look at the ppi …………….when the fovs and display sizes r super similar

            if I am comparing 10 headsets similar to the Elf in fov and screen size……and the massive difference was only the ppi-s of the displays they r using……..that is when the difference in ppi is the only critical part

          • Rigelleo

            I’m only saying you that simply telling the amount of pixels and the FOV gives you all the informations that is needed to estimate the real improvement of the angular resolution. You are telling me that if you have the size knowing that there is an increase in the PPI you know that there is an increase in the angular resolution. What you seems to not understand is that the two value (PPI and size) bear inside the real and only information that you need: the amount of pixels. you are saying that the PPI is important but only if you know also the size. Now open your eyes and see that the only reason that you need both the values is to calculate the number of pixels! Saying that PPI + size is important is exactly the same of saiyng that the amount of pixels is important. It is the PPI that alone doesn’t tell you anything about the angular resolution. The amount of pixels does it.

          • dk

            yeeeeees and
            if I am comparing 10 headsets similar to the Elf in fov and screen size……and the massive difference was only the ppi-s of the displays they r using……..that is when the difference in ppi is the only critical part of those headsets

          • Rigelleo

            You would buy your next headset kowing onli the PPI and the FOV but not knowing the amount of pixels nor the size? Will you be sure that this headset will have a good angular resolution? No. The only way you will be sure about the angular resolution is knowing also the size. So don’t tell me that the PPI is important and after tell me that you need also the size because the real value that you want is the amount of pixels. 😉 The increase of PPI alone tells you that “maybe” there is an increase in the angular resolution. The increase of the amount of pixels tell you that there is for sure ad increase in the angular resolution

          • dk

            looooool like I said I don’t look at only the ppi……………I look at it when the headsets r super similar and the only difference is the amount of pixels

          • Rigelleo

            how do you know that a hypothetical Vive 2 will be so similar that you will only need the PPI value?

          • dk

            when did I say that…….
            I said I am looking at the headsets on the market and they have pretty similar fov and screen sizes
            …………..aaaaand I said that in that case ……..the important part is the amount of pixels they have

            if the vive 2 has a huge or a tiny display or fov it won’t be super similar to rest of the headsets

          • Rigelleo

            watching for size + PPI is the same of watching for ampunt of pixels. The only meaning of my first post was: pay attention that watching only PPI isn’t enougth to judge the quality of an headset, if you want a single parameter to watch it is the amount of pixels.

          • dk

            yeeeeees that is what ppi is ……u get it from the size and the amount of pixels
            again I never said only ppi matters ………….I said it matters when u have super similar headsets…………and if u increase the ppi of the display of every hmd ……the sde will just get better

          • Rigelleo

            This is correct. The reason for my first post is that in lots of news about vr headsets in the net they write about the increased PPI without specity other parameters, as it would lead certainly (repeat: certainly) to an increase of the angular resolution. I wanted to point out that this is not exactly the case.

          • dk

            yep I get it ….if someone was saying that only the type of pixel matrix is important or something else like that I would question his reasons

          • Rigelleo

            if you keep posting these pictures it means you did not understand what I wrote to you, read it

          • dk

            all the pictures I post demonstrate what I am talking about

            if u have 2 display same size same fov
            and one is much higher resolution …..that means that ….that one has much higher ppi
            it’s a demonstrable fact

            that is why the density of the pixels is important and u said it yourself

          • dk

            teknosrc DOT com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Pixel-Density-Comparison-of-Displays-with-Different-Resolution.gif
            same size…..if there was a lens in front of it …the same fov
            …………..higher pixel density on the right…..also known as higher ppi

          • ibuprofène

            dk u retarded wow

          • dk

            yes u r 😛
            if u don’t get that when u have super similar headsets with a similar fov and similar screen size in front of your eye …..u get better screen door effect with the higher resolution

      • dk

        no u didn’t get it….vive rift ppi is 450ppi
        most win mr headsets is 700 because of the smaller screen
        and this one is 600 because of the bigger screen which is how they get the bigger fov

  • Ted Joseph

    I was really hoping for 200 deg FOV for these headsets.. Oh well, maybe Pimax then…

  • Matthew Jones

    Just to be clear, these will work with any game ( project cars 2 ) that was made to work with steam and the HTC vive ?

    • dk

      wait 2 months for the reviews ….but yeah it will work

  • Luke

    Hi, I really hope microsoft will support external sensors to work also

    with inside/out tracking HMDs, this kind of custom configuration would
    increase the accuracy. Or, why not, sell new models with rear cameras.
    maybe they could use 3 cameras, one very wide at the center and the
    other 2 at the very edges of the field of view of the central camera, or
    four cameras.
    but before considering to buy this kind of custom
    setup (the external sensors) I really wish to try the inside/out
    tracking system without mods, I wish to make this test: in super hot vr,
    when I’m surrounded by enemies very close to my body I would try to
    punch them from behind (I mean without facing them). With Oculus Rift
    and 2 sensors room scale I can fight in this way, I can also handle a
    gun with my right hand and aim front facing an enemy whyle with my other
    arm I can reach my back and shoot another enemy with a hail of Uzi
    bullets without even look at my target, and hear the glass fragments
    breaking and disintegrate in the air (how cool is that?).another
    example could be echo arena, in that game i need to “push my body”
    placing my hands/arms at my back sometimes and then jump into a new
    direction. I need to do all of this free movements basic actions, I hope
    you will make similar tests soon to let me/us know please

    • Sofian

      Or just add cameras to the controllers…
      But perhaps the ones on the headset already use too much computational power.

  • Stranger On The Road

    MS should insist that the name should include ‘Mixed Reality’, this will make the HMD easier to find and compare in web stores.

  • HybridEnergy

    Too low res and nothing special to bother moving from the VIVE or RIFT to this what-so-ever.

    • Evgeni Zharsky

      Yeah but no everyone already has a vice or rift, like me. So this will be something to keep an eye out for

  • HybridEnergy

    These devices are a step backwards for VR. I’m sorry but they are. No tracking for my hands when they aren’t in-front of my view? wow let me just throw my VIVE in the garbage right now !

  • GIBBS v2

    I am surprise these Outside-In tracking headsets still don’t want to employ the use of some reflective dot technology like they do in motion capture. You just stick a few discrete little stickers around your environment and the head set can use them as references point for higher fidelity tracking.

  • IMHO Samsung is the best choice, costs a little more, but it offers a lot more