AMD's Raja Koduri says that we need 16K at 240Hz for "true immersion" in VR

TeKPhaN

I deal in absolutes
Sep 11, 2013
37,939
9,340
4,031
The Delaware Valley
AMD speaks on VR.......
AMD's Raja Koduri says that we need 16K at 240Hz for "true immersion" in VR




"AMD's Raja Koduri, the head of the Radeon Technology group, has said for a long time that VR is going to the a driving force behind the advancements in GPU performance for many years to come and that he won't be happy until we can run games a 16K at 240Hz within his lifetime, saying that that would be the point where we will achieve "true immersion that you won't be able to tell apart from the real-world"

When I set the goal, I said, "We need to get here in our lifetime." We can't do that with Moore's law and hardware alone. We have to unleash software on this problem. We've been working with developers on all of these ideas. How can we get 16K by 16K displays refreshing at 240Hz with the picture that you want to draw? Developers want more control, on their side. They want console level GPU access on the PC.

16092130402l.jpg


What they've been able to achieve on consoles in the current generation, versus the current high-end PC-The current high-end PC specs are at least four to eight times faster than current consoles. The Fury X is an eight teraflop machine. The PS4 is a two teraflop machine. It's four times more compute in that single Fury. You can build a dual Fury PC. But PC doesn't give you that much better an experience with cutting edge content, because they can extract more performance from a console. They're also investing a lot of IP into that architecture. They're doing some really clever things that are not possible on the PC yet.

Raja Koduri says that we will have to rely on a lot more than Moore's Law in order to get into the "VR Era", where resolutions and refresh rates will be much higher than today's Oculus Rift or HTC Vive headsets. Large and intelligent changes in both GPU and software architectures will be the key to driving up performance while lowering power consumption, which is exactly what the AMD's Radeon Technologies group is working towards."

http://www.overclock3d.net/articles..._need_16k_at_240hz_for_true_immersion_in_vr/1
 
Somebody better tell Palmer and Kaz to knock it on the head. This guy clearly knows more than they do about VR because......
 
Somebody better tell Palmer and Kaz to knock it on the head. This guy clearly knows more than they do about VR because......
Well even Palmer has said what they have with Oculus Rift is the bare minimum you need to push the VR threshold. So this actually agrees with him.
 
Well even Palmer has said what they have with Oculus Rift is the bare minimum you need to push the VR threshold. So this actually agrees with him.

I read the title and mistakenly assumed he meant presence couldn't be achieved until 16K. Of course there's a long way to go for VR to be where we'd all like it to be.
 
Amd/nVidia>union

He's quite clearly talking out of his arse there though isn't he.

"The Fury X is an eight teraflop machine. The PS4 is a two teraflop machine. It's four times more compute in that single Fury. You can build a dual Fury PC. But PC doesn't give you that much better an experience with cutting edge content, because they can extract more performance from a console."

There isn't one case this gen where a console has performed anywhere near as good as PC 4 x more powerful. VR is all about high frame rate. Although it's possible that you can get more performance out of a console than a comparatively powered PC because of optimization and devs having to account for many variations of PC, this time the devs don't have to worry about cards below a 970 or 290x. They also don't have to worry about any AMD CPU's as they're not supported or many older variants of i5/i7. No way a PS4 can get anywhere close to the kind of performance of an 8tf machine with a high end CPU, absolutely zero chance.

It's quite clear that the PS4 being a 1.8tf machine doesn't bode well for the point he making so he throws it a bone "oh the PS4 can compete with a PC 4 x powerful because of optimisation" lol.
 
Last edited:
You better come packing if you want OR with Good visuals/Performance!

Indeed, if you want to play GTAV, Dirt Rally and those type of games (Elite Dangerous requires a 980 in VR), but for games bought from the Oculus store, guaranteed to run at a decent quality 90fps on a 970. It doesn't bode well for PS4 visuals though. Hopefully they pack another gpu or something in that box PSVR ships with.
As you know, both AMD and Nvidia will be shipping Pascal and Polaris cards this year on 14/16 nm chipset, it will make the 900 series cards drop in value substantially. 12-18 months down the line you'll be able to pick these cards up for cheap, while the PS4 will still be stuck with the same gpu.
 
Take a look at foveated rendering and eye tracking technology. I think this will go a long way for the high demands of future vr.



Basically only render at a high resolution of what is in your direct line of site that your eyes are focused on. Look at things irl, see how out of focus your peripheral vision is? Same concept for vr. We can mitigate the impact of high res display power draws by utilizing this.
 
I kind of agree with what he is saying to an extent, but that's like telling people to not bother with CRT tv's until OLED's are ready for mass production.
 
Take a look at foveated rendering and eye tracking technology. I think this will go a long way for the high demands of future vr.



Basically only render at a high resolution of what is in your direct line of site that your eyes are focused on. Look at things irl, see how out of focus your peripheral vision is? Same concept for vr. We can mitigate the impact of high res display power draws by utilizing this.

I've heard about this being worked on, but they haven't had the best of success yet. Even why I pause the video and look directly at the point of interest, the blurred background is still very noticed in the peripheral vision.
 
I've heard about this being worked on, but they haven't had the best of success yet. Even why I pause the video and look directly at the point of interest, the blurred background is still very noticed in the peripheral vision.

That was just a basic demo for the concept. Not an actual product. Sorry, I posted that from my mobile as a quick reference. Here's a more in-depth article with a company called SMI that has already achieved this at a cheap price if mass produced.

http://uploadvr.com/smi-hands-on-250hz-eye-tracking/



Would need to try it for myself obviously, but the tech is very near and theory is sound.
 
These GPU manufacturers are basically saying that because of VR there will be a market for powerful GPU's for many years to come. 16k or 8k per eye is what you'd need to replicate the clarity we see with our naked eye.
Here's the same guy talking about AMD's vision for VR in more detail to VentureBeat.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/01/amd-confirms-high-end-polaris-gpu-in-development-for-2016/

"Aside from Polaris, Koduri also told VentureBeat about AMD's VR ambitions. According to Koduri, current VR implementations (unsurprisingly?) have image quality that is "lower quality than a simple hand mirror... [which] has much better contrast, much better pixel resolution, infinite pixel resolution."

"Our goal, the path we're on, is to get to that mirror-like quality. What the eye can see in a display today is a small fraction of what it can see in the outside world."

As for the future, Koduri said that AMD's next goal was to reach "photorealism in VR," something that's currently achieved by "rendering a frame for several hours." He also mentioned the company has grand plans for the workstation business, including CAD/CAM and VFX content creators. "We have an excellent pipeline there," he said, "especially as Polaris-based workstations come in this year. We expect to make a run at the workstation market much more aggressively, with much more compelling hardware and software than any time in the last 10 years."
 
I don't think any current consumer gpu will have a long OR future(if you want the best visuals/performance/future titles.
With SLI not working that's a even bigger downer.

I definitely want to try it and try it with certain games though.
 
With SLI not working that's a even bigger downer.

With Nvidia GameWorks, SLI is now compatible with VR.

https://developer.nvidia.com/virtual-reality-development

VR SLI
vrsli.jpg


VR SLI provides increased performance for virtual reality apps where multiple GPUs can be assigned a specific eye to dramatically accelerate stereo rendering. With the GPU affinity API, VR SLI allows scaling for systems with >2 GPUs. VR SLI is supported for DirectX and OpenGL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frozpot
https://forums.oculus.com/viewtopic.php?t=19273

  • SLI adds extra latency.
  • There has been no time-table established for VR SLI to be completed, and from things I've heard from Oculus people, it's not as simple as Nvidia was making it out to be. It requires hardware and software working together.
  • CV1 will most likely be 1440p. The GTX 980 widens the gap from the GTX 970 at 1440p resolutions.
  • Unreal Engine 4 doesn't really support SLI.
  • Oculus used the GTX 980 for Oculus Connect demos, and it's the card they recommend.
  • Extra GPU power is nice when in the development stage, because I don't want to get sick due to lower frame rates before I've had time to optimize the frame rate
 
Last edited:
That threads over a year old, but I'll admit I havent read too much from sli user with vr since their updates. I'd say it's still early yet and still a work in progress.
 
He's quite clearly talking out of his arse there though isn't he.

"The Fury X is an eight teraflop machine. The PS4 is a two teraflop machine. It's four times more compute in that single Fury. You can build a dual Fury PC. But PC doesn't give you that much better an experience with cutting edge content, because they can extract more performance from a console."

There isn't one case this gen where a console has performed anywhere near as good as PC 4 x more powerful. VR is all about high frame rate. Although it's possible that you can get more performance out of a console than a comparatively powered PC because of optimization and devs having to account for many variations of PC, this time the devs don't have to worry about cards below a 970 or 290x. They also don't have to worry about any AMD CPU's as they're not supported or many older variants of i5/i7. No way a PS4 can get anywhere close to the kind of performance of an 8tf machine with a high end CPU, absolutely zero chance.

It's quite clear that the PS4 being a 1.8tf machine doesn't bode well for the point he making so he throws it a bone "oh the PS4 can compete with a PC 4 x powerful because of optimisation" lol.

It is LOL worthy. Also the reason he is saying that is from a business standpoint. AMD makes the APU chips in both consoles so of course he wants to make the PS4 sound more advanced than it really is.

The part of that comparing a dual Fury X (x2) PC to a PS4 and saying the PC doesn't offer much more in performance is the giveaway. LMFAO.
 
https://forums.oculus.com/viewtopic.php?t=19273

  • SLI adds extra latency.
  • There has been no time-table established for VR SLI to be completed, and from things I've heard from Oculus people, it's not as simple as Nvidia was making it out to be. It requires hardware and software working together.
  • CV1 will most likely be 1440p. The GTX 980 widens the gap from the GTX 970 at 1440p resolutions.
  • Unreal Engine 4 doesn't really support SLI.
  • Oculus used the GTX 980 for Oculus Connect demos, and it's the card they recommend.
  • Extra GPU power is nice when in the development stage, because I don't want to get sick due to lower frame rates before I've had time to optimize the frame rate

Val, you're blowing out fud right now. Why are you trying to downplay so hard?

-Talking about latency from an unfinished implementation and non-final hardware impressions?
-VR SLI is already completed, it was in the NVidia update like a month ago or so. It's on my computer right now, probably yours too if you keep your stuff updated.
-CV1 already has established specs, we don't need guesswork. It's not 1440p.
-Epic is working with Nvidia to integrate all of the Gameworks VR features, including VR SLI. They said all this like three months ago. Rumor has it pegged for the UE4.11 update.
-980 is only the recommended card for Elite Dangerous; Oculus has 970 as the recommended card.


wut?
 
Last edited:
I'll wait for the NX specs to come out, I have a feeling that thing will chew up 16k like nobodies business.
 

Did you actually read this thread?

Not only is the title wrong, but the guy literally states incorrect information in the OP. He simply states it as a fact, provides zero information, data or links and then proceeds to deal out incorrect specification info.... info that is readily available, literally anywhere.

Also, none of the information I corrected you on is in that thread at all. The only thing worth pointing out in that thread is that there is a person talking about how he was playing Elite Dangerous maxed out using SLI and flawlessly w/DK2 with Oculus SDK 0.5 build support.

When developers update to CV SDK 1.0 at launch, games like this that have developer integrated SLI support and Oculus support, will simply be patched at launch.
 
Last edited:
Did you actually read this thread?

Not only is the title wrong, but the guy literally states incorrect information in the OP. He simply states it as a fact, provides zero information, data or links and then proceeds to deal out incorrect specification info.... info that is readily available, literally anywhere.

Also, none of the information I corrected you on is in that thread at all. The only thing worth pointing out in that thread is that there is a person talking about how he was playing Elite Dangerous maxed out using SLI and flawlessly w/DK2 with Oculus SDK 0.5 build support.

When developers update to CV SDK 1.0 at launch, games like this that have developer integrated SLI support and Oculus support, will simply be patched at launch.
Yeah, not only was the thread OP four sentences long and without a single reference, it also claimed that Oculus Rift is only compatible with the GeForce 970 or higher. First response to the OP immediately questioned the farce, and the third response referenced an official NVIDIA blog stating they do support vr with sli. Fact checking is hitting a new low.