20% so it was the same until the 5k+ panel.
Well it doesnāt proof that the 4kās panel usage is 50%, thatās correct, it could be higher and still yield a noticeable difference. Yet SOMETHING is seriously wrong with the Pimax 8k, otherwise people wouldnāt be so indecisive between the Pimax 5k and the Pimax 8k. A HMD using two 4k panels simply should look much better than a device with two 1440p panels, thatās a fact. I find neoās explanation a very plausible one. Yet weāll need to wait 2 weeks for more info on that.
No because your forgetting the 4k is using 1 panel over 2 eyes. The core viewpoint(equal to 4k model 95 FoV) could be equal in resolution over the 95-96 FoV.
Just be patient & wait for the nda to be lifted. The core result Berlin Meet a success! Testers themselves looked quite 
.
Iām not forgetting anything. 170 vs 95 is less than 100%, while it does have twice the pixels. If anything the Pimax 8k should look better than the 4k. But my point was not even in relation to the Pimax 4k. My point is simply that a device with more than 240% more pixels should really look much better. If Neoās theory is incorrect, then something else is wrong with the Pimax 8k.
If the main viewpoint equalling 95 FoV on the 8k is equal to the 4kās total used Resolution not to be confused with using the entire 4k panel then SDE & res will be similar. Now the RGB pixel layout on the 4k is Rainbow; the 8k panel we know itās RGB. So harder to gauge.
The Resolution out of the main overlap viewpoint will not increase clarity just increase FoV.
Ok so for you itās perfectly normal that an 21440p device and a 24k device look pretty much the same. I think anybody can see thatās not normal. Weāll see in 2 weeks, I think @Neoskynet will have some interesting research for us that will explain why the Berlin testers are so indecisive between the two.
1 Like
They are not the same. Panel physical size is smaller in 5k+. As for normal; results varied from not seeing a difference to some clearly seeing the 5k+ has more sde.
So inconclusive & hence why folks are having difficulty deciding.
If the panel utilization was so low in the main view area the base 5k would look like Rift Cv1 & og vive. Possibly in the same class as the psvr.
Hopefully he will have an m2 & 5k+ to evaluate. As @cdaked said their was a clarity issue in their m1 & has likely muddied some of the tests & perceived issue.
Agreed, the base 5k should look pretty much like gen 1. But nobody even tried the base 5k? I donāt think Pimax brought it to Berlin?
1 Like
I didnāt recall seeing a norm 5k either. Edited above post.
Agreed, but the Berlin testers are about 50/50 indecisive. My whole point is that if Pimax really used the two 4k panels to its full potential, then pretty much everybody would have agreed that the Pimax 8k would be the better HMD simply because of the huge difference between 7.2 MP and 17.7 MP. Anyway Iām getting tired of this Helio, I feel like repeating myself over and over without getting through to you. Weāll know more in 2 weeks.
1 Like
Indeed weāre going in circles without proper info to go on. But the fact @Cdaked said their m1 was recalled due to clarity issues; suggests their m1 was flawed compared to the testers that attended in Berlin.
Why itās crucial for them to receive an m2 & 5k+ to be able to report based on properly setup hardwarw componets in the m2 vs possibly a flawed m1.
The 4k was 3.6 per eye. Main viewpoint might ne 3.6m with remaining 3.6m being lost in the 20% & peripheral.
2 Likes
Ok now youāre saying something that makes a lot of sense 
Thatās indeed possible, that the Spanish testers had a botched up M1 version. Agreed that itās important that they receive M2.
1 Like
Sorry to interrupt your arguments, but I believe you can move the panels closer. For sure it will change the focal distance for the viewer (I guess it will make it shorter?), but it does not mean it will be unusable. It all depends on what was the previous one and how much it did change.
Indecisive about what exactly?
1 Like
Correct, but it would definitely look (way) less sharp. Change it only 1 mm and it becomes unsharp already.
Whether the 8k or the 5k+ is the better HMD. If people are undecisive between a 7.2 megapixel HMD and a 17.7 Megapixel, then thereās something wrong with that 17.7 one. And that whole argument about subpixel layout becomes really moot at that resolution since itās impossible to discern subpixels. On my Pimax 4k itās really hard already to find pixels itself.
3 Likes
Except it would be approximately a 11mp vs 16.5mp
It also solves an old conversation. HD is 720p. But interestingly enough they do have a screwy option if making Qhd(4xHD) misleading by changing the Q to small qHD. Lol. Gotta live marketing non-sense.
2* 1440 * 2560 = 7.4M
2 * 2160 * 4096 = 17.7M
I am getting the impression that all threads are being hijacked by the display utilization percentage discussion - could you guys kindly take it to a separate thread on that topic please ? Itās a bit tedious to work out the few posts on the OP between the sea of off-topic postsā¦ 
6 Likes
Looked at wrong QHD.
1 QHD = 3.686 x2 = 7.392mp
1 4k UHD= 8.294 x 2 = 16.588mp
But we need to know PPI to better evaluate.
At 4k panel equalling 5" with rhe 5k+ having 9% improved sharpness; we can guess the 5k+ panel is 4.5" giving a more concentrated ppi over 5k Standard.
Now same focal length increased ppi.
Where that strange phrase come from? sure their respective images are difficult to make a part itās like comparing a 1080p signal on good HD tv and on 4K Tv upscaled.
If you want to say that Pimax should never proposed the scaling option on the first place itās another thing ā¦ that is debatable
So how do you explain that the fov is the same in the 5k with a smaller panel and the same lens?