That sounds like you're still streaming in traditional 2D with a static viewpoint being rendered somewhere in the cloud.
Full pre-rendered VR streaming would need to ship video of the entire environment for both eyes (or a reasonably large subset), and the client would be responsible for rendering your point of view. There'd be no latency that way, but the bandwidth needs would be significant given 4K per eye and a 90-degree FOV. That's on the order of 16K per eye, or 32K @ 120Hz video for static location. Add on some extra bandwidth for volumetric video to support position tracking, and you're looking at some even sillier numbers. Granted, a headset might spontaneously combust with that kind of data rate.
You can only accelerate your head so fast. Whatever resolution you pick for your headset, expanding the area by 50% is probably more than enough to let the client compensate for movement.
Cool to hear that what I do almost every day is impossible :)
AirLink actually works really well for me, but it does need a clean 5Ghz channel with nothing else on it. Any other device that is connected (even if it's not doing anything) will cause stutters. I have a separate Unifi 6 Lite AP hanging right above my head for it with a separate SSID.
Are you streaming across the room or actually from a datacenter? The impossible part seems to be that there is some latency that is pretty much unavoidable when you stream from 500km away.
Across the room normally but I signed up with plutosphere as well which offers VR streaming from the cloud. I have yet to try it because they have some capacity problems, but initial feedback from users that got in were good. I want to try it mainly to evaluate and for travelling as I already have a great game PC.
But latency does not seem bad enough there to worry about. Not everyone is as sensitive to that anyway and once you have your VR legs it becomes even easier.
I prefer local computing over streaming anyway. But like I said for travelling it might be a great option.
Full pre-rendered VR streaming would need to ship video of the entire environment for both eyes (or a reasonably large subset), and the client would be responsible for rendering your point of view. There'd be no latency that way, but the bandwidth needs would be significant given 4K per eye and a 90-degree FOV. That's on the order of 16K per eye, or 32K @ 120Hz video for static location. Add on some extra bandwidth for volumetric video to support position tracking, and you're looking at some even sillier numbers. Granted, a headset might spontaneously combust with that kind of data rate.