My understanding is that the foveated rendering would reduce bandwidth requirements enough that latency spikes become effectively non-existent.

We’ll see in practice - so far all hands-on reviewers said the foveated rendering worked great, with one trying to break it (move eyes quickly left right up down from edge to edge) and not being able to - the foveated rendering always being faster.

I agree latency spikes would be really annoying if they end up being like you suggest.

▲

monocasa 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Enough bandwidth to absolve any latency issues over a wireless connection is not really a thing for a low latency use case like foveated rendering.

What do you do when another device on the main wifi network decides to eat 50ms of time in the channel you use for the eye tracking data return path?

▲

cube2222 9 hours ago | parent [-]

I believe all communication with the dongle is on 6GHz - both the video and the return metadata.

So again, you just make sure the 6GHz band in the room is dedicated to the Frame and its dongle.

The 5GHz is for WiFi.

	▲	ncallaway 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		On the LTT video he also said that Valve had claimed to have tested with a small number of devices in the same room, but hadn’t tried out larger scenarios like tens of devices. My guess based on that is you likely dont need to totally clear 6GHz in the room the Frame is in, but rather just make sure its relatively clear. We’ll know more once it ships and we can see people try it out and try and abuse the radio a bit.