I would still lean toward the Rift S because it'll be lighter and more comfortable to wear for longer sessions, but for the fact it's obvious that Oculus are piling their developement investment into the Quest (will the S ever get the Quest hand position sensing?) I suspect it is "good enough" for most consumers. OK so they have "latency mitigation" but what does that mean?Īll of this is adds up to what sounds like a rather technically compromised solution, yet reports are that it works rather well. Even with slice encoded h264/h265 there will be some additional latency. Depending on how the video is encoded that should translate to a reasonable quality (Oculus themselves acknowledge that compression artifacts are more noticable in VR than on a TV).Īnd then there is latency. Then there is the decoder bitrate limit of 150mbps. So it could be just the next lowest standard resolution, IE 1920x1080? For both eyes or for each eye? We know the Quest is Snapdragon 835 powered which can do 4k (3840 x 2160) 60Hz but the Quest uses 1600 x 1440 per eye, so why they do this presumably comes down to using a lower resolution to get the framerate up. OK the Quest has a higher resolution OLED display vs the Rift S LCD, but the images are run through their "Access Aligned Distortion Transfer" to squash the picture resolution into the constraints of the encoder and Snapdragon decoder resolutions (essentially merging together pixels at the edges of vision and spreading them out on the receiving end).
OBDUCTION OCULUS QUEST PC
I'm unconvinced how well the PC grade VR experience will translate to Quest. I'm considering buying a Rift S, but the announcement of the Link cable for Quest throws bit of a spanner in that.