Acer Windows Mixed Reality HMD Review
-
Page 1:Microsoft’s Windows Mixed Reality Platform
-
Page 2:The Acer Windows Mixed Reality Headset
-
Page 3:The Acer Mixed Reality Motion Controllers
-
Page 4:System Requirements
-
Page 5:How We (Couldn't) Test The Acer Windows MR HMD
-
Page 6:Health, Safety & Maintenance
-
Page 7:A Simple Setup Process
-
Page 8:What You Can (And Can’t) Do With Windows Mixed Reality
-
Page 9:Conclusion
How We (Couldn't) Test The Acer Windows MR HMD
When we received the Acer Windows Mixed Reality Headset, we hoped to run some benchmarks on it. Previously, we dabbled with Nvidia’s FCAT VR utility, which reports graphics performance using Oculus' Rift and HTC's Vive. Unfortunately, FCAT VR does not support Microsoft’s Windows Mixed Reality platform, though. We did reach out to Nvidia regarding WMR testing and were told that FCAT VR wouldn't be updated in time for the launch.
Although we were disappointed by Nvidia’s response, we weren't surprised. It took the company more than one year to develop the first iteration of FCAT VR, and constant runtime updates have necessitated maintenance releases ever since. We have full confidence that Nvidia will eventually add WMR support to FCAT VR, but until then, we're unable to quantify frame rates or dropped frames as we did in FCAT VR: GPU And CPU Performance in Virtual Reality.
As of December 7, 2017, Nvidia pulled the FCAT VR download from its site and left a note stating that a new version would be available soon. If the upcoming build supports Windows MR, you can be sure that we'll test with it.
Display Performance Testing
FCAT VR is a great tool for evaluating the VR graphics pipeline's performance, but a host PC’s ability to deliver high frame rates doesn't matter if the headset's displays can't keep up. Last year, Basemark released a utility that measures how fast an HMD’s display reacts to the signal coming from your computer.
Basemark’s VRScore software pairs with a device called a VRTrek, which features two photodiodes that detect light emitting from your headset’s displays. The software determines the latency between a command's initiation and its execution on the display. In the past, we used VRScore and the VRTrek device to evaluate the performance of Oculus' DK2, Oculus' Rift, HTC's Vive Pre, HTC's Vive, and the OSVR headsets. Unfortunately, we may never be able to run the same test on Windows MR headsets.
Before we received Acer's solution, we checked with Basemark to see if there would be a new version of VRScore with support for Microsoft’s Mixed Reality platform. The company planned to release VRScore 1.1 over the summer, but was forced to delay its release for several months. We still don't know when the new version will be available. But even when Basemark gets 1.1 out the door, it still won't include Windows MR support.
“Regarding Microsoft VR headsets, we had to, unfortunately, cancel the support as nor we or our current partners were able to get enough interest from Microsoft to help us out with the integration,” said Arto Ruotsalainen, Basemark Co-Founder, and CEO. “VRScore PC 1.1 will have updated Oculus, HTC Vive, and OSVR SDKs.”
With that news, our hands are tied. Lacking the tools to test real performance, we can’t verify Microsoft’s claims. Subjective experience is all we can offer at this time. We hope that, eventually, performance analysis won't be as challenging. But until then, we're at the mercy of an emerging market.
Subjective Tests
We tested Acer's Windows MR headset with three different systems. First, we used our primary VR test system, which includes an Intel Core i7-5930K, 16GB of Crucial Ballistix Sport DDR4-3200, and a Zotac GeForce GTX 980 Ti AMP! Extreme. Then we tried the headset with less powerful machines, including a system with an Intel Core i3-4330, 8GB of G.Skill DDR3-1600, and a GeForce GTX 950. Microsoft also made a big deal about Windows MR headsets working with the HD Graphics engines in Intel sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-gen Core processors, so we auditioned an Intel Core i5-6500 and 16GB of Corsair DDR4-3200.
| Test Systems | Low-End | No GPU | High-End |
| CPU | Intel Core i3-4330 | Intel Core i5-6400 | Intel Core i7-5930K |
| Graphics Card | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 950 | Intel HD Graphics 530 | Zotac GeForce GTX 980 Ti AMP! Extreme |
| Motherboard | Asus Z87-WS | Asus Z270i Strix | MSI X99S Xpower AC |
| Memory | 1x 8GB G.Skill DDR3-1600 | 2x 8GB G.Skill DDR4-3200 | 4x 4GB Crucial Ballistix Sport DDR4-3200 |
| Hard Drive | 128GB SanDisk SSD | 256GB Intel 600p M.2 SSD | 500GB Crucial MX200 |
| Power Supply | PC Power & Cooling 750 Quad 750W | SilverStone SX600 600W SFX | be quiet! Dark Power Pro 10 850W |
First, we tried Acer's Windows MR headset on our highest-end system. This allowed us to experience what a premium experience should look like. Backed by a powerful host machine, Microsoft’s Windows Mixed Reality platform ran well. Its frame rate felt smooth, and the visuals were crisp. Our informal test sequence suffered no perceivable dropped frames, leaving us satisfied.
We did, however, experience frame rate problems when we enabled a preview window to let others see the display output. Microsoft’s spectator view contributes significant load, bringing performance down across the board. When we have access to a version of FCAT VR that works with Windows MR, we’ll quantify the spectator window's true impact.
Next, we moved on to a lower-end Core i3-4330 and GeForce GTX 950. This system exceeds Microsoft’s minimum requirement for Windows MR, but it doesn’t satisfy the baseline for an Oculus Rift or HTC Vive headset. To our surprise, though, it had no trouble with mixed reality. In fact, we had a hard time discerning between the Core i7- and Core i3-based PCs. We played around in the Beach House, pinned apps on various walls, and jumped between windows to push the hardware as hard as possible. We even fired up Bigscreen, which calls for a Core i5 and GeForce GTX 970 at least, and noticed no performance hitches.
VR Through Integrated Graphics
Finally, we tried Acer's Windows Mixed Reality Headset hooked up to a Core i5 with Intel HD Graphics. Microsoft made a big deal about the Window MR platform’s ability to run well without discrete graphics, and we were skeptical of its ambitions from day one. Nevertheless, we were eager to test the company's claims.
To accommodate the lower performance of an integrated graphics engine, Windows Mixed Reality headsets must operate at two refresh rates. When a discrete GPU is present, they refresh at 90 Hz. Without an add-in card, they run at 60 Hz.
Oculus and Valve put a lot of time and effort into determining what makes VR comfortable, and both companies concluded that 90 frames per second is the sweet spot where most people experience no negative side effects. When the frame rate dips much below that threshold, users start to get sick. Thus, we weren't sure how Microsoft's pursuit of 60 Hz would go, and our real-world experience didn't help. In fact, we don't think 60 Hz should be an option.
Of course, Microsoft’s intent is to make immersive technology accessible to a wider audience, which should drive adoption for MR (and VR) hardware/software. However, if mixed reality leaves you with a bad taste in your mouth, you probably won't line up to buy it. And unfortunately, the most accessible configuration for Windows Mixed Reality proves to be incredibly jarring. By now we’re accustomed to VR, and we’re rarely affected by motion sickness. But Windows MR running on integrated graphics ranks among the worst experiences we’ve ever had.
As you might expect, graphics quality in the Beach House is reduced when you don’t have a discrete GPU installed. The environmental details aren't what worry us, though. Performance is the more serious issue. As soon as we turned around for the first time, we wondered what Microsoft was thinking. As we rotated, the scene had trouble keeping up. Intel's HD Graphics engine couldn't even maintain a consistent 60 FPS. The problems worsened when we tried moving around. Pressing the joystick to teleport, we noticed a prominent delay between controller input and on-screen action. There was even lag when we moved our hand to place the teleport reticle in a different place.
The primary purpose of supporting Windows MR headsets on integrated graphics hardware is to make the platform appealing in the business world. This idea falls flat due to the performance implications, though. Sitting in front of a static window works fine. Turn your head to the side to check another screen, though, and the image gets choppy, quickly becoming uncomfortable.
Gaming powered by integrated graphics was the only redeeming experience, ironically enough. i-illusions somehow managed to smooth out the performance of Space Pirate Trainer on the most basic hardware configuration. Of course, all of the advanced graphics details were disabled, but we still had to be impressed by the fluid frame rates. Few games demonstrate this level of refinement, and fewer support the entry-level Windows MR hardware configuration. But if you can find a few gems like Space Pirate Trainer, you could potentially justify using Intel’s HD Graphics as a temporary solution. Still, we do not advocate skipping a dedicated GPU for long-term use.
MORE: Best Virtual Reality Headsets
MORE: All Virtual Reality Content
MORE: Virtual Reality Basics
- Microsoft’s Windows Mixed Reality Platform
- The Acer Windows Mixed Reality Headset
- The Acer Mixed Reality Motion Controllers
- System Requirements
- How We (Couldn't) Test The Acer Windows MR HMD
- Health, Safety & Maintenance
- A Simple Setup Process
- What You Can (And Can’t) Do With Windows Mixed Reality
- Conclusion
really that difficult in an online publication to update pricing before publishing? Not
the first time I've seen pricing off on these articles.
The price didn't drop. Amazon is selling them at a huge discount, but if you look at Microsoft's website the price hasn't dropped for any of them.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-mixed-reality
Amazon is a much bigger store than Microsoft. And this is not the first time the price has dropped either. $400 is just a technicality, the practical price for the headset is under $300 (as are the other Windows MR headset, apart from the much better Samsung Odyssey model).
On another note, I think you should have put more emphasis on the lack of integrated audio. You're forced to fiddle with a separate audio headset, with its own extra cord flopping around, and often physically interfering with the VR headset. It's really a major downside compared to the Samsung Odyssey, Oculus Rift, and Vive + deluxe headstrap upgrade.
Yep, WMR headsets have been commonly available under $300 for a while. Sure, the MSRP might not have officially dropped, but the headsets from Acer, Dell, Lenovo and HP are all available in this price range online. In fact, some have gone on sale for under $250 at times. The Oculus Rift getting permanently discounted to $400 has made it necessary for these headsets on a less established platform to sell for less, particularly since most of them don't do much to be distinct from one another. I'm sure the high price of graphics cards hasn't helped either. It's undoubtedly hurting sales of the Rift and Vive too, but the higher resolution of these HMDs means even higher-end hardware is required for gaming, which is undoubtedly still their main draw.
It might be worth at least mentioning in the conclusion that it may be possible to find the headsets for well under retail. That could change of course, if adoption of the platform were to really pick up, but I think the main thing selling them currently is their lower price.
I find it odd that you did not delve into the fact the Windows store has very few games and that you really need to use the Steam store for gaming. (Which is what 95% of people want these things for.) It would have been very helpful had you talked about this and mention some potential game compatibility limitations. Personally I have found the MR headsets work very well for every game I have tried but since they are not written for MR you are often looking at a Vive controller and guessing about how controls are mapped.
Having used all available VR headsets at this point, I actually like the Windows MR the best. It is about the ease of setup. You do not end up with a bunch of wires running everywhere for the tracking and unless you have a large dedicated room for VR this is a big deal. The tracking may not be quite as good as a perfect setup of the competitors but it is functionally really good.
Video cards: VR reviews should mention the current state of decent video cards at this time. These things will be very disappointing on anything less than a GTX 1060 6GB or RX 580 8GB. But...getting you hands on one is unlikely at any reasonable price point.
Controllers: The reference controller could be better ergonomically but they are not uncomfortable to use for long periods of time. (Samsung actually made a better version for their headset combo.) What I find nice about the controller is that becase they have both the touch pad and stick inputs you can generally play both Vive and Rift games. The controllers are interchangeable across all the headsets and I expect someone to come out with a better aftermarket controller at some point.
Really the Windows MR headsets are a good entry point for VR. They would not be good value at $399 but they are nowhere close to that price point.
"This is a pretty weak review especially considering that it is months after release."
I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm not going to get into the politics behind the delay in publishing, but the review was written before Christmas.
"The cost of the actual Windows MR headsets has been between $200-300 for more than a month."
Amazon is the only place that I've seen the headset discounted. Acer did no drop the price, and Microsoft didn't step in to subsidize the cost.
When the price comes down at all retailers, we'll update the review. Until then, I stand by what I wrote. Acer wants $400 for the package, and unless you buy from Amazon, that's what you'll pay.
"I find it odd that you did not delve into the fact the Windows store has very few games and that you really need to use the Steam store for gaming."
Page 8 discusses that briefly. What would you suggest should be added?
"Video cards: VR reviews should mention the current state of decent video cards at this time."
We have written a lot about the current state of the graphics card market. I don't believe that has any place in a VR review because it's a temporary state of the market. Yes, it sucks to buy into VR right now because of GPU prices, but that doesn't affect the merit of the headset itself, nor the platform it runs on.
"Controllers: The reference controller could be better ergonomically but they are not uncomfortable to use for long periods of time."
Maybe for you, but my hands cramped up within 10 minutes of using them, and several people who tried it had similar complaints. Not everyone will have that problem, but the controllers were not designed in such a way that most people won't have problems.
As for the Samsung controllers-- I haven't received a sample from Samsung yet, so I can't say much about that. I used Samsung's controllers for about 10 minutes and they are much better ergonomically.
Steam? Did you miss the "Early Access support" support in steam. Or the fact that if you are a steam user; we would see a new headset icon that represents WMR.
Reviews usually go with suggested retail price not a retailer's sale. Now i do agree that a small addition mentioning that Amazon is having a sale on them.
But all in all a great review!
While Intel's igpu peeformane was not good are you able to run some tests on Amd's Apus? Fm2+ & Ryzen Apus would be interesting if they yeild better results.
I get a magic Amazon link, showing their lowest price (currently $285) on several of the pages, if not all. Don't you? It's even directly below the verdict!
I wonder if that was even their goal or, if it's as you say - to make limited use of 2D apps for the sake of convenience. Conventional apps, hardware, and GUIs have co-evolved for about 35 years. As long as you're doing something that's well-suited to a conventional desktop setup, it's hard for me to see how a VR version wouldn't be worse. Maybe not after another 5-10 years, but for the time being, I'll be using nice monitors for all things 2D.
Maybe I missed it, but I'm wondering if Rift or Vive can be used with Windows MR software. Not that I really care, but it would be good to know... in case Win MR really takes off.
Finally, is the controller tracking really on par with Rift and Vive? That's quite a feat, since it involves tracking the HMD in absolute space, then tracking the controller relative to the HMD. All errors in each stage should be compounded.
The Windows MR headsets all track relative to the headset. The controllers are the easiest thing to track, since they have LEDs and are a known shape.
Unless they're outside the FOV of the tracking cameras of course. Which is why tracking is not on par with the Rift and Vive. As long as your hands are in view of the cameras (slightly wider FOV than what you see in the headset), tracking is fine, but if you try to reach over your shoulder it's not going to work. That means the majority of content is unaffected as you aren't making those motions, but there are some games that become unplayable because they rely on over-the-shoulder stuff.
Actually, the Amazon links in the article list $399.99 for me. Perhaps that's due to something like a privacy extension interfering though.
Seeing as the writer mentioned that the review had been written before Christmas, it's understandable that the conclusion might be based on pricing that might not be entirely accurate now, but that really brings up the question of why these reviews are getting posted so late. It was the same with the i3-8100 review, comparing prices as they stood months prior around the time of Coffee Lake's launch, instead of the prices as they stood at the time the review was published in mid January, which significantly affected the CPU's value relative to the other processors. They really should try to get their reviews out on a more timely basis, or at least update them based on current pricing at the time the article goes live.
And yes, the product's MSRP is still technically $400. These discounts might just be retailers trying to offload them at lower prices once they found them to be slower sellers than expected.
Perhaps I wasn't clear. Let's say the controller represents a virtual gun. In order to know where it's aimed, the system must track it relative to world space. So, this means you've got to concatenate the transform from controller to HMD with the transform from HMD to world space.
Why not? Do you know this from experience with Windows MR? Why can't they put an IMU in the controller? It should track well enough, as long as you only require coarse gestures when it's occluded and it doesn't stay occluded for long. Once it's back in view, the camera can correct it.
BTW, I totally predicted some deep discounts on Windows MR HMDs, in January. There's no way they were going to sell as many as I'm sure they'd hoped.
Does anyone know if they can physically be connected to XBox One X? If so, then we're just a software update away...
But world space is relative to the headset, so to get the controllers right just requires tracking them compared to the headset. The hard part is tracking a floor that isn't LED-lit and might not be uniform, as well as whatever other objects might be in your play space.
The Windows MR controllers default to rotational tracking when outside the tracked volume.
The HMD can be physically connected, but you would need to disconnect your TV first. The controllers can't be connected because Xboxes don't support Bluetooth.
If the Xbox One X ever gets VR support, it'll probably require new HMDs and controllers.
Sorry, there's no free lunch. The bad guys exist in world space, so they're still two transforms away from the controller.
All that would be required would be a pass-through box, just like the PSVR uses. The box could split the HDMI signal between the headset and TV, and also provide the Bluetooth connectivity via USB.
Sure, but I don't think Microsoft would manufacture and sell the pass-through box alone. It would probably be part of a pack including an HMD, also manufactured by Microsoft, just like the PSVR pack. And if they were to do that, why would they support Bluetooth? The Xbox wireless protocol is much better.
My point is: don't buy one of these HMDs in the hope that you'll be able to use it with an Xbox One X. Microsoft didn't say that support is coming. If you don't currently own a powerful PC, it's best to wait.
I agree that it's probably not a good idea to buy one of these HMDs expecting Microsoft to support them with their console in the future. As far the hardware compatibility side of things goes though, there's nothing that would prevent them from doing so. Microsoft designed the basic specifications for this hardware themselves, and even stated less than a year ago that they intended to bring them to their console in 2018. Since then, I believe they stated that their intention was to focus on wireless VR for the console side of things, but that doesn't necessarily mean support for wired headsets can't happen. Some form of add-on box would be necessary either way, and adding a bluetooth receiver to the device would add very little to its cost. Plus, Microsoft has been pushing their Xbox and Windows platforms closer together in recent years, so it would arguably make sense to extend that to HMDs. They'll likely have an official, branded headset for the console, but that doesn't necessarily exclude third-party compatibility.
Transforms are part of computer graphics, not tracking. Doing transforms is easy, we've had hardware transform capability since the 90s.
What I meant is transforms computed using two dependent estimations - the estimated pose of the HMD, in world space, and the estimated pose of the gun, in the HMD's frame of reference. You've got to map the gun into the same coordinate space as what it's shooting at. No matter how you do it, in involves transforms computed using both estimates.
So, you could transform the bad guy into the HMD's frame of reference, but then you're still exposed to the error of the HMD tracking, and then any error in the tracking gun's position within the HMD's frame of reference. But what people normally do is transform the gun into world space.
For instance, if it's some type of beam weapon, imagine what other players in the game would see. They'd see the beam from your gun shaking due to the combined errors of the controller's tracking from the HMD, and the HMD tracking, which the gun is tracked against.