I'm waiting for more info about both devices. Very interesting times now for high end VR enthusiasts.
Pimax wants to have the Crystal Super released and shipped this year in Q4 because they plan to show the new 12K prototype in January 2025. If they don't manage to do that then they will probably lose sales on the Super because there is a serious chance that people will then wait for the 12K again. But yes, there's a big chance that it gets delayed (both, the Super and the 12K prototype at CES), Pimax has a history of delays indeed. I personally think that the QLED variant comes first and that the OLED will cause the delay.I expect that the decontented Crystal will be released this year and that it will sell well.
The Super is much more likely to come some time in 2025, then again the VR1 hasn't been given an official release time table either.
I run the Crystal almost maxed out with 3988*~4800px + 4xMSAA or something in all sim racing titles. That's very close to the native 100% render resolution. That's with the oced 4090. With such an high PPD/resolution as the Super has you could get away with 2xMSAA instead, so I expect that the 5090 could run it just fine after some tweaking (which is always mandatory).The VR1 is getting real 125-130 hFOV and appears to be sharper than the Crystal.
Pimax attempted a wide FOV lens and it appears not to be very good and only reached 115 hFOV.
Did they just sandbag on the lens for the Crystal, hiding their true lens expertise? Or do they not really know how to create a sharp 130 hFOV lens ?
The VR1 will pretty well max out a 5090.
The Super has very similar specs to the XR4 and very likely will have a similar FOV about 115 hFOV. The problem is that unless you are only playing DCS, a 15Mp display will need to wait for a 6090 to actually drive it.
At this point I'm pretty sure the VR 1 will be a pretty big step up from a Crystal.
The Super falls into a category like the XR4 where we are so far behind the GPU to push it, that I don't see the point. I also will never see a VR headset as future proof or an investment, so buying something with the hope a GPU released 2 years later will drive it well doesn't make a lot of sense.
Agree, yes the FoV for the uOLED will probably be to small, I expect the same FoV as the crystal has now. But the new QLED panels are ~30% bigger than the current ones and their new glass lens design sounds logical/as an proper upgrade over the current 104FoV lenses, also 30% bigger and with a double stacked design. 150 FoV doesn't sound believable but I don't expect that it's much less than 120-125 FoV and that combined with a MUCH higher resolution, new technology (so probably even better colors) and much more dimming zones and that for ~half the price (and no battery/standalone issues anymore), its simply very competitive, the VR1 just looks like a bad deal now.I think the uOLED will come MUCH later and that's why they are selling the QLED with the option to swap out to uOLED later.
They never mentioned the FOV for the uOLED which will likely be much smaller. There is no capacity or even availability in uOLED displays that would allow them to remotely match what they have with the Crystal now for FOV. They will be smaller. Unless like the 12K they push it back a couple more years.
I still think Pimax has yet to prove they can create a decent lens with a wider FOV.
I think the VR1 is real and will actually be out soon and Pimax pulled the marketing team together to check every box out there and try to get people to delay buying other products.
We'll see the Crystal Lite this year. The rest is marketing. Time will tell.
At least in theory, there is no reason constraining µOLED panel usage only to pancake lenses;There is no capacity or even availability in uOLED displays that would allow them to remotely match what they have with the Crystal now for FOV.
That's absolutely true, but uOLED panels are still small compared to miniLED panels.At least in theory, there is no reason constraining µOLED panel usage only to pancake lenses;
aspheric triplets could yield larger FoVs while forfeiting small HMD form factor.
The VR1 will pretty well max out a 5090.
I'm assuming/hoping that both of the above are only true in the absence of DFR, and that adding DFR is enough to cut the GPU requirements by a couple of classes...problem is that unless you are only playing DCS, a 15Mp display will need to wait for a 6090
This comment reminds me that one of the limitations when designing an optical system is the flatness or otherwise of the object surface and another is the directionality of the light leaving that surface (e.g. you'd love all of the light from your panel to just want to head towards your lens, but in reality the light from a flat panel will be brightest when viewing perpendicular to the panel). A curved OLED panel might dramatically change/simplify the VR optics...At least in theory, there is no reason constraining µOLED panel usage only to pancake lenses;
aspheric triplets could yield larger FoVs while forfeiting small HMD form factor.
We all know your VR1 assumptions are based on the opinion of one guy on the Internet and don't believe the two others who roasted it. And certainly nothing strange about a CEO doing hours of fanboy videos about the Apple Vision Pro and almost nothing about his own headset. And how do you get this 125-130 hFOV if the only measurement I know of is just 108 hFOV and in the same ballpark like the Index? And what's good about it if this hFOV is made with the obvious side effects of disturbing barrel distortion and chromatic aberration?The VR1 is getting real 125-130 hFOV and appears to be sharper than the Crystal.
Pimax attempted a wide FOV lens and it appears not to be very good and only reached 115 hFOV.
Did they just sandbag on the lens for the Crystal, hiding their true lens expertise? Or do they not really know how to create a sharp 130 hFOV lens ?
The VR1 will pretty well max out a 5090.
The Super has very similar specs to the XR4 and very likely will have a similar FOV about 115 hFOV. The problem is that unless you are only playing DCS, a 15Mp display will need to wait for a 6090 to actually drive it.
At this point I'm pretty sure the VR 1 will be a pretty big step up from a Crystal.
The Super falls into a category like the XR4 where we are so far behind the GPU to push it, that I don't see the point. I also will never see a VR headset as future proof or an investment, so buying something with the hope a GPU released 2 years later will drive it well doesn't make a lot of sense.
... but light perpendicular to a lens' surface is not refracted.light from a flat panel will be brightest when viewing perpendicular to the panel
If that's true, I guess we would hear it from more than one source.The best information I have to date leads me to believe the VR1 is a solid improvement over the Crystal.
It may very well be true but they are in the same boat as everyone else, trying to keep interest in a product that is just around the corner and my guess is that they have found someone who is prepared to say the good and hold back on the bad and thats what they feel is better than letting others have a look.If that's true, I guess we would hear it from more than one source.
I hope it for Somnium, but if you watch those previews I've linked already, it doesn't look like it. If relatively small YouTubers get the privilege by a company to test their product, including flight, hotel etc. and two out of three of them announce very straight that they didn't like the product for very similar reasons, I don't give a damn what the 3rd guy is saying if it contradicts it.It may very well be true
So if two of three testers experience extreme CA with those lenses, they suffer from hallucinations?And here is where the disinformation by Pimax about plastic lenses starts to show up.
It's absolutely incorrect and has nothing to do with using plastic or glass.
The current VR1 lenses with no Amalence software running are supposed to have LESS CA than the current Pimax glass lenses with Amalence software fixing CA.
You are basing that on an early test version of the lenses. There have had many iterations since then. All will be pretty obvious when they ship, but I think they stand a much better chance of setting new standards in sharpness and lack of CA etc than Pimax does.So if two of three testers experience extreme CA with those lenses, they suffer from hallucinations?
So when is the VR1-release? Must be quite soon if it's as good as you think...You are basing that on an early test version of the lenses. There have had many iterations since then. All will be pretty obvious when they ship, but I think they stand a much better chance of setting new standards in sharpness and lack of CA etc than Pimax does.
Let's table this conjecture until they are released. Then all should be pretty obvious and it will just be fact rather than what source of information we believe or don't believe.
Seems like they should be coming soon as the final bits are checked off. 98Vx136H Not bad.
View attachment 747173