←back to thread

Steam Frame

(store.steampowered.com)
880 points Philpax | 10 comments | 12 Nov 25 17:54 UTC | HN request time: 1.157s | source | bottom
Show context
modeless ◴[12 Nov 25 19:02 UTC] No.45904494[source]▶
Foveated streaming! That's a great idea. Foveated rendering is complicated to implement with current rendering APIs in a way that actually improves performance, but foveated streaming seems like a much easier win that applies to all content automatically. And the dedicated 6 GHz dongle should do a much better job at streaming than typical wifi routers.

> Just like any SteamOS device, install your own apps, open a browser, do what you want: It's your PC.

It's an ARM Linux PC that presumably gives you root access, in addition to being a VR headset. And it has an SD card slot for storage expansion. Very cool, should be very hackable. Very unlike every other standalone VR headset.

> 2160 x 2160 LCD (per eye) 72-144Hz refresh rate

Roughly equivalent resolution to Quest 3 and less than Vision Pro. This won't be suitable as a monitor replacement for general desktop use. But the price is hopefully low. I'd love to see a high-end option with higher resolution displays in the future, good enough for monitor replacement.

> Monochrome passthrough

So AR is not a focus here, which makes sense. However:

> User accessible front expansion port w/ Dual high speed camera interface (8 lanes @ 2.5Gbps MIPI) / PCIe Gen 4 interface (1-lane)

Full color AR could be done as an optional expansion pack. And I can imagine people might come up with other fun things to put in there. Mouth tracking?

One thing I don't see here is optional tracking pucks for tracking objects or full body tracking. That's something the SteamVR Lighthouse tracking ecosystem had, and the Pico standalone headset also has it.

More detail from the LTT video: Apparently it can run Android APKs too? Quest compatibility layer maybe? There's an optional accessory kit that adds a top strap (I'm surprised it isn't standard) and palm straps that enable using the controllers in the style of the Valve Index's "knuckles" controllers.

replies(10): >>45904910 #>>45905167 #>>45905538 #>>45905540 #>>45905841 #>>45906677 #>>45906840 #>>45906875 #>>45907352 #>>45908497 #
xeonmc ◴[12 Nov 25 19:23 UTC] No.45904910[source]▶
> Roughly equivalent resolution to Quest 3 and less than Vision Pro. This won't be suitable as a monitor replacement for general desktop use. But the price is hopefully low.

Question, what is the criteria for deciding this to be the case? Could you not just move your face closer to the virtual screen to see finer details?

replies(3): >>45904957 #>>45905175 #>>45906004 #
potatolicious ◴[12 Nov 25 19:37 UTC] No.45905175[source]▶
There's no precise criteria but the usual measure is ppd (pixels per degree) and it needs to be high enough such that detailed content (such as text) displayed at a reasonable size is clearly legible without eye strain.

> "Could you not just move your face closer to the virtual screen to see finer details?"

Sure, but then you have the problem of, say, using an IMAX screen as your computer monitor. The level of head motion required to consume screen content (i.e., a ton of large head movements) would make the device very uncomfortable quite quickly.

The Vision Pro has about ~35ppd and generally people seems to think it hits the bar for monitor replacement. Meta Quest 3 has ~25ppd and generally people seem to think it does not. The Steam Frame is specs-wise much closer to Quest 3 than Vision Pro.

There are some software things you can do to increase legibility of details like text, but ultimately you do need physical pixels.

replies(1): >>45906087 #
1. giobox ◴[12 Nov 25 20:28 UTC] No.45906087[source]▶
Even the vision pro at 35ppd simply isn't close to the PPD you can get from a good desktop monitor (we can calculate PPD for desktop monitors too, using size and viewing distance).

Apple's "retina" HiDPI monitors typically have PPD well beyond 35 at ordinary viewing distances, even a 1080p 24 inch monitor on your desk can exceed this.

For me personally, 35ppd feels about the minimum I would accept for emulating a monitor for text work in a VR headset, but it's still not good enough for me to even begin thinking about using it to replace any of my monitors.

> https://phrogz.net/tmp/ScreenDensityCalculator.html

replies(3): >>45906275 #>>45907633 #>>45908593 #
2. potatolicious ◴[12 Nov 25 20:37 UTC] No.45906275[source]▶
Oh yeah for sure. Most people seem to accept that 35ppd is "good enough" but not actually at-par with a high quality high-dpi monitor.

I agree with you - I would personally consider 35ppd to be the floor for usability for this purpose. It's good in a pinch (need a nice workstation setup in a hotel room?) but I would not currently consider any extant hardware as full-time replacements for a good monitor.

replies(1): >>45907009 #
3. andybak ◴[12 Nov 25 21:29 UTC] No.45907009[source]▶
Most people in what age group?

I'm 53 and the Quest 3 is perfectly good as a monitor replacement.

replies(2): >>45907192 #>>45907255 #
4. froggit ◴[12 Nov 25 21:44 UTC] No.45907192{3}[source]▶
Are you saying ppd requirements for comfortable usage vary with age?
5. gruturo ◴[12 Nov 25 21:49 UTC] No.45907255{3}[source]▶
I'm in the same boat. Due to my vision not being perfect even after correction, a Quest 3 is entirely sufficient.
replies(1): >>45908220 #
6. whycome ◴[12 Nov 25 22:18 UTC] No.45907633[source]▶
We get by with lower resolution monitors with lower pixel density all the time.
replies(2): >>45907647 #>>45907766 #
7. giobox ◴[12 Nov 25 22:20 UTC] No.45907647[source]▶
I'm not sure most of us do anymore - see my 1080p/24 inch example.

No one who has bought almost any MacBook in the last 10 years or so has had PPD this low either.

One can get by with almost anything in a pinch, it doesn't mean its desirable.

Pixel density != PPD either, although increasing it can certainly help PPD. Lower density desktop displays routinely have higher PPD than most VR headsets - viewing distance matters!

8. big_toast ◴[12 Nov 25 22:29 UTC] No.45907766[source]▶
I think part of getting by with a lower PPD is the IRL pixels are fixed and have hard boundaries that OS affordances have co-evolved with.

(pixel alignment via lots of rectangular things - windows, buttons; text rendering w/ that in mind; "pixel perfect" historical design philosophy)

The VR PPD is in arbitrary orientations which will lead to more aliasing. MacOS kinda killed their low-dpi experience via bad aliasing as they moved to the hi-dpi regime. Now we have svg-like rendering instead of screen-pixel-aligned baked rasterized UIs.

9. pdpi ◴[12 Nov 25 23:11 UTC] No.45908220{4}[source]▶
I keep hearing this argument, and it baffles me. I find that, as I age and my vision gets worse, I need progressively finer text rendering. Using same-size displays (27") at the same distance, with text the same physical size on screen, 1440p gives me a much worse reading experience than 4k with 2x scaling.
10. numpad0 ◴[12 Nov 25 23:52 UTC] No.45908593[source]▶
I think there is a missing number here: angular resolution of human eyeballs is believed to be ~60 ppd(some believes it's more like 90).