320°

To handle VR graphics, gaming PCs have to be 7 times more powerful

"The folks at Nvidia, the world’s largest maker of stand-alone graphics chips, are good at numbers. So I talked to them recently about their expectations for virtual reality gaming. They showed me some demos of the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive virtual reality headsets, powered by a PC using Nvidia’s GeForce GTX Titan X graphics chip. The demos were just a taste of the many VR experiences we’ll see at the 2016 International CES, the big tech trade show in Las Vegas next week."By DEAN TAKAHASHI

Read Full Story >>
venturebeat.com
ShadowKnight3055d ago

"That shows that the market for VR won’t be gigantic in 2016, at least on the PC. Sony is also launching PlayStation VR on the PS4 video game console. Sony’s installed base of 30 million PS4 units means that its market potential will be bigger than the PC’s. But Nvidia notes that VR on the PC will be more demanding in terms of graphics processing required."

Of course it will be more demanding on the PC.

R6ex3055d ago (Edited 3055d ago )

Bet Sony's PS VR will be more expensive than the Oculus Rift, because it'll not only house the lens but also a GPU (bet it'll be of the same one as the PS4 to make rendering 1 GPU per eye).

jujubee883055d ago (Edited 3055d ago )

VR can run on mobile hw and has run on even worse than that in the past to get a true immersion effect.

Idk what all this consumer propoganda bs is about, tbh. Bleeding the stone from regular ppl is what these companies are doing

garrettbobbyferguson3055d ago

@jujubee88

VR can run on my Galaxy S5. But because the DPI of the screen isn't that great and it only outputs at 30hz frequency, I received horrible headaches after using it for half an hour. There needs to be a specific standard for VR to work and not legitimately hurt people and the hardware you're describing is not it.

3055d ago
hay3055d ago

Since processing power doubles every around two years, we are four to six years before VR will blast off seriously.

donthate3054d ago

R6ex:

There is no GPU in the PS VR, and the extra processing chips is there to alleviate the PS VR inability to keep a high enough frame rate by distorting the image slightly.

So what you have in the PS4 as far as "power" (I would call it performance), is what you get period. There is no if's and but's about it.

That means PS VR will likely be close in price to Oculus Rift, maybe less since I expect higher quality parts from Oculus, but they don't need the breakout box. The techniques done on the hardware for PS VR can be done on Oculus (and Valve's Vive) on PC hardware with minimal performance degradation if at all.

I expect PS VR games to be around Wii to PS3 graphics at best. I don't see a lot of people paying $300 for that.

u4one3054d ago (Edited 3054d ago )

@juju:

If you saw the graphics and resolution that is produced on samsungs gear vr you would never have posted that comment. They are very stripped down and the frame rates make you sick because they aren't fast enough. You also see the pentiling in the Samsung display - never mind the fact that mobile vr doesn't do hand, spatial or head tracking to boot. It's all from the phones gyro.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3054d ago
ji32003055d ago (Edited 3055d ago )

when they said "VR GRAPHIC" they meant 8k or 12k resolution ultra ultra photo realistic life like graphic. I can play Dying Light and Advance Warfare 1080p pc games easily with my oculus rift dk2 and gtx 970.

donthate3054d ago

Yup, you also have a GTX970 which is the minimum recommended specs from Oculus.

neoandrew3054d ago

DK2 is very low res, tragic low quality pixeleted screen, any 2k smartphone is better.

Pl4sm43054d ago (Edited 3054d ago )

is there a screen with 8k or 12k resolution for vr ? uhhhgg what ?

or are they just talking far future ?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3054d ago
3-4-53055d ago

VR won't be what we want it to be for another 10 years.

I'm glad they are starting now though.

I'm not buying into the VR thing, but I'm glad it exists for those who want to try it out.

PurpHerbison3055d ago

Exactly how I feel. I hope it does okay though... We will never see what VR could and should be if it crashes and burns in the beginning. I'm certainly not going to be an early consumer though, let others beta test VR through the coming years.

donthate3054d ago

I just hope it isn't just too early causing distrust in the public's eye. Kind of like what happened to Wii motion controls and Kinect. By the time the technology was almost perfect, the public distrust caused it's death before it got explored further.

VR is even more susceptible to this due to VR sickness, lack of quality experience and high cost. Even worse is when you look at PS VR that the experience is going to be Wii/PS3 like with high susceptibility for VR sickness and massive lack of content, and you wonder how this is going to work out.

I just hope it survives the initial hype, and people are actually able to use VR for hours on end with quality content.

Gamer4News3054d ago (Edited 3054d ago )

> To handle VR graphics, gaming PCs have to be 7 times more powerful

That's only if your game is meant to be photo-realistic. If, on the other hand, your game is something like Family Guy, where the graphics is cartoony, then no, it doesn't require 7 times the power.

That's the thing about VR. The graphics does NOT have to be realistic, you'll still get so immerse, that you'll feel like you have teleported into the cartoony world of Family Guy, where everyone is cartoony looking. Where cartoons (with bad graphics) have come to live.

It's kinda like that episode when Homer was teleported into the real world. He looks cartoony but real.

It's hard to explain. You'll have to experience it before you'll understand what I mean.

solar3054d ago

"Sony’s installed base of 30 million PS4 units means that its market potential will be bigger than the PC’s."

I didnt know there were less then 30 million gaming PC's.

donthate3054d ago

I know... the irony is in the fact PS4 gamers are cheap gamers i.e. they buy a console for $300 and often has to be discounted another $50 to gain higher adoption.

A PC gamer tend to spend considerably more and it isn't unusual for them to spend $300 on a graphics card, so they are more likely to spend $300 on VR headset. They are early adopters, but of course this is just a group of PC gamers, not all PC gamers.

solar3054d ago

not to mention donthate the knowledge base of the console owner. I still laugh at the "UC4 has the best grafx ive ever seen!" comments

ChuckTheIceMan3054d ago (Edited 3054d ago )

Do you honestly think sony won't screw up PlayStation vr? They are going to massacre that thing. Sony sucks at software! The ps4 is a great example of that. Psn is another example of that (although much better recently). Great hardware, the best console hardware choice, but the software can't even do the things the ps3 can do and we're two years in!

walruskiller3054d ago

Would you mind giving an example?

solar3054d ago

@ walruskiller (hate your name btw :P)

Xbox Live?

Sony isnt god. stop it.

awi59513054d ago (Edited 3054d ago )

Yeah this is a bunch of crap it was shown you can run this on a sli/crossfire setup just yesterday. You need two graphics cards but its easily done you need a gpu for each eye.

Tsar4ever013054d ago (Edited 3054d ago )

Hold on a sec, This is Nvidia's PR spokesman talking. And according to the recommended Pc specs for the consumer retail Oculus Rift, You don't need no "Ultra High End" Pc with a $1000+ GTX Titan X GPU to get the best from VR gaming off PC. https://www.oculus.com/en-u...

For the full Rift experience, we recommend the following system:

NVIDIA GTX 970 / AMD 290 equivalent or greater
Intel i5-4590 equivalent or greater
8GB+ RAM
Compatible HDMI 1.3 video output
2x USB 3.0 ports
Windows 7 SP1 or newer

And besides that, AMD is LEADING in VR tech and has the largest PC/Console gaming developing support with it's upcoming "Liquid VR" technology which nVidia is way behind. This vid from AdoredTV clearly explains it detail in this GPU vs video staring at 13:02. https://www.youtube.com/wat...

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3054d ago
R6ex3055d ago

Two Nvidia Pascal GP100 cards will do. ;P

FasterThanFTL13055d ago

7 times powerful than what? Current-gen consoles?

R6ex3055d ago

7 times more graphics power than whatever you are gaming now at 1080p30fps.

BISHOP-BRASIL3054d ago

Actually it's simply 7 times better than whatever you may have, it can be a 5 years old phone or a 3D modeling working station... It doesn't need to make sense, it's Nvidia, they just really, really want you to buy a new GPU.

awi59513054d ago

Most pc people dont find 30fps playable. If im not running 60fps its time ebay that part and upgrade.

zerocarnage3055d ago (Edited 3055d ago )

Enjoy forking thousands of more pounds out for a complete New pc, while the already present one cost you thousands in first place and is now useless to power vr.

Glad I'm not all that bothered about it, it's just a step up and more flashy way from what Sony's PlayStation move was and Microsoft's Kinect, instead you got a headset this time and it looks more real around you with full body motion. No one wanted to get off there butts to play the games and devs didn't get into it all either for PlayStation move or Microsoft's kinect. While it's all nice and all vr is going to be very expensive at first I reckon. I do think ar looks better than vr at the moment..

I'm happy just buying a console and buying the games for it..

freshslicepizza3055d ago

obviously your knowledge of pc's is immense and quite staggering. thank you for that bit of information, very helpful.

of course in the real world a one thousand dollar, not pounds, pc can and will do justice for vr gaming. and if you already have a decent pc you can simply upgrade certain parts, not the whole thing, depending on your layout. that's the beauty of the pc, it's called flexibility. only those achieving top notch performance change parts on a regular basis. we are talking about those who play on ultra settings and above 1080p resolution. it's already been confirmed a 970gtx for example can play vr games.

donthate3054d ago

For $1000 you can get a relatively high end rig with GTX 970 (recommended by Oculus) and a VR headset and still have a little to spare.

PCs aren't as expensive as people make them to be. The real cost is in the initial phase of configuring and resolving issues, and updating.

I'm probably going to upgrade my PC for VR. Getting an Oculus Rift most likely if the price is right for best 3rd party support.

BenRage33055d ago

You are assuming most people need a new pc. Some will, but many, many people like myself simply need to upgrade the GPU. Since a GTX 970 will suffice--that's a $300 upgrade and hardly breaks the bank.

madjedi3054d ago (Edited 3054d ago )

My pc in total is maybe $1100-1300 that is while not skimping on quality parts and I am likely good for another 4-5 yrs.

I just barely meet the requirements for occ rift, 7 times more powerful than what, a gtx 970, a 980 ti.

That is a useless statement without specifying what is the card and/or processor that the 7 times more powerful is referring to.

Tobsesan3055d ago

It works with freaking smartphones...

R6ex3055d ago

Yeah. For low quality android games visuals, even VR is a piece of cake. But imagine Witcher 3 or Star Citizen's galaxy's level of visuals and openness, VR will be a challenge.

Nicaragua3055d ago

Errrrr no.

VR runs just fine on a decent modern gaming PC. Elite Dangerous has a similar scope to Star Citizen and already manages what you are talking about.

The idea that some me kind of quantum leap in computing is needed for VR is nonsense.

donthate3054d ago

Yeah it works for smartphones, if you want a headache and terrible experience. It is a gimmick on smart phones.

DigitalRaptor3054d ago

The positive reviews of the Gear VR and its content kinda disprove your point.

Show all comments (70)
70°

Pistol Whip is Alive and Well With VOIDSLAYER Scenes

Cloudhead Games has announced the VOIDSLAYER update for Pistol Whip, adding three new scenes in June for all supported platforms.

Read Full Story >>
xrsource.net
330°

Nvidia DLSS 3.7 drives a further nail in the coffin of native performance

Nvidia DLSS 3.7 is the latest update to the long-running AI upscaling technology, and it further shows native performance doesn't matter.

DustMan31d ago

I think hardware development is at a point where they need to figure out how to draw less power, These beefy high end cards eat wattage, and I'm curious if using DLSS & AI in general will lower the power draw. It would seem like the days of just adding more VRAM & horsepower is over. Law of diminishing returns. Pretty soon DLSS/FSR will be incorporated into everything, and eventually the tech will be good enough to hardly notice a difference if at all. AI is the future and it would be foolish to turn around and not incorporate it at all. Reliance on AI is only going to pick up more & more.

Tapani30d ago (Edited 30d ago )

DLSS certainly lowers power consumption. Also, the numbers such as the 4090 at 450W does not tell you everything, most of the time the GPU stays between 200-350W in gameplay, which is not too different from the highest end GPU of 10 years ago. Plus, today you can undervolt + OC GPUs by a good margin to keep stock performance while utilizing 80% of the power limit.

You can make the 4090 extremely power efficient and keep 90% of its performance at 320W.

However, in today's world the chip manufacturing is limited by physics and we will have power increases in the next 5-10 years at the very least to keep the technology moving forward at a pace that satisfies both businesses and consumers.

Maybe in 10 years we have new tech coming to the markets which we are yet to invent or perhaps we can solve existing technologies problems with manufacturing or cost of production.

On the other hand, if we were to solve the energy problem on earth by utilizing fusion and solar etc. it would not matter how much these chips require. That being said, in the next 30-40 years that is a pipedream.

MrBaskerville30d ago

I don't think fusion is the way forward. It will mosy likely be too late when it's finally ready, meaning it will probably never be ready. Something else might arrive before though and then it becomes viable.

Firebird36030d ago

We need to stop the smear campaign on nuclear energy.
We could power everything forever if we wanted too.

Tacoboto31d ago

PS4 Pro had dedicated hardware in it for supporting checkerboard rendering that was used significantly in PS4 first party titles, so you don't need to look to PC or even modern PC gaming. The first RTX cards released nearly 6 years ago, so how many nails does this coffin need?

InUrFoxHole31d ago

Well... its a coffin man. So atleast 4?

Tacoboto31d ago

PSSR in the fall can assume that role.

anast30d ago

and those nails need to be replaced annually

Einhander197231d ago

I'm not sure what the point you're trying to make is, but PS4 Pro was before DLSS and FSR, and it still provides one of the highest performance uplifts while maintaining good image quality.

DLSS is it's own thing but checkerboarding om PS5 still is a rival to the likes of FSR2.

Tacoboto31d ago

Um. That is my point. That there have been so many nails in this "native performance" coffin and they've been getting hammered in for years, even on PS4 Pro before DLSS was even a thing.

RaidenBlack30d ago

Don't know what's OP's point is either but ... checkerboard rendering was good enough for its time but in terms of image quality its wayy behind what's DLSS 3 or FSR 3 is currently offering.
The main point of the article and what OP missed here is that DLSS 3.7 is soo good that its nearly undisguisable from native rendering and basically throws the "its still blurry and inferior to native rendering" debacle, (that's been going around in PC community since 2019), right out of the window.

Einhander197230d ago

RaidenBlack

DLSS is as i said a different thing from FSR and checkerboard.

But you're talking about FSR 3 which probably is better than checkerboard, but FSR 3 has only started to get games this year, so checkerboard which was the first hardware upscaling solution was and is still one of the best upscaling solutions.

Give credit where credit is due, PlayStation was first and they got it right from the get go, and PSSR will almost certainly be better than it will be given credit for, heck digital foundry is already spreading misinformation about the Pro.

Rhythmattic30d ago

Tacoboto
Yes... Its amazing how many talekd about KZ2 deferred rendering, pointing out the explosions were lower res than the frame itself..
And of course, Then the idea of checkerboard rendering, not being native....
For sure, maybe this tech makes it minimal while pixel counting, but alas, seems performance and close enough , and not native now matters.....
I want to see it run native without DLSS.. why not?

RonsonPL31d ago

Almost deaf person:
- lightweight portable 5$, speakers of 0,5cm diameter are the final nail in coffin of Hi-Fi audio!

Some people in 2010:
- smartphones are the final nain in the console gaming's coffin!

This is just the same.
AI upscalling is complete dogshit in terms of motion quality. The fact that someone is not aware of it (look at the deaf guy example) doesn't mean the flaws are not there. They are. And all it takes to see them, is to use a display that handles motion well, so either gets true 500fps at 500Hz LCD TN or OLED (or faster tech) or uses low persistence mode (check blurbusters.com if you don't know what it means) also known as Black Frame Insertion or backlight strobing.

Also, image ruined by any type of TAA is just as "native image" as chineese 0,5$ screwdriver is "high quality, heavy duty, for professional use". It's nowhere near it. But if you're an ignorant "journalist", you will publish crap like this article, just to flow with the current.

There's no coffin to native res quality and there never will be. Eventually, we'll have enough performance in rasterization to drive 500fps, which will be a game changer for motion quality while also adding other benefit - lower latency.
And at 500fps, the amount of time required for upscalling makes it completely useless.
This crap is only usable for cinematic stuff, like cutscenes and such. Not for gaming. Beware of ignorants on the internet. The TAA is not "native" and the shitty look of the modern games when you disable any TAA, is not "native" either as it's ruined by the developer's design choice - you can cheat by rendering every 4th pixel when you plan to put a smeary TAA pass on it later on. When you disable it, you will see a ruined image, horrible pixellation and other visual "glitches" but it is NOT what native would've looked like if you'd like to honestly compare the two.

Stay informed.

RaidenBlack30d ago

Main point of the article is how far DLSS has come with v3.7 since 2018. If this is what we're getting already, then imagine what we'll get within next ~3 years. Yes parity will obviously be there compared to the then native rendering tech but it'll slowly narrow down to the point it'll be indistinguishable.
Something similar is like the genAI Sora ... AI generative videos were turd back when they were introduced (the infamous Will Smith eating video) ... but now look at Sora, generating videos that just looks like real life.

RonsonPL11d ago

You can improve quality but you will never be able to reach native quality in motion. The biggest part of why these upscallers are so praised is because they use previous frame data. You cannot do that without degrading latency and/or hurting the motion quality. If you put another flaw on top of it, coming from sample and hold method of displaying image, or coming from low framerate, sure, the difference between "screwed up image" vs. "image screwed up even more" may seem small or non-existent. But if you talk about gaming, not interactive movies, the upscallers are overhyped and harfmul tech for the gamers and the whole gaming industry. For example, a game designed around screwed up motion, like the TAA enabled games, will never be played with improved quality even 100 years later when hardware allows for native 16K res. The motion quality will be broken and even if you disable the AA pass, you will still get the broken image, cause the devs were designing their effects with smeary filter in mind - this is why you can disable TAA in some games today, manually, with some tinkering, but you get 1 to 16 understampled crap.
It's annoying that nobody seems to understand the serious drawbacks of AI assisted upscallers. Everyone just praises it and calling it a great revolution. Don't get me wrong. AI has its place in rendering. But NOT in gaming.

30d ago
Yui_Suzumiya30d ago

How much VRAM is standard today? My laptop has a 1080p QLED display but only an Intel Iris Xe with 128MB of VRAM. I currently do all my gaming on it but certain titles do suffer because of it. I plan on getting a Steam Deck OLED soon to play the newer and more demanding titles.

purple10130d ago

Maybe better to get a budget gaming laptop and link a dualsense to it

= Portable console with far better graphics than a steam deck! + bigger screen and able to use it for work / etc

170°

Why I'm worried about the Nvidia RTX 50 series

Aleksha writes: "Nvidia has established itself as a dominant force in the world of AI, but I can't shake the worry of what this means for the RTX 50 series."

Tal16934d ago

Echo sentiment here - I think the way GPUs are going, gaming could be secondary to deep learning. Wonder if the 40 series was the last true generation of GPUs?

Number1TailzFan34d ago

No.. Jensen believes GPUs should stay expensive. Those wanting a top end GPU will have to splash out for it, or play at just 1080p and 60fps or something if you can only afford a low end option.

On the other hand if you don't care about RT or AI performance then there's always AMD that are doing ok at the mid range.

Christopher33d ago

***or play at just 1080p and 60fps or something***

My over 2-year-old laptop GPU still runs fine. I think this is more a reason why GPUs are going to other things in priority, because the market reach for new users is shrinking as more PC gamers focus less on replacing older and still working parts that run RT/AI fine enough as it is. Not to say there aren't people who still do it, but I think the market is shrinking for having the latest and greatest like it has been the past two decades. Problem is we aren't growing things at a rate as we were, we're reaching the the flattening of that exponential curve in regards to advancement. We need another major technological advancement to restart that curve.

D0nkeyBoi34d ago

The irremoval ad makes it impossible to read article

Tzuno33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

I hope Intel takes some lead and do a big dent to nvidia sales

Jingsing33d ago

You also need to consider that NVIDIA are heavily invested in cloud gaming. So they are likely going to make moves to push you into yet another life subscription service.

Kayser8133d ago

NVIDIA will never change their price point until AMD or intel makes a GPU that is comparable and cheaper than them .
it happend before in the days of gtx280 which they changed the price from 650$ to 450$ in a matter of 2 weeks because of rx4870 which is being sold at 380$.

Show all comments (8)