Meta Project Cambria Device to be significantly higher than $800.

[dburne]

https://www.roadtovr.com/meta-project-cambria-price-significantly-higher-800/

 

Just my opinion but if they are going to play in the high end VR game, the device better support native display port connection directly to the GPU rather than compressing through a Link cable.

 

Also Meta plans four new headsets by 2024:

https://www.roadtovr.com/meta-vr-headset-roadmap-quest-3-4-project-cambria-release-date/

Edited May 3, 2022 by dburne

[chiliwili69]

In VR I would not enter in discussions about the price of a Headset. I think they can go as high as they want (until certain point), but they have to be worth the money.

It seems that the Cambria is not going to be subsidised by Meta, by I really don´t care about cambria since we already know it uses a normal FOV and not a spectacular resolution. (just 2160x2160 per eye).

 

What I really really don´t understand is how a company that is pouring out billions of dollars every quarter is not able to produce NOW another proper headset just for PC-VR, just a Rift with better lenses, more FOV, better resolution, edge-to-edge clarity, comfort, etc...

 

 

They say they have 3 more headsets in the pipeline, 2 of them will be in the line of Quest2 (so not for me) and a succesor of Cambria in 2024. 

 

Come on VALVE!!!  we PC-VR simmers need desperately the Index-2!!

[unlikely_spider]

I don't think this headset is for gaming, from what I've read.

[dburne]

I am extremely pleased with my Aero. Thankfully I don't think I will be in the market for another headset for quite a while.

Even with these four new headsets announced I think they will all center around the Meta Verse. Meta wants all the data they can get on folks. 

Edited May 3, 2022 by dburne

[Drum]

Same, this Aero is so clear and good I have zero craving for anything else anymore, and I'm only running the res at 2180ish.  But that's absolutely plenty in this sim when there's no longer any blur to deal with.  IL-2 needs to get the proper distortion profiles setup for the other HMDs and that'll make them all a whole lot better I'm sure, I changed none of my settings from what I used with the G2, but the graphics are all of a sudden now so crystal clear?  It definitely has a lot to do with how the software overlaps the two images from the game.  No more shimmer either, etc.  Fenris is right, IL-2 still needs to fine tune the other HMD images before they too can fully benefit from what they're capable of doing I think.

Edited May 4, 2022 by Drum

[firdimigdi]

6 hours ago, Drum said:

I changed none of my settings from what I used with the G2, but the graphics are all of a sudden now so crystal clear? 

 

I suspect the use of aspheric lenses in the Aero vs fresnel lenses in the G2 accounts for most of the "all of a sudden".

[Drum]

Not really, the aspheric lenses truly are clear right to the edges while the sweet spot on the G2 still starts to get a little blurry at mid to long range.  The Aero doesn't, it stays crispy clear just like a monitor for as far as the image is clear on a monitor.  The aspheric lenses are impressive though, but still, the G2 should be as clear as them or a monitor in the center, but they aren't.

 

I was never trying to improve the G2's image where the lenses are normally blurry, just in the center where they shouldn't be. Varjo's software is doing an impressive job with the image, I'm only using FXAA=4 while with the G2 I used MSAA=2 to help minimize the distant landscape flickering & blur.

 

With the Aero I adjusted the in game settings upwards until stopping at 80 FPS.  I should be fine tuning it more I guess but I get zero flickering or distortion, I just haven't felt the need to do so yet becuase as the others who reviewed it said, it's in a league of it's own and comparing this with the G2 feels like comparing a 1080P 25" monitor with a 1440p 34".  ?

Edited May 4, 2022 by Drum

[firdimigdi]

1 hour ago, Drum said:

comparing this with the G2 feels like comparing a 1080P 25" monitor with a 1440p 34"

 

I see, unfortunately the price doesn't scale at the same ratio as between a 1080p 25" and a 1440p 34". Sometime in the future maybe.

 

1 hour ago, Drum said:

distant landscape flickering & blur

 

I keep reading this mentioned, it seems to be a main issue mentioned on the OpenXR thread as well (as in with OpenXR this is not an issue for some people, while using OpenVR it is) but I honestly don't know. With the G2 I don't get flickering or blurriness with the landscape, it's almost as sharp and clear as I see it on my 4K monitor. The only shimmering I might encounter at times is related to alpha channeled textures, like the foliage or transparent textures on objects (nets, fences, etc), but forests from altitude or distant landscapes are pretty solid. And as for flickering, the thing that I notice flickering the most is shadows, either buildings or trees, but that is down to the game's rendering.

 

One thing that has come to light after a lot of back and forth with @dgiatr (who transitioned from a Q2 to G2 and had issues focusing with the G2) is that that the G2 seems to have a shorter focal distance which can affect how people with presbyopia experience it. The lens in the eye is trying to focus at something too close for its current ability while the eyes themselves are converging on something that is "in the distance" (there's a long thread about it in the MSFS forum here: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/psa-reverb-g2-small-sweet-spots-observations-and-solutions/343611 - the thread author (CptLucky8) is one of the people contributing to the OpenXR toolkit). This is known as the vergence-accommodation conflict which affects all HMDs of the current tech (small screen on face seen through magnifying lenses), but depending on design choices, anatomy and eye health it can manifest itself  in varying degrees.

 

 

Edited May 4, 2022 by firdimigdi

[Drum]

Thanks for that link, Firdimigdi.  It was a good read and I think that's what I was experiencing with the G2, as well.  Never liked it from the beginning and now that it's boxed up to be my backup, I'll know what to do the next time I stick my face into it's lens bucket again.   Hopefully never.  ? 

[dgiatr]

20 hours ago, firdimigdi said:

 

 

 

 

One thing that has come to light after a lot of back and forth with @dgiatr (who transitioned from a Q2 to G2 and had issues focusing with the G2) is that that the G2 seems to have a shorter focal distance which can affect how people with presbyopia experience it. The lens in the eye is trying to focus at something too close for its current ability while the eyes themselves are converging on something that is "in the distance" (there's a long thread about it in the MSFS forum here: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/psa-reverb-g2-small-sweet-spots-observations-and-solutions/343611 - the thread author (CptLucky8) is one of the people contributing to the OpenXR toolkit). This is known as the vergence-accommodation conflict which affects all HMDs of the current tech (small screen on face seen through magnifying lenses), but depending on design choices, anatomy and eye health it can manifest itself  in varying degrees.

 

 

Yes i confirm that my G2 is more blurry around the peripheral view than my Q2. Inside my G2 sweet spot area the view isnt much clearer than inside Q2 sweet spot area though. I have the same prescription lenses from VR OPTICIAN inside both of them . i get better spotting with Q2 although a little more shimmery image but i get higher fps with G2 than with Q2 for sure.  Indeed i have a little presbyopia so it could be probably a matter of different focal distance between Q2 and G2 ( probably focal distance of G2 shorter than focal distance of Q2 )

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Cambria has been confirmed to support WiFi 6e.

 

As such it'll be able to stream wirelessly without compression and virtually latency-less.

 

So... with micro-OLED and flat lenses... wireless... and eye tracking... and can be standalone too...  

 

P.S. it'll have fully configurable passthrough available as well. So those who have them can take simmer's cockpits and use them in VR..!

 

Edited May 23, 2022 by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

[chiliwili69]

58 minutes ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

without compression

 

The bit rate with no compression should be 2160x2160x2(panels)x24(8bit per color)x90(Hz)= 20.1 Gbps (Giga bit per second)

 

Definetely some compression is needed.

 

I hope Meta removes the account requirements, at least to try the device (and deliver it back for not great FOV).

[dburne]

You will be able to go fishing in your living room or hang out with friends in the Meta Verse.

Wow...

 

 

1 hour ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

The bit rate with no compression should be 2160x2160x2(panels)x24(8bit per color)x90(Hz)= 20.1 Gbps (Giga bit per second)

 

Definetely some compression is needed.

 

I hope Meta removes the account requirements, at least to try the device (and deliver it back for not great FOV).

 

 

 

Surely FOV specs will be known prior to ordering.

 

Edited May 23, 2022 by dburne

[dburne]

Also interesting article here:

https://www.tomsguide.com/news/oculus-quest-pro-meta-project-cambria

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Sigh... If you argued in that sense, the Varjo does compression as well. When talking about compression it is referring to "that you don't see it". And the throughput of the DP cable vs WiFi 6e - go check it out and compare the Varjo's cable throughput to WiFi 6e's. 

 

Waiting for your results

 

Regarding specs...

Well it can't be as bad as the Varjo FOV-wise, which set a new low for a benchmark on it. 

 

Knowing Oculus, I'm also expecting an unwarped, geometrically fully correct picture, something that the Varjo still doesn't manage to achieve. 

 

Yeah yeah, "if you only play Sim with the Varjo you don't notice". I'm definitely playing roomscale with it. There even blind snakes who couldn't catch a ball if their life depended on it would notice.

 

An overpriced one-trick-pony like the Varjo isn't competitive with that scope. Back into the shelf and waiting for better options soon.

 

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

[chiliwili69]

4 hours ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

Waiting for your results

 

I don´t know the varjo numbers but in the veteran Reverb G2 we have the same numbers 2160x2160x2x24x90=20.1Gbps

Reverb G2 uses Display Port 1.3 which support up to 26Gbps, So I believe G2 doesn´t do compression.

 

The WiFi 6e support bit rates of 5 to 10Gbps. So compression will be used. But as you said, we will not notice it. Which is a good step forward.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Yeah, I hope so.

 

After going wireless it's hard to go back to wired. Albeit, remember please, I'm referring to roomscale gaming as well.

 

A Sim-only use-case may be perceived differently.

[dburne]

11 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

I don´t know the varjo numbers but in the veteran Reverb G2 we have the same numbers 2160x2160x2x24x90=20.1Gbps

Reverb G2 uses Display Port 1.3 which support up to 26Gbps, So I believe G2 doesn´t do compression.

 

The WiFi 6e support bit rates of 5 to 10Gbps. So compression will be used. But as you said, we will not notice it. Which is a good step forward.

 

WiFi 6e has a ways to go to becoming broadly accepted so not everyone might have access to this anytime soon.

https://www.pcmag.com/news/what-is-wi-fi-6e  I have not read anywhere Meta claim their Cambria device will support it, but by the time of release I would not be surprised if they do. Meta currently still shares very little info on this device. 

 

I play my games with typically hardware mounted to my desk. This hardware has cables running to my PC. Cables do not bother me or I would have been screaming for wireless sticks, throttles, rudders, etc a long time ago. I not only have a true display port cable running from my headset to my PC but also a Point Control cable doing the same as well. No desire for room-scale stuff on my end. I even play Half Life Alyx seated. However I am disabled which is one of the main reasons.

[WIS-Redcoat]

7 hours ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

Regarding specs...

Well it can't be as bad as the Varjo FOV-wise, which set a new low for a benchmark on it. 

 

By FOV I assume you mean lit screen of light and not usable viewing area?  Yeah, the unreleased Cambria might be better or it might be the same or it might be worse.  Great observation.

 

7 hours ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

Knowing Oculus, I'm also expecting an unwarped, geometrically fully correct picture, something that the Varjo still doesn't manage to achieve. 

Does it come with a free Facebook account?  Joking aside... I agree it might have stuff.  Hope springs eternal.

 

7 hours ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

 

An overpriced one-trick-pony like the Varjo isn't competitive with that scope. Back into the shelf and waiting for better options soon.

Overpriced and not competitive against what exactly?  I've used my Aero for four wonderful months already, life is short.  In order for it to be either of those things there has to be another option.  I certainly agree the G2 is a better value... but lets get real.  

 

When one goes to buy a race horse do you get a better price with the seller when you talk about unicorns?  I know you reported months ago that Cambria was already in production but obviously that was simply more whistle smoke for the Hype Train Express. 

 

I applaud Facebook's work here and look forward to the Cambria, but I wouldn't waste too much time attacking the current shiny. 

VR Flight sim people that want the best retail PC sim headset (that exists on planet earth) will buy the Aero; and people that can't afford that luxury will buy the G2.  Propaganda will not alter those feelings.   

 

17 hours ago, dburne said:

You will be able to go fishing in your living room or hang out with friends in the Meta Verse.

Wow...

 

Actually that sort stuff can be fun.  I have a Quest2 and its actually pretty darn good at being a living room VR headset.

Edited May 24, 2022 by WIS-Redcoat

[dburne]

Yeah Varjo is hardly a one trick pony lol they have been heavily involved in real world flight training - with their headsets Aero included.

In any event going off into Aero territory or even Varjo is very much OT for the purpose of this thread, which is Meta's Cambria - much of which is still unknown. Speculation is always fun though lol.

8 minutes ago, WIS-Redcoat said:

 

 

 

Actually that sort stuff can be fun.  I have a Quest2 and its actually pretty darn good at being a living room VR headset.

 

I had the original Quest and bet I did not get 10 hours into it. It just did not do it for me, nothing against it , was just not for me. After experience Rift S games the Quest games seemed so meh. I gave it to my granddaughter when they were down earlier this year. Of all my headsets that was the first I got rid of. She is loving it from what I understand.

 

Having this awesome Aero I don't see Cambria enticing me any, and it would take quite a lot for me to spend another plug nickel with Meta. But I will be very interested in what it has and what kind of consumer acceptance it gets. 

Edited May 24, 2022 by dburne

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Well, I did buy the Aero. I'm saying it's not worth its price, especially with that warped view, because competitors even nowadays are better for roomscale gaming and cost less.

 

So it's not just about wether it's worth its price, but wether it's outclassed in use-cases.

 

It's certainly not outclassed for Simulators, as in my review - it's fielding place number one here for IL-2.

 

But roomscale, which often had the player in smaller rooms or closer horizons so the warping gets extremely noticeable... Or racing, which benefits extraordinarily from a large FOV to emit the feeling of velocity... Or shooters in which you're at a real disadvantage due to being wired AND the tiny FOV so you constantly need to swivel your head and scan to spot someone..it only allows for one of two human viewing modi: Focused active view, but not the unfocused passive view. 

 

 

Come on WIS, you didn't say anything in regards of the world-warping in the Aero. My post already pulled you out of your cave once, try to nullify that fact. 

 

P.S. we know a lot about the Cambria by now, that's not speculation.

 

Pancake lenses (Aero quality but without warp)

2160*2160 90/120Hz screens (we don't know yet if they're OLED, which is the only question mark remaining)

Lighter formfactor, especially the front

High-Res passthrough (AR capability)

Snapdragon XR-2 (ability as standalone)

WiFi-6e for Airlink, direct link

Controllers without ring (self tracked)

5 hour hotswap battery

Eye-tracking, mimic tracking

OpenXR/-VR/-composite compatibility

Largest library with Meta exclusives

Best software package by far

 

Even if the headset was the same price as the Aero, it would be a clear upgrade.

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

[Drum]

Having the FOV extend beyond where my eyes can physically rotate and see seams like a waste of GPU horsepower IMO.  With this Aero I can not get my eyes to look pass the black side edges right now.  When looking ahead I perceive about 1/4" of black edge on either side which doesn't feel restrictive to me. 

 

Just my personal opinion due to my face shape and IPD and everyone's experience will be a little different based on their IPDs; my IPD is 65, dead center of the adjustment scale so if one's IPD is out near the 70 mark then they might feel the need for more FOV.

 

I only use VR with IL-2 right now, so my opinion on other gaming experiences is nil.

 

[dburne]

We really should keep this on topic of the Cambria and not a pissing match between Aero and Cambria. No reason for that.

 

[dburne]

1 hour ago, Drum said:

Having the FOV extend beyond where my eyes can physically rotate and see seams like a waste of GPU horsepower IMO.  With this Aero I can not get my eyes to look pass the black side edges right now.  When looking ahead I perceive about 1/4" of black edge on either side which doesn't feel restrictive to me. 

 

Just my personal opinion due to my face shape and IPD and everyone's experience will be a little different based on their IPDs; my IPD is 65, dead center of the adjustment scale so if one's IPD is out near the 70 mark then they might feel the need for more FOV.

 

I only use VR with IL-2 right now, so my opinion on other gaming experiences is nil.

 

 

I use it with IL-2, DCS, and to much lesser extent MSFS 2020. And some other made for VR games occasionally like Half Life Alyx and Medal of Honor. Star Wars Squadrons but has been quite a while since I played that one. I love Half Life Alyx - imho the best "made for VR" game done to date.

Edited May 24, 2022 by dburne

[firdimigdi]

1 hour ago, Drum said:

Having the FOV extend beyond where my eyes can physically rotate and see seams like a waste of GPU horsepower IMO.

 

Not necessarily, with healthy eyes we have a surprisingly wide FOV and peripheral vision is a pretty important component of how we perceive motion, speed and the sense of presence apart from the obvious practical use in a combat sim of keeping an eye on that bandit. If you can get better FOV for the same pixel throughput due to better lens tech not wasting them to distortion or due to well-implemented foveated rendering then why not?

[Drum]

I'm all for more of everything, it's just at what cost though right now.  Eventually we'll have it all, which will be nice, this Cambria sounds pretty good and the more competition the better for all of us which should help to lower the prices as well.

Edited May 24, 2022 by Drum

[WIS-Redcoat]

2 hours ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

 

Come on WIS, you didn't say anything in regards of the world-warping in the Aero. My post already pulled you out of your cave once, try to nullify that fact. 

 

 

I don't have any "world warping"; thus nothing to mention.  I did have some distortion back in January but its all gone now.  I'm not really sure what the "cave" comment is about; but if that makes you feel stronger I am happy to oblige as cynics needs wellness too.  

 

I hope the Cambria clobbers the Aero.  The tech in the Quest 2 gives me cautious optimism.  The Cambria headset will hopefully exist (despite your claim it is NOT in production) and my understanding is that it may not be until well into 2023.  Going after Aero with white paper data is like comparing the VCR before DVD players were released.  Things get better and cheaper.  I'm the sort that pays for the best (and apparently lives in a cave).

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

[dburne]

I still think Cambria is going to be heavily focused on the Meta social VR utopia they are hoping for. Going to be interesting to see what market they are going after, or whether they are just trying to create a new market. Basically a higher end MR project. We shall see...

I can't see myself giving any more money to Meta anytime soon but again will be interesting to see.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

16 hours ago, WIS-Redcoat said:

 

I don't have any "world warping"; thus nothing to mention.  I did have some distortion back in January but its all gone now.  I'm not really sure what the "cave" comment is about; but if that makes you feel stronger I am happy to oblige as cynics needs wellness too.  

 

I hope the Cambria clobbers the Aero.  The tech in the Quest 2 gives me cautious optimism.  The Cambria headset will hopefully exist (despite your claim it is NOT in production) and my understanding is that it may not be until well into 2023.  Going after Aero with white paper data is like comparing the VCR before DVD players were released.  Things get better and cheaper.  I'm the sort that pays for the best (and apparently lives in a cave).

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

hehehe, lucky you then. My first Aero had dead pixels on top of that. World warping wasn't fixed yet, but it's not visible in Flight Sims. You can see it when playing roomscale games and looking up, then down, then up again. To me it is distracting, count yourself lucky if it doesn't bother you / not noticeable.

 

Oh, and Cambria is already in production, or rather its parts in the SC to fill up stocks, it's not entirely JiT as the market is too loose. It's not in assembly yet, just next month..  

It'll be right there after summer. I wonder however what competitors may bring as well. Apple is hot bagels right now, if they deliver AR with VR capability we're in for a treat.

[dburne]

Interestingly there is absolutely zero talk or excitement on this Cambria device over on the Oculus forums. Strange times we live in I tell ya. Meta still not sharing any real info on it yet either.

 

 

 

Edited May 25, 2022 by dburne

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

There wasn't any on the Aero before its release and Steve pushing videos on it either. The Cambria is aimed at professionals like me and "prosumers" anyway. It'll be quite interesting.

 

Meta needs to grip the supply chain entirely first, they got to be careful with announcements. The information is from insiders and data mining, not from official announcements.

 

P.S. CNET is just journalists putting together what they've googled.