Pimax Crystal - New models Confirmed

[Varibraun]

IMHO - Very smart move by Pimax if confirmed. 

 

TLDW - Leak says getting rid of the battery and bringing down the weight (probably the 2 biggest complaints with the current Crystal since almost no one uses it stand alone).  Also adding a cheaper "core" "Light" version and a "pro" 2 "Super" 4k versions with optional micro-oled displays (to compete with Apple and the new Varjo?)  Both releases potentially this year.

 

 

Edited April 16, 2024 by Varibraun
Leak Confirmed

[Aapje]

2 hours ago, Varibraun said:

IMHO - Very smart move by Pimax if confirmed. 

 

That is one way to phrase it, when someone fixes a huge mistake.

[Youtch]

The core one looks very interesting but I am afraid they are going to abandon eye tracking for foveated rendering.

[Aapje]

If they optimize it for PCVR simming, removing foveated rendering would be counterproductive.

[kissTheSky]

7 hours ago, Varibraun said:

IMHO - Very smart move by Pimax if confirmed. 

 

TLDW - Leak says getting rid of the battery and bringing down the weight (probably the 2 biggest complaints with the current Crystal since almost no one uses it stand alone).  Also adding a cheaper "core" version and a "pro" 4k version with micro-oled displays (to compete with Apple and the new Varjo?)  Both releases potentially this year.

 

 

Thanks for the TLDW!

 

with the demise of WMR, and the Aero, with Somnium having a probable $3k price tag for tier I’d want to get it at, a battery-less, display port enabled crystal might emerge as the only choice for me.

[Dagwoodyt]

Assuming the "leak" proves accurate, how is Pimax going to organize manufacture, parts supplies and software support for the various HMD variants?

[Panzerlang]

Once bitten and all that. I was promised back in January the wide FOV lenses would be shipping in March. Tumbleweed has been delivered instead. Even the long-promised pass-through mode doesn't work after the long wait for it. Add the fact I can see round edges in my display and the thing gives me face-ache after half an hour of use, I won't go with Pimax ever again.

[DBCOOPER011]

1 hour ago, Hetzer-JG52 said:

Once bitten and all that. I was promised back in January the wide FOV lenses would be shipping in March. Tumbleweed has been delivered instead. Even the long-promised pass-through mode doesn't work after the long wait for it. Add the fact I can see round edges in my display and the thing gives me face-ache after half an hour of use, I won't go with Pimax ever again.

 

From what i've read on discord, you lose some pretty significant binocular overlap to gain the extra 10-15% of HFOV with the wide FOV lenses. I'm pretty happy with the regular lense right now so I'll wait and see what more reviews say about the wide ones. My crystal is my go to headset at the moment. It looks really really good in IL2 but it extremely shines in DCS with eye tracking/QVFR.  The fit on this HMD is comfortable for me using the apache strap and 15mm face gasket for sime use, its not a headset I would prefer to use playing beat saber for though. What sort of round edges are you seeing? There is a hotfix available for pimax play at the pimax discord that may help, I'm not seeing any of that though. The crystal definately isnt a plug and play headset by no means, but it is pretty sweet once dialed in but does have some chromatic aberration on the edges though..

 

The latest review I've seen on the somnium indicates a pretty substantial HFOV with matching binocular overlap. I'm interested to see how this thing turns out, except for the price..

 

[Youtch]

2 hours ago, DBCOOPER011 said:

From what i've read on discord, you lose some pretty significant binocular overlap to gain the extra 10-15% of HFOV with the wide FOV lenses. I'm pretty happy with the regular lense right now so I'll wait and see what more reviews say about the wide ones. My crystal is my go to headset at the moment. It looks really really good in IL2 but it extremely shines in DCS with eye tracking/QVFR.  The fit on this HMD is comfortable for me using the apache strap and 15mm face gasket for sime use, its not a headset I would prefer to use playing beat saber for though. What sort of round edges are you seeing? There is a hotfix available for pimax play at the pimax discord that may help, I'm not seeing any of that though. The crystal definately isnt a plug and play headset by no means, but it is pretty sweet once dialed in but does have some chromatic aberration on the edges though..

What is the gain in terms of FPS with Foveated rendering enable through eye tracking?

[Varibraun]

13 hours ago, Hetzer-JG52 said:

Add the fact I can see round edges in my display and the thing gives me face-ache after half an hour of use, I won't go with Pimax ever again.

 

11 hours ago, DBCOOPER011 said:

My crystal is my go to headset at the moment. It looks really really good in IL2 but it extremely shines in DCS with eye tracking/QVFR.  The fit on this HMD is comfortable for me using the apache strap and 15mm face gasket for sime use, its not a headset I would prefer to use playing beat saber for though.

 

My own Crystal experience has been good overall and, fortunately for me, much more in line with Cooper's than Hetzer's.  On VR headsets in general, having been through 7 of them now (with 3 returns - including the early Aero), I think so much comes down to individual face shape and not receiving a lemon.  I did several adjustments to my Crystal including the apache strap with counter weight and switching the gasket, but the visuals have been well worth it for me.  I would consider a Pimax again, depending on the competition at that time.  

Edited April 9, 2024 by Varibraun

[DBCOOPER011]

6 hours ago, Youtch said:

What is the gain in terms of FPS with Foveated rendering enable through eye tracking?

 

Its a pretty big gain for DCS with QVFR, but less so for MSFS and IL2. I am able to use eye tracking in IL2 using steamvr and see around a 1.5-2ms drop in frametime, but its buggy and will crash the game inconsistently.

 

I'm running DCS at 90hz and around 40% above the native resolution in the foveated region. Settings are almost maxed except with the shadows being flat. Its very sharp and smooth at 90fps. I'm getting around 70-95% GPU usage depending upon the map. The biggest problem I have is being CPU bound. The eye tracking gain is less significant in MSFS at around a 2ms drop.

[blitze]

Would be nice to see an update to the 8K-X with better screens and improvements if they can to the lenses but keeping it pretty much the same elsewhere.  Don't want all the clobber of the Crystal (inside out tracking and eye tracking)  just oled screens with localised backlighting and maybe a bump in resolution.

[Aapje]

The new models have been announced:

 

 

 

The Pimax Crystal Super allows you to switch out the screen + optics, and they sell both a QLED and micro-OLED module, including a kit with both. So you can switch to the one you prefer.

 

The Pimax Crystal Light starts at $699 and is much lighter, but no eye tracking, so it uses fixed foveated rendering. There is a version with local dimming for $899.

 

The Light seems quite interesting for Reverb G2 & Valve Index owners who only do PCVR and are looking at a new headset, but really want a DP headset.

 

They also introduced a new wireless dongle for the Crystal.

 

As always with Pimax I would wait for them to iron out the worst bugs and not preordering.

Edited April 15, 2024 by Aapje

[Aapje]

Their website is getting hammered a bit now.

 

Prices for the Super:

$1799 for the QLED version

$1999 for the micro-OLED version

$2399 for the version with both QLED and micro-OLED kits

[Dagwoodyt]

I couldn't stop skipping through the video. Pimax is a fantastical😊

[Varibraun]

They are also offering Crystal owners a $399 discount on the Super (29:33).  So, I put in my $1 reservation fee to get on the list and will see where all of this leads. 

Edited April 15, 2024 by Varibraun

[DBCOOPER011]

I also reserved the Crystal Super for a buck and read that its suppose to come out Q4 of this year. If the spec's they put out are accurate, this should be a pretty insane headset for sim use. The only thing the Crystal light needed was eye tracking, thats unfortunate. But, I assume that would make the regular Crystal cheaper, since I dont think anyone would purchase it with the super out at close to the same price..

Edited April 16, 2024 by DBCOOPER011

[Aapje]

Interesting that you guys focus on the Super, when the Light seems the more interesting headset to me.

[simfan2015]

What is SUPER about these new Crystals ?

Massive FOV : another salesman term ... 100, 180 ... what ?

What are the upgrades compared to the old Pimax version, is it so much better in all regards versus Quest 3 and PICO 4 ... surely not price/size/weight !? 

Why gets simmers here so excited, mostly because it is a DP headset ? 

Edited April 16, 2024 by simfan2015

[Varibraun]

1 hour ago, simfan2015 said:

Why gets simmers here so excited, mostly because it is a DP headset ? 

 

For me personally, it has always been about the resolution which has lead me to every upgrade I have done over the years since my first CV1.  I have returned 3 headsets where I didn't feel the upgrade in resolution was enough to justify the upgrade cost.  The DP and getting rid of the battery and some weight would just be a bonus.

 

If you really are interested, then it is probably worth watching the Pimax video (and just ignoring the hype part for the specs and tech discussion).  The parts that "caught my eye" and making it worth the $1 investment was the 50 PPD with an increase in the field of view.  Grain of salt, but here is the graph they put up in the video regarding FOV for the QLED Super version (which is the one I reserved):

 

 

 

Edited April 16, 2024 by Varibraun

[blitze]

Yawn, sticking to the 8K-X still.  Something like the Crystal Light but with 8K-X FOV - pretty please.

[DBCOOPER011]

8 hours ago, Aapje said:

Interesting that you guys focus on the Super, when the Light seems the more interesting headset to me.

 

The specs on the Crystal Super are more or less comparable to the Varjo XR4 it appears, at less then half the price. XR4 resolution being 3840 x 3744 and the Super at 3,840 × 3,840. The Somnium VR1 headset is rendering at the same resolution as the OG Crystal (2,880 × 2,880) but at a higher price then the Crystal Super. So that definitely wouldnt be of interest to me. I also like the QLED/OLED panel swap feature the Crystal Super will appear to have.

 

If your mainly playing IL2 in VR then the Crystal Light appears to be a viable option, since eye tracking isnt supported..

[simfan2015]

Thank you varibraun !

I only looked at the webpages, did not yet see the movie.

117 / 130 degrees is more than fine.

If only those Pimax headsets were a lot ... smaller and lighter, but there is no magical formula I guess.

[Aapje]

22 minutes ago, simfan2015 said:

If only those Pimax headsets were a lot ... smaller and lighter, but there is no magical formula I guess.

 

The Light is 300 grams lighter.

[chiliwili69]

That guy Sweviver went from youtuber to Pimax marketing, and he is not doing bad at all.

It looks that these new models of Crystal Light and Crystal Super are closer to the thing of what the Crystal should have been from the begining.

It is good that they listen to the PCVR people like us and put the focus on it.

But we all know that being first users with Pimax new models it could be painful.

On the other hand VR haedsets are very personal and you never know if you like it or hate it until you try it.

 

One thing that they are not fully clear is with the FOVs of the Crystal Light. I assume they are just the same than the Crystal with non-wide-Fov lenses, so rendered HFOV:103, VFOV:104 (reference here), don´t believe Pimax webpage.

So this is not a small FOV but neither a Massive FOV as they state:

 

Despite of all that, I am really tempted to try the Pimax Light and test the FOVs, the FFR, the comfort, the 72Hz mode, etc

[Aapje]

30 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

One thing that they are not fully clear is with the FOVs of the Crystal Light.

 

Sweviver said that this is intentional, since it can change a little bit during finalization of the product and there is also not a way to measure it objectively, so they are not being too clear on it to avoid drama. But since it is a stripped Crystal, it should be pretty much the same as that one.

 

I'll wait for the reviews and early adopter experiences anyway. But it is a headset that is on my 'maybe' list. Although BradleyIsSadly, our infamous VR spy is suggesting that a bunch more headsets are coming this year. Perhaps even Valve will finally bring out Deckard.

[Youtch]

Bradley has been saying that Deckard is coming for years...

 

The Crystal Super instantly kill Somnium and Varjo, it is a very good move from Pimax, to shoot at the competition straight for consummer market.

[Aapje]

According to Bradley, Deckard would use the very promising 4K Emagin micro-OLED displays. Emagin has been acquired by Samsung a year ago and their panels seemed to have been done, aside from getting them ready for mass production (which itself is a big step).

 

Apparently these Emagin panels would also go into a Samsung/Google/Qualcomm headset. I can also see them being used for the Quest Pro 2.

 

So my guess is that Bradley's remark that a lot of headsets are coming later this year is because all these headsets are waiting for the Emagin panels (+ perhaps a matching Qualcomm chip with built-in upscaling to run all these pixels with relatively low horsepower) and that Samsung is expected to have mass production ready later this year.

 

But of course this is all just semi-informed speculation.

[Youtch]

I know that Pimax has some rough start with quality and customer service, but I kind of like the improvements they made and new direction they are taking, going step by step and the component approach.

 

If tomorrow something fail on the Pimax Super, it shall be much easier to fix or cheaper to replace.

[DBCOOPER011]

2 hours ago, Aapje said:

So my guess is that Bradley's remark that a lot of headsets are coming later this year is because all these headsets are waiting for the Emagin panels (+ perhaps a matching Qualcomm chip with built-in upscaling to run all these pixels with relatively low horsepower) and that Samsung is expected to have mass production ready later this year.

 

But of course this is all just semi-informed speculation.

 

Any information if these upcoming headsets are going to have a displayport connection?

[Aapje]

2 hours ago, DBCOOPER011 said:

 

Any information if these upcoming headsets are going to have a displayport connection?

The Somnium VR1 has USB C.

 

The leaks about the Deckard are mostly datamined from their Steam VR changes, which won't tell us anything about the ports, since they have to support both DP and USB C anyway, due to other headsets.

 

There is pretty much zero info about the Samsung/Google-headset or a potential Quest Pro 2.

[chiliwili69]

3 hours ago, DBCOOPER011 said:

displayport connection?

By the way, The current DP1.4 present in all 40xx nvidia cards will not be enough for this two panels of 3840x3840.

 

The current DP 1.4 has a max data rate of 25.92 Gbit/s.

The new DP 2.1 has a max data rate of 77.37 Gbit/s.

2x3840x3840x3(RGB)x8(8-bit color)x90(Hz) is 63.7 Gbit/s. 

 

[TimSell75]

5 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

By the way, The current DP1.4 present in all 40xx nvidia cards will not be enough for this two panels of 3840x3840.

 

The current DP 1.4 has a max data rate of 25.92 Gbit/s.

The new DP 2.1 has a max data rate of 77.37 Gbit/s.

2x3840x3840x3(RGB)x8(8-bit color)x90(Hz) is 63.7 Gbit/s. 

 

They talked about it on YT and they will do it by compression

[chiliwili69]

This very high resolutions of new Crystal Super (like Varjo XR-4) will need very heavy DFR techniques to reduce the number of pixels to be rendered.

In this table I put pixels to be rendered for the varjo XR-4 (assuming same internal supersampling ratio than Aero) and Crystal Super (assuming same internal supersampling ratio than Crystal) compared with all previous headsets.

[Aapje]

On 4/17/2024 at 9:06 PM, chiliwili69 said:

This very high resolutions of new Crystal Super (like Varjo XR-4) will need very heavy DFR techniques to reduce the number of pixels to be rendered.

In this table I put pixels to be rendered for the varjo XR-4 (assuming same internal supersampling ratio than Aero) and Crystal Super (assuming same internal supersampling ratio than Crystal) compared with all previous headsets.

 

I think that it's a bit more complicated than that, because the headsets don't work like a regular screen. A lot of them have angled panels or optics distortions, which means that they have to manipulate the rendered images quite a bit to display a proper image. This is why there is such a thing called 'sampling' in the first place. They construct a new image by sampling the rendered image.

 

Depending on the panels, optics and quality of the sampling algorithm, you can get a different result when rendering an image of a certain size to headsets that have the same panel resolution. So simply comparing the pixels is not a good way to judge what quality you get from a certain render resolution.

Edited April 19, 2024 by Aapje

[firdimigdi]

4 hours ago, Aapje said:

So simply comparing the pixels is not a good way to judge what quality you get from a certain render resolution.

 

It's a good indicator of expected performance however.

[Aapje]

38 minutes ago, firdimigdi said:

 

It's a good indicator of expected performance however.

 

Not if you need a higher resolution on one headset than on another, to get the same actual quality, despite them having the same panel resolution.

 

 

[chiliwili69]

9 hours ago, Aapje said:

So simply comparing the pixels is not a good way to judge what quality you get from a certain render resolution

 

The intention of that chart was not to compare the image quality of the headsets, but the default extra number of pixels they need to render to take into account those optics and geometry.

In the X axis is just the total pixels of the two physical panels.

In the Y axis is then the default total rendered pixels (with SteamVR SS 100%).

That´s why all the dots are above the diagonal, all depends on the internal supersampling that every manufacturer need to introduce for every optic&geometry.

 

So, the purpose of the chart is just to compare the required raw GPU power (for default resolution, ie 100% SteamVR SS) if not other techniques are used (FFR, DFR).

 

The table and calculations are in the "SS per Device" tab:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gJmnz_nVxI6_dG_UYNCCpZVK2-f8NBy-y1gia77Hu_k/

At the bottom.

Edited April 19, 2024 by chiliwili69

[Aapje]

They have two new choices for the Light:

$799 Local dimming, but no controllers

$899 Local dimming & Lighthouse faceplace, but no controller

 

And these are offered next to the choices they had already announced:

$699 No local dimming, with controllers

$899 Local dimming, with controllers

[Panzerlang]

Thank you for your support of Pie products. 
The large FOV is currently at a beta testing phase and order deliveries have not yet been initiated. 
Regarding the shipment plan for it, it is expected to be scheduled in June. 
I have paid attention to your ticket and will synchronize the information with you at that time. 
We apologize for the delay and thanks again for your understanding and waiting.
Sincerely,
Kelly

Meanwhile they have all the time and resources to produce variations of the entire headset. Let me guess what won't be shipping in June however.