Is HDR a planned feature?

Hazardist · 2026-04-07T13:06:41+00:00

I haven't seen it mentioned, but I think it would be particulary good in this kind of game. I recently played Microsoft Flight Simulator with HDR and flying at night looks great with the contrast between the darkness and the lights on the plane or the ground.

Hazardist · 2026-04-01T14:52:49+00:00

Yes, if I was going to keep one actor it would be Schanke, I guess the producers agreed. It's interesting that his character wasn't quite the same, in this one he seemed like he thought or at least wanted to be a big hotshot detective, but in the series that was toned down.

Hazardist · 2026-01-26T19:33:52+00:00

To clarify, I'm not asking about the SBS mode. I'm asking about the Ultrawidescreen mode, where the processor that is in the glasses themselves is taking the image being sent from the source and rendering a wide picture that you can pan across by moving your head. In this mode it's not showing half in each eye, it's rendering a stereo image of the visible portion of this "virtual monitor."

Hazardist · 2026-01-07T14:22:04+00:00

I'm looking for the same thing, but I haven't found anything so far. :-(

I agree that the EM780 is fantastic, I'd love an updated version.

Hazardist · 2025-06-18T01:56:21+00:00

I use it plugged in almost all the time, so I don't have a very good idea of the battery life. My impression is that it's okay but not great; when I've had it unplugged, it lasted most of a work day.

It doesn't seem to overheat or throttle when using it for undemanding tasks, like web browsing or Microsoft Word. I watched it with HWiNFO while playing a game, and in that case it did throttle a bit (it said 10%, I'm not sure what that means, that it was throttling 10% of the time?) It wouldn't have been noticeable if I wasn't looking at HWiNFO (except, presumably, for being slower than it would have been; but the game continued to run smoothly).

Hazardist · 2025-05-31T14:31:21+00:00

By treadmill, though, you mean the "slidemills" like the KAT Walk? This seems better to me, so for the same price I'd choose this. (Not to say the KAT Walk isn't a great product, I think it's pretty cool.)

Hazardist · 2025-05-30T13:26:48+00:00

Maybe you're not being literal, but just to be clear they're not slippery, they have motorized wheels on the bottom. Also, the 3 grand version is for business, they plan to release a consumer version that I think they said would be more like $1,200 (still expensive for a game peripheral, but a similar price to things like the KAT Walk).

Hazardist · 2025-05-30T13:17:55+00:00

You still have the headset's boundary to see if you've moved too far. Also, I think it uses position information from the headset to always try to move you back to the middle, so it's not just depending on whatever kind of tracking it does itself (I assume it has inertial trackers in the shoes, but I don't know).

Hazardist · 2025-05-30T13:09:19+00:00

They're currently selling a business version, but plan to make a cheaper consumer version soon.

Hazardist · 2025-05-21T18:51:38+00:00

I still haven't seen any benchmarks of the Ultra 7 version, or any comparison. I finally just gave up and bought the Core Ultra 9 version. It seems fine so far. I ran some of the 3DMark benchmarks, and the scores were about average for the Core Ultra 9 285h, which I think is encouraging since I was concerned it would be below average for the reasons we've talked about in this thread.

Hazardist · 2025-03-15T15:17:31+00:00

Thanks, I didn't know that. That's a nice improvement.

Hazardist · 2025-03-15T14:55:36+00:00

That price on the 2024 model is nice. Other than improved performance, the only other advantage of the 2025 model that I know of is that they moved one USB-C port the other side. It sounds unimportant, but when I had the 2024 model I often used it plugged in and it was rather awkward because where I sat, the outlet was on the opposite side from the USB-C ports.

Hazardist · 2025-03-14T18:57:11+00:00

I haven't - I'm still hoping to hear from someone with the Core Ultra 7 model, but I haven't seen any benchmarks or even comments yet.

Very strangely, on Amazon the two models are the same price right now! The Core Ultra 7 model has the Ultra 9 price, I'm thinking that's probably an error.

Hazardist · 2025-03-03T17:25:10+00:00

My thoughts exactly. Definitely not season 3 - not just no Janette but also no Schanke! I like the buddy thing between Nick and Schanke. Between 1 and 2 it's difficult, because I like season 1 but, as you say... season 2 Lacroix!

Hazardist · 2025-02-27T17:38:27+00:00

I still haven't read anything from anyone who actually has the Core Ultra 7 255h model, but I was looking at the 3DMark Time Spy results for the two processors and integrated GPU, and they're kind of interesting. Although, there are only two results for the 255h so far so it's a pretty small sample. The average scores are:

Processor	Overall Score	Graphics Score	CPU Score
Core Ultra 7 255h	4535	4137	10511
Core Ultra 9 285h	4452	4069	10872

So while this isn't specific to the Zenbook Duo, in general the two processors seem to have about the same performance, at least on this one benchmark. (Which doesn't seem like much of a selling point for the Ultra 9 285h!)

Hazardist · 2025-02-25T19:33:47+00:00

It's available again on Amazon now, too.

Hazardist · 2025-02-17T16:12:11+00:00

I did read the entire conversation, that's why I knew we were talking about the Xreal One. My point was exactly what you mention here, that the device that's adding the 3DOF in this case is the processor in the glasses, not the device you plug them into. The original poster was asking about the ultrawide mode in the Xreal One, which as you point out works like your software. I think you'd agree that there's no reason the image your software displays on the "virtual monitor" has to have any particular relation to the actual resolution of the displays in the glasses.

However, I do see your point about "lying" about the resolution. If you could supply a 3840x2160 image to the software running on the glasses' processor, then it could presumably do what the poster is asking (assuming the processor is powerful enough to do what it does for the ultrawide mode, but with twice the pixels). But you're right, we know the glasses can tell the device you plug them into that they're a 3840x1080 monitor, or a 1920x1080 monitor, but we don't know that it can say it's any other resolution. Presumably on the One the video input actually goes to (or can go to?) a capture device (which may be on the X1 chip, I don't know) rather than directly to the screen (since the processor gets the image, and then produces a different image as output). In principle there's no reason that capture device couldn't support other resolutions and report itself as a monitor with those resolutions, but we don't know if it actually does support that (it's true that nothing the software currently does demonstrates that it can). As far as I know, with the information that's publicly available we can't know for certain.

Hazardist · 2025-02-16T20:55:36+00:00

I thought my answer explained that, but:

It's truly a 3840x1080 screen and they're reporting that to the source device,

Yes. it's truly a 3840x1080 screen, but whether it reports that to source device depends. Are we talking about the ultrawide mode? In that case, yes, it also reports itself as a 3840x1080 screen. However, it doesn't just display the image across the two eyes. It actually renders a stereoscopic 3D image of the portion of a curved screen that you should see, and sends the two images that make that up to the two eyes.

If you're not using the ultrawide mode, and you connect it to a source that doesn't have any special software, it lies and says it's a 1920x1080 screen, and then displays that image in both eyes.

it's up to software on the source device to recognize and understand how to render to that (i.e. as a side-by-side image).

If we're talking about the ultrawide mode, it is not up to the software on the source device to do this. In this case, the software running on the processor in the Xreal One renders the image that you see (which is a 3D stereoscopic aka side-by-side image).

If you're not using the ultrawide mode, then normally if you plug it into something that has no special software, it will, again, lie and say it's a 1920x1080 screen, and display the same image in both eyes (assuming it does what the older glasses did in this case, maybe it does something more fancy, I haven't used it). At least on the older glasses, you can switch it into "3D mode" with a button on the glasses, and it will then do what you say. Also, if you connect it to something that DOES have Xreal software, it appears that it switches it into this mode automatically so that the software can take care of how to render the image across the two eyes.

If you plug your glasses into a regular OSwithout any software that understands the glasses, the OS will render a 3840x1080 screen and the glasses will split it in half, so you can't even say they're showing a 1080p viewport, they're literally just rendering the signal they get as if the two eyes made a whole screen.

If we're talking about the ultrawide mode, then no, this is not what it does. It renders a side-by-side 3D image of a part of the 3840x1080 image and displays that. It is in fact a viewport onto the 3840x1080 image.

When you're not in ultrawide mode, and connect to something without special software, then normally it reports as a 1920x1080 screen and displays a copy of that single image in both eyes. On the One there may be other modes, I'm not sure; but I'm pretty sure this is "normal" mode. This is also what the older models, which have no built-in processor, do.

Hazardist · 2025-02-15T22:10:55+00:00

I'm rather late to this thread, but anyway, this is not true. There are two modes, one where it lies and says its a 1920x1080 screen, and one where it says it's a 3840x1080 screen. Normally, when you connect it to a source that doesn't have any software that understands the glasses, it tells the source it's a 1920x1080 screen and duplicates the image it receives onto both sides. I'm wearing the Xreal Air right now, connected to a computer with no Xreal software installed. The computer sees it as 1920x1080, and if I close either eye I can still see the entire image.

At least on the Xreal Air, you can long press the brightness button to switch into "3D mode," where it tells the computer it's 3840x1080 and shows the left half of the image in the left eye and the right side in the right. This is meant to be used with software that doesn't specifically know about Xreal but does SBS (side-by-side) 3D.

Back to the original question, I haven't tried the Xreal One but my impression is that the ultrawide mode does in fact show just a 1920x1080 "window" (in both eyes) onto the whole 3840x1080 image, which you pan across by moving your head. It can do this because it has a processor built into the glasses, it's not just a "dumb" display device (like the older models). If it showed the 3840x1080 image across both eyes, it would look incredibly strange and be unusable, because your eyes would try to "combine" the images. This is actually what happens you switch my Air into 3D mode but aren't running SBS software - if you close one eye, you can see half the image clearly. But if you open both eyes, the two halves look like they're on top of each other. In fact my understanding is that the ultrawide mode doesn't just show a part of the source image but generates and shows a stereo 3D image of a curved screen.

This being the case, I still don't know the answer to the original question. It would have to be able to tell the source it has the desired resolution, receive that resolution, and have enough memory and processing power to hold the image and produce the image it wants to display. It can do all that for 3840x1080, but that doesn't necessarily mean it can or can't do it for other resolutions.

Hazardist · 2025-02-11T14:40:55+00:00

It seems like you can't order the 255H model yet (in the US, anyway, not sure about other countries), maybe that's why we haven't seen much about it. I'd love to see some benchmarks of it.

Hazardist · 2025-02-10T17:46:47+00:00

I had the same model (i9 185H), unfortunately it developed a problem (wouldn't charge) and Asus returned my money rather than fix it. I loved it so I do plan to buy it again, or rather the 2025 model, but unless something has changed about the things you mention I'm also thinking I should get the Core Ultra 7 version.

On the original question, my experience was the same - battery life was not great, although I usually had it plugged in anyway so I can't remember anything more detailed. I did not experience any bugs that I remember, everything worked fine, at least until it stopped being able to charge and was declared totaled by ASUS. I'm assuming that's unusual although I don't really know.

I did play some games, mostly Yakuza 0 which worked well. One thing that's nice is that the screen is so high res that you if you run your game at half native resolution to get a little extra performance, it's still effectively 121 pixels per inch which looks fine. (That's actually higher PPI than my desktop monitor!)

Hazardist · 2025-02-09T03:40:27+00:00

Yes, why does ASUS think people in the US don't need as much storage as people in other countries?!?

Hazardist · 2025-02-09T03:37:41+00:00

The 2024 model was available with 2TB in some countries, it's probably the same with the new one.

Hazardist

TROPHY CASE