Well, I just picked up a Gear VR which is powered by Oculus (whatever that means exactly) and considering is uses a mobile phone, I was really surprised at how well it worked and how mind blowing the experience can be. I'm sure Sony adding in a co processor on the unit itself will be worth it but it will drive the price up possibly a lot.
Rift will still be the way to go, for full 1080p+ resolution and less screen door effect.
For the full Rift experience, we recommend the following system:
NVIDIA GTX 970 / AMD 290 equivalent or greater
Intel i5-4590 equivalent or greater
The % of people with 970 or r290 GPU or better is so small is pathetic.
Hell seeing this spec i am surprise to see the PS4 running it at all,speciall on the CPU side.
True and what else could users ask from SONY besides the world's most powerful video game console known to man???
Well according to steam stats cows would like to point out every time they say intelHD graphics is the most popular GPU ( though gtx970 overtook that in popularity lately) users with gtx970,Gtx 780Ti, R9 290 and better GPUs are 6,5%. Add to that a small amount of SLI and Crossfire users ( using r9280's, gtx 960's, gtx 770's, r9 270's ) and you are looking about 10-15million users capable of running VR at its recommended settings ( and that is based on Steam alone )
Let alone people with gtx 960's and r9 380's if they lower a few settings VR is certainly passable
So all the Xbox haters laughed at it for having a small power brick but now that Sony has an external box to run their VR headset nobody is saying that it will now mess up their clean looking media centers. lol
Well according to steam stats cows would like to point out every time they say intelHD graphics is the most popular GPU ( though gtx970 overtook that in popularity lately) users with gtx970,Gtx 780Ti, R9 290 and better GPUs are 6,5%. Add to that a small amount of SLI and Crossfire users ( using r9280's, gtx 960's, gtx 770's, r9 270's ) and you are looking about 10-15million users capable of running VR at its recommended settings ( and that is based on Steam alone )
Let alone people with gtx 960's and r9 380's if they lower a few settings VR is certainly passable
But that is half the amount of gamers on PS4,that is the whole point few people can run it,steam has more than 100 million users 10 or 15 million of those is to little.
So all the Xbox haters laughed at it for having a small power brick but now that Sony has an external box to run their VR headset nobody is saying that it will now mess up their clean looking media centers. lol
Except the xbox one power brick is not small is big,and is mandatory to power the console,i don't need VR and is not mandatory at all,so if you want that yeah have in mind it has an extra box,on xbox is mandatory were ever you like it or not.
Well according to steam stats cows would like to point out every time they say intelHD graphics is the most popular GPU ( though gtx970 overtook that in popularity lately) users with gtx970,Gtx 780Ti, R9 290 and better GPUs are 6,5%. Add to that a small amount of SLI and Crossfire users ( using r9280's, gtx 960's, gtx 770's, r9 270's ) and you are looking about 10-15million users capable of running VR at its recommended settings ( and that is based on Steam alone )
Let alone people with gtx 960's and r9 380's if they lower a few settings VR is certainly passable
But that is half the amount of gamers on PS4,that is the whole point few people can run it,steam has more than 100 million users 10 or 15 million of those is to little.
Are you implying all 30million Ps4 users are gonna buy VR? If anything the likelihood of someone that has a $300+ Gpu buying VR is certainly higher than someone that has a 300-400console .
Besides that is only steam and gaming pc's are constantly getting faster and where as a gtx970 performance nowdays cost 300 in 1-2 years that will cost less than 200 and the amount of people with capable Gpu's for VR compared to consoles will only increase
Well according to steam stats cows would like to point out every time they say intelHD graphics is the most popular GPU ( though gtx970 overtook that in popularity lately) users with gtx970,Gtx 780Ti, R9 290 and better GPUs are 6,5%. Add to that a small amount of SLI and Crossfire users ( using r9280's, gtx 960's, gtx 770's, r9 270's ) and you are looking about 10-15million users capable of running VR at its recommended settings ( and that is based on Steam alone )
Let alone people with gtx 960's and r9 380's if they lower a few settings VR is certainly passable
But that is half the amount of gamers on PS4,that is the whole point few people can run it,steam has more than 100 million users 10 or 15 million of those is to little.
Are you implying all 30million Ps4 users are gonna buy VR? If anything the likelihood of someone that has a $300+ Gpu buying VR is certainly higher than someone that has a 300-400console .
Besides that is only steam and gaming pc's are constantly getting faster and where as a gtx970 performance nowdays cost 300 in 1-2 years that will cost less than 200 and the amount of people with capable Gpu's for VR compared to consoles will only increase
The steam's survey was never meant to provide actual status of PC market,neither does their user number.
Well according to steam stats cows would like to point out every time they say intelHD graphics is the most popular GPU ( though gtx970 overtook that in popularity lately) users with gtx970,Gtx 780Ti, R9 290 and better GPUs are 6,5%. Add to that a small amount of SLI and Crossfire users ( using r9280's, gtx 960's, gtx 770's, r9 270's ) and you are looking about 10-15million users capable of running VR at its recommended settings ( and that is based on Steam alone )
Let alone people with gtx 960's and r9 380's if they lower a few settings VR is certainly passable
But that is half the amount of gamers on PS4,that is the whole point few people can run it,steam has more than 100 million users 10 or 15 million of those is to little.
Are you implying all 30million Ps4 users are gonna buy VR? If anything the likelihood of someone that has a $300+ Gpu buying VR is certainly higher than someone that has a 300-400console .
Besides that is only steam and gaming pc's are constantly getting faster and where as a gtx970 performance nowdays cost 300 in 1-2 years that will cost less than 200 and the amount of people with capable Gpu's for VR compared to consoles will only increase
The steam's survey was never meant to provide actual status of PC market,neither does their user number.
That is true Steam survey is far from actually painting the picture of pc gaming but to highlight something from the link you posted
"JPR claims that while the market of desktop AIBs is shrinking, sales of expensive graphics cards used by gamers are increasing
However, in spite of the overall decline, somewhat due to tablets and embedded graphics, the PC gaming momentum continues to build and is the bright spot in the AIB market,” said Jon Peddie, the head of JPR "
So yeah if anything more and more people will have VR capable pc's in the future
Basically the low end $40-80 Gpus are gone since integrated GPU's nowdays are more than powerfull enough to replace those low end GPu's who used to make a large part of discrete Gpu's sold
Well according to steam stats cows would like to point out every time they say intelHD graphics is the most popular GPU ( though gtx970 overtook that in popularity lately) users with gtx970,Gtx 780Ti, R9 290 and better GPUs are 6,5%. Add to that a small amount of SLI and Crossfire users ( using r9280's, gtx 960's, gtx 770's, r9 270's ) and you are looking about 10-15million users capable of running VR at its recommended settings ( and that is based on Steam alone )
Let alone people with gtx 960's and r9 380's if they lower a few settings VR is certainly passable
But that is half the amount of gamers on PS4,that is the whole point few people can run it,steam has more than 100 million users 10 or 15 million of those is to little.
Are you implying all 30million Ps4 users are gonna buy VR? If anything the likelihood of someone that has a $300+ Gpu buying VR is certainly higher than someone that has a 300-400console .
Besides that is only steam and gaming pc's are constantly getting faster and where as a gtx970 performance nowdays cost 300 in 1-2 years that will cost less than 200 and the amount of people with capable Gpu's for VR compared to consoles will only increase
The steam's survey was never meant to provide actual status of PC market,neither does their user number.
That is true Steam survey is far from actually painting the picture of pc gaming but to highlight something from the link you posted
"JPR claims that while the market of desktop AIBs is shrinking, sales of expensive graphics cards used by gamers are increasing
However, in spite of the overall decline, somewhat due to tablets and embedded graphics, the PC gaming momentum continues to build and is the bright spot in the AIB market,” said Jon Peddie, the head of JPR "
So yeah if anything more and more people will have VR capable pc's in the future
Basically the low end $40-80 Gpus are gone since integrated GPU's nowdays are more than powerfull enough to replace those low end GPu's who used to make a large part of discrete Gpu's sold
You were trying claim there are far more than 15 millions high end GPUs on the market,I just want to point you out.
When exactly did i imply that? I said based on steam stats alone there are about 10-15 million users capable of taking advantage of VR and that number is only going to grow
When exactly did i imply that? I said based on steam stats alone there are about 10-15 million users capable of taking advantage of VR and that number is only going to grow
Valve has never stated there are 10-15 million users using a 970 or higher display card on steam.Those number were make up buy the PC master race,messing with the steam survey's data,well...........just like what you did there.
When exactly did i imply that? I said based on steam stats alone there are about 10-15 million users capable of taking advantage of VR and that number is only going to grow
Valve has never stated there are 10-15 million users using a 970 or higher display card on steam.Those number were make up buy the PC master race,messing with the steam survey's data,well...........just like what you did there.
Arent you doing the same though or any of you the matter of fact when you are quickly to point out intel HD is the most popular GPU ?
Also i have taken percantage of people with gtx970 performance and up using steam stats. Is not like i pulled it out of thin air
The only certain think is that sales of high end GPU's are actually increasing and the proof of that is in the link you provided
Well according to steam stats cows would like to point out every time they say intelHD graphics is the most popular GPU ( though gtx970 overtook that in popularity lately) users with gtx970,Gtx 780Ti, R9 290 and better GPUs are 6,5%. Add to that a small amount of SLI and Crossfire users ( using r9280's, gtx 960's, gtx 770's, r9 270's ) and you are looking about 10-15million users capable of running VR at its recommended settings ( and that is based on Steam alone )
Let alone people with gtx 960's and r9 380's if they lower a few settings VR is certainly passable
But that is half the amount of gamers on PS4,that is the whole point few people can run it,steam has more than 100 million users 10 or 15 million of those is to little.
Are you implying all 30million Ps4 users are gonna buy VR? If anything the likelihood of someone that has a $300+ Gpu buying VR is certainly higher than someone that has a 300-400console .
Besides that is only steam and gaming pc's are constantly getting faster and where as a gtx970 performance nowdays cost 300 in 1-2 years that will cost less than 200 and the amount of people with capable Gpu's for VR compared to consoles will only increase
The steam's survey was never meant to provide actual status of PC market,neither does their user number.
From http://wccftech.com/gpu-market-share-q3-2015-amd-nvidia/
Q3 2015 dGPU sales are higher. Low end dGPU sales are getting displaced by stronger PC IGP. There would be a massive jump in performance for AMD PC IGP with 14 nm process tech.
From https://www.techpowerup.com/218578/samsung-to-fab-amd-zen-and-arctic-islands-on-its-14-nm-finfet-node.html
Samsung's 14 nm FINFET process tech to fab AMD's ZEN and Artic Islands!
It has been confirmed that Samsung will be AMD's foundry partner for its next generation GPUs. It has been reported that AMD's upcoming "Arctic Islands" family of GPUs could be built on the 14 nanometer FinFET LPP (low-power Plus) process. AMD's rival NVIDIA, meanwhile, is building its next-gen "Pascal" GPU family on 16 nanometer FinFET node, likely at its traditional foundry partner TSMC.
It gets better - not only will Samsung manufacture AMD's next-gen GPUs, but also its upcoming "Zen" family of CPUs, at least a portion of it. AMD is looking to distribute manufacturing loads between two foundries, Samsung and GlobalFoundries, perhaps to ensure that foundry-level teething trouble doesn't throw its product launch cycle off the rails. One of the most talked about "Arctic Islands" GPUs is codenamed "Greenland," likely a successor to "Fiji." Sales of some of the first chips - GPUs or CPUs - made at Samsung, will begin some time in Q3 2016. Some of the other clients for Samsung's 14 nm FinFET node are Apple and Qualcomm. The company plans to speed up development of its more advanced 10 nm node to some time in 2017.
14 nm GPUs would be a generation jump from 28 nm GPUs.
Something is consuming GlobalFoundries' 14 nm FINFET fab capability for AMD spill over to Samsung i.e. perhaps Nintendo NX.
If Nintendo NX takes off, it's pretty easy for Sony to switch to a similar 14 nm based APU solution i.e. PS4 2X would deliver VR with PS4's graphics details by brute force.
Unlike PS3's low level libraries with SPE, PS4's games doesn't have real access to hardware i.e. low level libraries are above the driver level. Sony/AMD could change the PS4's GPU Core with minimal impact to low level libraries. The structure is similar AMD Mantle.
Log in to comment