Jump to content

Razer OSVR HDK 2

From VR & AR Wiki


The Razer OSVR HDK 2 (Hacker Developer Kit 2) was an open-source virtual reality head-mounted display developed through the OSVR (Open Source Virtual Reality) initiative, led by Razer and Sensics. Released in July 2016, the HDK 2 represented a significant upgrade over the HDK 1.4, featuring dual OLED displays with the same resolution as the HTC Vive and Oculus Rift, custom SLR-grade optics, and 90Hz low-persistence displays.[1]

Razer OSVR HDK 2
Basic Info
VR/AR Virtual Reality
Type Head-mounted display
Subtype PC VR (Open Source)
Platform PC, SteamVR
Creator Razer, OSVR
Price $399
Website http://www.osvr.org
System
CPU Intel i5-4590 (minimum)
GPU NVIDIA GTX 970 (minimum)
Storage
Display
Display 2 x OLED (dual display)
Resolution 2160 x 1200 (1080 x 1200 per eye)
Image
Optics
Tracking
Tracking 6DoF (IR positional tracking at 100Hz)
Audio
Connectivity
Connectivity USB, HDMI
Ports HDMI, USB
Device
Sensors Gyroscope, accelerometer, IR LEDs
Input Compatible with various controllers

History and Development

Evolution from HDK 1.4

While the HDK 1 was designed to provide essential VR technology for development, the HDK 2 was engineered to deliver high-end visual experiences competitive with premium consumer headsets.[2]

Open Source Commitment

Like its predecessor, the HDK 2 maintained full open-source principles:

  • Software SDK: Apache 2.0 license
  • Hardware MDK: Community development encouraged
  • No Licensing Fees: Hardware developers could interface freely

Industry Support

The HDK 2 launched with over 320 official OSVR supporters including major companies like Intel, NVIDIA, Acer, Ubisoft, and Gearbox Software.

Design and Hardware

Display System

The HDK 2 featured a significant display upgrade:

  • Configuration: Dual OLED RGB displays
  • Total Resolution: 2160 x 1200 (1080 x 1200 per eye)
  • Refresh Rate: 90 Hz with low persistence
  • Technology: IQE (Image Quality Enhancer) for reduced screen door effect

The dual-display system matched the specifications of the HTC Vive and Oculus Rift.

Field of View

The HDK 2 offered a 110-degree field of view, providing improved immersion over the HDK 1.4.

Optical System

Custom designed SLR-grade lenses provided:

  • Clearer, more vibrant images
  • Reduced optical distortion
  • Adjustable focus for vision correction

Diopter Adjustment

  • Range: +450 to -200 degrees
  • Adjustment Method: Dials on headset bottom
  • Purpose: Brings lenses closer or further depending on vision needs

Physical Design

The HDK 2 used the same housing as the HDK 1.4:

  • Body: Injection molded flat-black plastic
  • Faceplate: Removable IR LED array
  • Facial Interface: Pliable rubber with soft foam gasket

Note: No mechanical IPD adjustment included.

Tracking System

6DoF Positional Tracking

  • IR Faceplate: v1.4 IR faceplate with LED array
  • External Camera: IR camera operating at 100 Hz
  • Tracking Type: Full 6 degrees of freedom

Software Compatibility

Supported Platforms

  • Native OSVR experiences
  • SteamVR content (HTC Vive games)
  • WebVR applications
  • 360 video and media players

Not Supported

Oculus-based content was not compatible with the HDK 2.

System Requirements

Component Minimum Requirement
CPU Intel i5-4590 or equivalent
GPU NVIDIA GTX 970 or equivalent
RAM 8 GB
OS Windows

Comparison: HDK 1.4 vs HDK 2

Feature HDK 1.4 HDK 2
Display Type LCD OLED (dual)
Resolution 1920 x 1080 2160 x 1200
Per Eye 960 x 1080 1080 x 1200
Refresh Rate 60 Hz 90 Hz
FOV 100° 110°
Optics Standard SLR-grade
Low Persistence No Yes
Price $299 $399

Specifications

Specification Details
Display Type 2 x OLED RGB
Resolution 2160 x 1200 (1080 x 1200 per eye)
Refresh Rate 90 Hz (low persistence)
Field of View 110°
Optics Custom SLR-grade
Tracking 6DoF (IR at 100Hz)
Focus Adjustment +450 to -200 diopters
IQE Technology Yes (reduced screen door)
Price $399
License Open Source

Reception

The HDK 2 received attention for offering competitive specifications at a lower price point than the Rift and Vive, though reviewers noted the lack of bundled controllers and the early-stage nature of the OSVR software ecosystem as limitations.[3]

See Also

References