[jakemoshenko]

> I fear that fovea-tracking will remain scifi dreams in my lifetime, so the reality is we need to render full resolution throughout the field of view to be prepared for where the eye gaze might go in the next frame.

This is not at all true. All of the AVP, the Quest Pro, and the PSVR2 do eye tracking based foveated rending. They lower the clarity of the things you're not looking at. And reviewers say it works perfectly, like magic. They are unable to "catch" the screen adjusting for what they're looking at.

[saltcured]

Hmm, interesting...

Are they actually doing some kind of optical shifting of a limited pixel display? Or you just mean they do some kind of low-res rendering mode to populate most of the framebuffer outside a smaller zone where they do full quality rendering?

In other words, are they just allocating rendering compute capacity or actual pixel storage and emission based on foveal tracking?

[jakemoshenko]

> Or you just mean they do some kind of low-res rendering mode to populate most of the framebuffer outside a smaller zone where they do full quality rendering?

This exactly. They don't reduce the resolution too much, but it's visible to an outside observer watching on a monitor.

[vlovich123]

That’s just to be about to have enough compute/bandwidth to drive the display. Other posters are correct that the DPI decreases away from the center and various optical aberrations increase. Foveated rendering won’t help with that.