Why does VR require amazing computers?

[BrenRC]

Why does VR require amazing computers (not necessarily amazing, just well out of budget)? I understand with the hand controllers and whatnot, but isn't it really just a second HDMI display? I'm asking this because I am a HUGE War Thunder freak, and I thought,it would be cool to have VR for it. After looking online, I found HTC Vive and Oculus Rift. My pc didn't meet their system requirements. What confuses me is how it couldn't, because once I hooked up Fatshark FPV goggles (a (way too) low resolution FPV monitor for anything other than FPV) and plugged in a wireless Gyro Mouse so I could look around the cockpit (in War Thunder). Again, the resolution was way too low. But seeing as I set up such a simple VR system for just a few hundred (and NO lag), why can't these companies do the same?

That brings me to my main question: Does anyone have a simple HDMI/USB VR headset (USB for the Gyro)? I'm willing to do some DIY work. In reality I could get a high-res 5.1 inch monitor and put it in a Google Cardboard with a Gyro on it and have the same thing as an Oculus Rift headset, right? I'm willing to do some DIY, but I'd like to try to stay under $300 and have a reasonable resolution. Please, cockpit view is calling me!

 

[nuttynut]

The reason is that you need high framerates (~90) and stereo output (don't know about mono VR). And like you said, your test system is low res.

Newegg has a nice guide that explains a few things: http/www.newegg.com/vr/guides/find-out-if-your-pc-can-handle-vr.html

 

[BrenRC]

The reason is that you need high framerates (~90) and stereo output (don't know about mono VR). And like you said, your test system is low res.

Newegg has a nice guide that explains a few things: http/www.newegg.com/vr/guides/find-out-if-your-pc-can-handle-vr.html

I see what your saying about how my test system was low res, but I still got the fps I'd get on my pc, and honestly how is the high frame rate on a second display any different then using a large, high res monitor as my secondary display for my laptop? Isn't it just a smaller screen? Second, I can just get a free program (that I already found) to display my screen in the two "goggle views" Thanks for the help!

 

[Math Geek]

that's why amd's new 480 card is such an awesome thing. $200-229 MSRP for VR ready gpu. you won't need a $600 card anymore for VR. amd save the day

 

[nuttynut]

The reason is that you need high framerates (~90) and stereo output (don't know about mono VR). And like you said, your test system is low res.

Newegg has a nice guide that explains a few things: http/www.newegg.com/vr/guides/find-out-if-your-pc-can-handle-vr.html

I see what your saying about how my test system was low res, but I still got the fps I'd get on my pc, and honestly how is the high frame rate on a second display any different then using a large, high res monitor as my secondary display for my laptop? Isn't it just a smaller screen? Second, I can just get a free program (that I already found) to display my screen in the two "goggle views" Thanks for the help!

You need higher framerates due to the immersive, vision-filling nature of VR. 90 fps is considered the gold standard. The difference in framerates becomes more pronounced with a headset.

Now a headset (for a game at least) uses true stereo, meaning that the engine must render the scene twice for every frame. It's not as simple as mirroring displays.

Hope that explains why system requirements for VR are so insane.

 

[Math Geek]

poor framerates can produce nausea and vertigo very quickly. think about stuttering and such in a gem. this is annoying when seeing a monitor. but if it is all you see then any slight delay or stutter messes with your head. all your eyes see is the screen so if you turn your head left and it does not look left as fast. your brain gets confused and vertigo results.

happens real quick. you NEED the high fps and resolution to fool your brain into thinking it is seeing real life or it gets mad and makes you puke