HTC today revealed its next standalone XR headset, the Vive Focus Vision. The company appears to be appealing again to enterprise and prosumers, packing in a mishmash of specs from Vive Focus 3 and Vive Elite XR—priced at $1,000.

HTC launched pre-orders today for its new MR headset, Vive Focus Vision. Pre-orders are available from today through October 17th, after which the headset will presumably launch.

You may recognize many of the specs below from Vive Focus 3, which was released primarily for enterprise in 2021. It has the same controllers, same Fresnel optics and dual 2,448 x 2,448 resolution LCDs, and works with Vive Focus 3 accessories too, like the optional Vive Focus 3 facial tracking module ($100).

Unlike Focus 3, Vive Focus Vision however boasts color passthrough for mixed reality thanks to dual color cameras and depth sensor, bringing it much closer in function to the company’s Quest Pro competitor Vive XR Elite, which was released in 2023 for $1,100 (now $900).

Additionally, it comes with four front-facing tracking cameras and infrared floodlight for illuminated hand tracking.

SEE ALSO
LG Shakes Up XR Division, Reportedly Putting Meta Headset Partnership on Ice

Packing in Vive XR Elite’s Snapdragon XR2 Gen 1 chipset, Vive Focus Vision comes with built-in eye-tracking—later added an optional module on XR Elite which also tracks the user’s mouth. Hence ‘Vision’ (no relation to Vision Pro). Automatic IPD adjustment for users between 57–72mm ought to appeal to VR arcades and other enterprise use cases where multiple people use the same headset.

The company calls it a “hybrid device,” owing to its ability to play PC VR games via Steam and Viveport. To boot, pre-orders come along with a newly unveiled Vive Wired Streaming Kit for free ($150 MRSP), which includes a 5-meter streaming cable and converter, both with DisplayPort compatibility, offering what HTC says is lossless visuals from PC to the headset itself.

Ostensibly appealing to gamers, pre-orders are also set to come with seven games: Metro Awakening VR (coming to Viveport in late 2024), Arizona Sunshine 2, Bootstrap Island, Breachers, The Pirate Queen, Taskmaster VR, Kayak VR: Mirage, Wanderer, and MR-compatible games Puzzling Places, Magic Keys, Toy Trains, Yuki, and Figmin XR.

Check out the spec sheet below:

Vive Focus Vision Specs
Resolution 2,448 x 2,448 (6.0MP) per-eye, LCD (2x)
Refresh Rate 90Hz (120Hz via DisplayPort alt mode coming late 2024)
Lenses Dual-element Fresnel
Field-of-view 120° horizontal
Optical Adjustments Automatic IPD
IPD Adjustment Range 57–72mm
Processor Snapdragon XR2 Gen 1 (same as Vive Elite XR)
RAM 12GB
Storage 128GB (expandable via MicroSD to 2TB)
Connectors 2 USB-C (1 with DisplayPort Alt mode)
Battery Life 2 hours (hot swappable with 20-minute internal battery)
Tracking 4 front-facing tracking cameras and infrared floodlight for illuminated hand tracking
Controllers Vive Focus 3 controllers, rechargeable battery
Audio In-headstrap speakers (dual driver), 3.5mm aux output
Microphone Dual microphone
Pass-through Cameras 2 RGB Cameras (16MP) w/ Depth Sensor

This story is breaking. We’re filling in details as they arrive, so check back soon.

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.


Scott Hayden
Well before the first modern XR products hit the market, Scott recognized the potential of the technology and set out to understand and document its growth. He has been professionally reporting on the space for nearly a decade as Editor at Road to VR, authoring more than 4,000 articles on the topic. Scott brings that seasoned insight to his reporting from major industry events across the globe.
  • tmikaeld

    These must have a considerable weight to them, most probably higher than the Valve Index, which is why I almost don't play in VR any more.

    (Logging in via wordpress to comment doesn't work, I just get logged in to wordpress in the dialog and when I close it I'm no longer logged in)

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      They will probably be similar to the Vive Focus 3 at 785g compared to the 809g Valve Index. The color passthrough and the second USB-C port plus DP decoder like on Pico Neo 3 Link shouldn't add much weight, the 10min hot-swap battery on the HMD a few grams. You should end up with less than 50g extra, and they may have saved weight somewhere else.

      And the total weight isn't as important as weight distribution. With the HTC Focus Vision's (now hot-swappable) battery at the back of the rigid strap serving as a counter weight, it should put a lot less pressure on face and head than HMDs where all weight is sitting at the front. And even in these a matching headstrap can work wonders, like on the Varjo XR-3 at 980g without a battery counter balance, but with tons of adjustability and swiveling pads that distribute the pressure more evenly.

      The worst scenario is still an HMD only relying on pressuring against the face with a facial interface not matching you bone structure. There all the weight/pressure is put mostly on a few protruding parts like the cheekbones that make up less than 10% of the intended contact surface, while on the XR-3 the very large pads that can adjust to the shape of you head make sure the weight is properly distributed. So an HMD twice the weight can be way more comfortable with a good strap.

      • tmikaeld

        Good point, a great strap could make all the difference. I'm saving up for the Bigscreen VR though, since I heard to much good about the oled screens and comfort.

        • Christian Schildwaechter

          The Bigscreen Beyond is very interesting because it takes the weakest point of a "front only" HMD, discomfort due to a mismatch between facial interface and face, and removes it by using a facial interface that was made esp. for one face, so the pressure distribution will always be perfect. Then they removed everything non essential to get to 155g incl. strap for a VR experience where you barely notice the HMD anymore.

          This of course comes at the cost of flexibility, so no swapping with other users, no passthrough, no hand tracking, requiring lighthouse bases and of course a cable. It's sort of targeting one end of the enthusiast market, while the Focus Vision with a very similar 2.5K per eye resolution (still using Fresnel) comes from the other, allowing for wireless and tethered use, including all the MR features and flexibility for multiple users and environments, with long sessions made possible by hot-swapping.

          Currently we can't have both light and flexible at the same time, so it is good that enthusiasts can at least choose the device that fits their needs best.

          • mirak

            I guess there is no microphone too right ?

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            No, microphones were considered essential for the Beyond. And like the other parts they considered worth including, those are excellent, with YouTube reviewers baffled by them sounding better than their studio microphones. Beyond has kind of a "if it's worth doing, it's worth doing it right" policy that I like a lot.

  • VRDeveloper

    This is a clear lack of understanding of the market. In a few months, you'll see them saying: 'This VR market isn’t profitable, it’s not our fault, the market just isn’t ready yet.'

    Mark my words, you can come back here in two months to criticize me if I'm wrong.

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      HTC were the first to market with an HMD including 6DoF tracked controllers and are still the preferred solution for any professional application due to their guaranteed services and not killing one business program after another like Meta. They just couldn't compete in the consumer market with Meta, who by now have spent USD 50bn at MRL alone/estimated USD 100bn total for XR in total.

      HTC actually has to make money, while Meta spent USD 5000/10000 for each currently active Quest user to get to their current position, so it wasn't exactly a fair fight. And while pretty much all of the other early HMD manufacturers either died or retracted into the very high end market, HTC still serves at least the enthusiast market, and the Vive Focus Vision with DP-in and ETFR, still using the XR2 Gen 1 because according to HTC the Focus 3 is mostly used as a PCVR HMD, is testament to that.

      So I am very sure that HTC will be still around in two months without complaining that the VR market isn't profitable. Their Vive Pre demonstration blew me away nine years ago at gamescom 2015, and they managed to make it to today despite VR growing very slowly and an opponent with almost infinite resources. So they apparently understood enough of the market to still be going despite all the things working against them by finding a proper niche.

      • VRDeveloper

        You are right, i understand that competing with Meta can be unfair, and this often puts small businesses at a disadvantage since only large companies can invest so heavily in a market.

        I recognize HTC's experience in the industry, but I believe that the current market conditions make it a challenging time to launch a headset like this. Given its price point of a thousand dollars, I would be surprised if there are enough enthusiasts willing to invest in the device.

        Additionally, these trailers (which are common these days) don’t understand the user at all; gamers can’t connect with them. A trailer like this wouldn’t even sell water in the desert.

        But to avoid sounding like just a troll or hater, I think that if they adopted Meta's OS and launched the same device but oriented towards games with superior graphics, it could be a huge success. Only time will tell. I hope it works out. I’m just sharing my point of view, especially since we’ve only been getting bad news lately on games industry.

      • flynnstigator

        Very well said. However, I still can’t shake the feeling that HTC is flailing with their product launches. Instead of a coherent, well-thought-out strategy, they keep releasing something every couple of years that doesn’t quite hit the mark. It seems like the coherent vision (no pun intended) was coming from Valve, and once HTC stopped working with them, their market strategy suffered greatly.

        The Cosmos wasn’t quite there with its inside-out tracking, and the Cosmos Elite with its lighthouse tracking was placed confusingly similar to the Vive Pro / Pro 2. All of the above cried out for wireless connectivity after the Quest 2 launch, but it came in the form of an expensive dongle that couldn’t hit the full resolution of the Pro 2. Pricing was always just above what the market wanted to pay, and each headset consistently lacked at least one key feature.

        Their software strategy has been “copy the leader,” such as launching a proprietary Vive store after the market had already settled on Meta and Steam as the two competing stores. Even Pico never got much traction with their store, and they had the China domestic market advantage and a lot more capital. HTC should have pursued an open-standards agenda instead of trying to emulate much larger companies that had huge headstarts. Imagine if they had gotten together with Pimax, Pico, and the other small players on a platform like Sidequest with automatic cross-buy for every version of a game, whether on-device or PCVR. Now it wouldn’t be so risky to buy games for your HTC device, because you’ll still have them if you switch headsets. The whole ecosystem of smaller VR device manufacturers could have thrived a lot more, and HTC was in a position to help put it together. It all seems like a series of missed opportunities, which is why I’ve been so disappointed in them.

        • Christian Schildwaechter

          HTC's Vive Wave platform similar to Meta's HorizonOS was announced 2017 with 12 partners. Wave is their customized Android for mobile HMDs, Pico, iQiYi and DPVR were among the initial supporters, and in 2020 HTC also partnered with Qualcomm to bring Vive Wave to all Snapdragon based HMDs.

          But again the problem was money. Vive Wave works like AndroidXR or HorizonOS: HTC offers the OS for free, but requires manufacturers to use their software store to make money back from app sales. This model requires HMDs to be sold with profit, so it ran into the same issues as 2016 Google Daydream. With Meta accepting no hardware profits and billions in losses, neither could compete, and Wave only survived on the Chinese market with Meta absent.

          Limited resources also lead to hardware design compromises. Both Pico 4 Ultra and HTC Focus Vision are mostly improving existing HMDs for XR productivity with more RAM and hires color passthrough cameras, both easy to add. Ultra also upgrades the SoC, while Vision adds DP-in, hot-swapping and integrated eye tracking instead of an add-on. Upgrading is much cheaper than creating a new product, but leaves core aspects like displays, lenses or form factor unchanged.

          • mirak

            I only needed an upgrade of the Vive 1 screens to PSVR2 oled panels.

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            In the ideal scenario for VR/XR really taking off, we end up with something similar to PCs today, where we have some very compact notebooks with limited configurability for maximum mobility, but also desktop PCs where you can pick the components that you need.

            XR HMDs don't have to fit into your pocket like phones that require extreme miniaturization, so while those for people who'd use them all day or on the road have to be very light and small, others more targeting immersive gaming or office use can still be somewhat larger and heavier, as long as they are well balanced. Which would allow for a much more modular design, where you could pick the type of lenses, display and head strap that best fits your needs, different compute modules either sitting in front, at the back, on the belt or on untethered streaming from a desk for, with varying CPU/GPU power. And as much battery as you need wherever it is the least annoying.

            We are far from that, with the current low sales numbers only making a very small number of models from a few vendors barely economically feasible. I'm still hoping things will improve over the next decade, so that nobody will ever have to be forced to use LCD, see mura, deal with low FoV or being unable to read text due to insufficient PPD, because components have become so standardized that you can instead combine whatever you need/can afford yourself. Or even just upgrade your existing headset by replacing some components like the screens with newer, better ones. Until then we are unfortunately stuck with "one size fits all", driven largely by hard economic limits, and actually not at all fitting everyone's needs.

      • Arno van Wingerde

        But at least from where I am that this is a product at a much higher price point then the Q3 yet with inferior lenses and stand alone hardware… nice that they were first at something, but they certainly are not today… The high end glasses are very expensive but at least offer superior quality at a few points. Q3 over this thing any time!

        • Christian Schildwaechter

          TL;DR: Quest 3(S) provides the most value for almost everyone; HTC knows this, so they target special needs with features Quest doesn't have (yet), which for a small group of users are more important than inferior hardware and higher price; they'd probably love to directly compete with Quest 3 instead of clinging to niches, but understand that they simply lack the resources to do so.

          No doubt the Quest 3 provides a much better value for almost everyone. The Focus Vision is a slightly updated and price reduced version of a 2021 USD ~1500 (with eye tracking) HMD targeting business users. It won't magically become a Quest 3 competitor, and HTC knows better than to even try.

          I already have a Quest 3, and I'm considering getting a Focus Vision, mostly because it is now pretty much the cheapest HMD with eye tracking useful for development. There is still the Quest Pro, which won't see a lot of support anymore, or the Pico 4 Pro available as a gray import from China, both also using XR2(+) Gen 1, but neither give full access to the eye tracking data, while HTC is way more liberal with its SDKs because of their enterprise focus. Due to my interest in XR productivity I also care more about the 2.5K display and hires color passthrough than a faster SoC. And while pancakes would be nice, I realize that the only reason why HTC can offer the Focus Vision for USD 999 is that it is mostly a three year old Focus 3, using tech that got cheaper over time, with only limited new development costs needing to be priced in.

          Would I recommend someone else to get one? For most users that's a clear "no". Someone interested in standalone games will get a much better value from a Quest 3, and for most it will also be the best choice for wireless PCVR streaming. For some simulator fans my answer would be a "maybe", because DP-in and 2.5K resolution will make small text on interfaces more readable when looking straight forward. Pancake have much better edge-to-edge clarity, but Fresnels are sufficiently sharp at the center, and that's where we automatically look while reading anyway, because that's where our retina has the highest resolution too. Most simulator fans would be served better with a tethered Bigscreen Beyond, though this requires an extra investment for lighthouses and controllers.

          These specific use cases are small niches that nobody besides HTC is currently covering at this price level, still requiring compromises. My comment about HTC being first was addressing the "clear lack of understanding of the market" claim. I'm sure HTC absolutely knows what type of HMD they'd need to lure people away from the Quest 3, but they simply cannot afford to produce and sell this at an acceptable price. So they took what they had and optimized it for certain niches the Quest 3 doesn't cover, which means they actually understand the market and their position/options in it quite well.

          Most people will be outside those niches, where the Focus Vision still offers something new to the market not yet available in that form, even with a three year old SoC and outdated lenses. But whenever a new non-Meta HMD appears, someone will inevitably claim that nobody will buy it because of price/lack of features/games etc., concluding that the developers don't get the market.

          It is usually the other way around, those demanding that all HMDs should serve the needs and wishes of the majority, basically improving on Quest, don't understand the cost involved and what options companies have against Meta's billions. There is just no way to outcompete Meta based on better tech and price. The only chance is to make their often weaker and/or (much) more expensive tech provide some very specific added value, too far outside the mainstream for Meta to include it (yet), but worth a lot to some.

          And I'm willing to pay them something extra just so they can stay alive. Meta's willingness to invest billions in research and sell hardware at cost is great for users and probably covers 95% of what the market needs. But it also means there is no way to get them to cover or even allow exotic use cases, simply because they have different goals and don't need the money. For this we still need companies like HTC trying not to be better, but different than Meta.

          • Arno van Wingerde

            OK, and thanks: I was literally not seeing any use case for this other than „I hate FB“. This is a small niche, but valid nevertheless.
            I am hoping somebody will develop a goed OLED pancake set set with high res and DP and Horizon OS.

    • Octogod

      To be fair, HTC has been repeating this pattern now for five plus years now.

  • polysix

    LCD = Lose Contrast & Depth…. NO THANKS. Not for 1k not for 100… NO LCD HMD will ever cross my threshold again (ex quest 2 and quest pro owner who's now happily on PSVR2 with adapter + PS5)

    • Zachary Williams

      Good luck dealing with that tiny sweetspot on a headset with the awful fresnel lenses. In my opinion, vr isn't even vr if you can't look around with your eyes and have 100% clarity edge to edge. Pancakes lenses are the next gen experience and the quest 3 puts the psvr2 to shame. Keeping that sweetspot is just a last gen headset worry only. Couldn't care less about the lcd drawbacks when I can play pcvr flawlessly with no cable and 100% edge to edge clarity. Ive compared them right side by side and I'm not sure why Sony even has the psvr2 on the market if they won't support it with any games. Getting to play gt7 in vr is the only reason to even think about psvr2. Everything else is vastly superior on a gaming pc with the quest 3. Period.

    • Andrew Jakobs

      I do not agree on the OLED, but I do agree this headset is kinda DOA.
      OLED (or micro-led) would be great, but those displays are very expensive, especially if you want a very wide fov. Personally I would prefer a wider FOV over OLED as I'm not at all displeased with the pico 4 lcd screens, they're not much worse as the OLED screens in my HTC Vive Pro, which isn't nicely black either.

    • Adrian Meredith

      The rift cv1 display was garbage had terrible colours and awful purple smeary blacks

    • eadVrim

      I have Q3 but I still use Quest 1 for indoor vr pc games, specially horror ones. Cause of Oled

  • Rudl Za Vedno

    Weight 702 g with headstrap… 300 grams too much for me to consider it over my G2. Plus fresnel lenses in 2024/25… Thanks but no thanks. Fingers crossed Asus and Lenovo offer something similar to us PCVR users but with Meta's Q3 lenses + PD support + weight around 400g for around a grand. That would be an instant buy for me.

  • Zachary Williams

    Fresnels in 2024 for a grand? No thank you.
    Another odd choice to put eye tracking in a headset that also has a sweetspot in only the middle 10% of the lens. They actually want you to have to look at the blurry edges? A whole decade of learning to move your head specifically to make up for fresnels sweet spot bs, and now they really want you to move your eyes in headsets with 90% blur. I'd rather be able to see than have it track what I can't.

    • mirak

      please stop, you are not going to not move your head anymore because you have eye tracking

      • Zachary Williams

        Obviously you don’t understand. It’s not about not moving your head, it’s that you don’t have to on pancakes, as you can just naturally look around with clarity. On fresnels, you feel like you have to keep your eyes still and move your head because it’s blurry if you move your eyes whatsoever. Then with eye tracking they are actively asking you to move your eyes into the blurry portion.

        • Christian Schildwaechter

          That's only partly accurate. Our retinas have the highest resolution only in a very small FoV of about 5° when looking straight forward. If you look outside of 18°, the number of cone cells for color vision light still falls on is less than 25% of what you have in the core. This makes it close to impossible to read text that is 45° of your visual axis, but we don't notice, because we automatically turn our head to get the sharper image.

          On the retina the color cone cells decrease towards the edge, while the faster rod cells for detecting changes in brightness increase, so you very quickly notice that tiger approaching from the side, but you don't really see it, only something moving, and then turn your head to actually identify it. This is why VR gets away with Fresnel lenses and low FoV. We automatically try to keep the most relevant part in the center of the view, only see things clearly when we look directly at them, and outside a rather small FoV around "straight forward" everything becomes blurry.

          We don't notice this, because our brain construct the world view in a way that it seems that we have a much larger, usable FoV. But if you actually try to read or identify things without moving the head, you very quickly run into unexpected limits.

          Pancakes no doubt provide much better edge-to-edge clarity, which everyone will immediately notice. But you benefit from this less often than you'd expect because human vision itself hasn't great edge-to-edge recognition. Fresnel lenses decrease edge clarity a lot more than our eyes, but in regular use, meaning when you are not consciously looking for the difference, this has a much smaller impact because the head movements that we instinctively make to get the clearest picture also cause us to look through the center of the lenses most of the time.

          Your assumption that you will look around more with your eyes than your head in pancakes due to the added clarity doesn't really match our biology, and even if an eye tracking UI forces you to look more toward the edges, you'd still recenter the view by moving your head for anything longer than a short glance.

  • Mike

    "LCD"
    Pass. Again. Come on, HTC, you can do better.

  • Andrew Jakobs

    My god, typical HTC, fresnel lenses, XR2 gen1(quest 2/pico 4 chipset), with specs like that, it is as good as DOA. If it had the XR2 gen2 (quest 3/pico 4 ultra) chipset, it might still have a place due to the eyetracking and the 120° fov (and for some the announced DP alt-mode).

    • mirak

      Yet pros will prefer this over Quest or Pico.

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      But it is not a Focus 4, it is a Focus 3 plus. The main differences to Focus 3 are more RAM and color passthrough, which means just using different components and won't require changing the mainboard. The depth sensor will connect to one of the existing XR2 CSI ports, the now integrated eye tracking the same way as the external module before, and the DP-in is probably on a separate daughter board that also contains the DP decoder the XR2 lacks. It's possible that Vision uses the exact same logic board as the Focus 3.

      Which is why there are no other significant changes. HTC stated that the Focus 3 is mostly used for PCVR streaming, for which the XR2 Gen 1 is more than enough. The eye tracking (from Tobii) works with PCVR too, so this is clearly targeting people with a rather powerful PC that (with Tobii's ETFR for PC that also powers the Pimax Crystal) can actually utilize the 120° FoV and 2.5K per eye resolution, either compressed and wireless or uncompressed and tethered via DP-in. In comparison the Quest 3 with XR2 Gen 2 uses a default render resolution of 1680*1760, up 30% from Quest 2, but still only about 2/3rd of its pixel resolution. The Focus 3/Vision resolution adds another ~30%, meaning the Quest 3 by default only renders half of the Focus 3/Vision pixel resolution.

      This makes the Focus Vision a somewhat odd standalone product esp. for XR productivity apps, but the design goal here seems to clearly have been making an existing product more attractive for the group that already uses it most with some simple but clever additions, and without having to create a completely new product. Which is a smart move, even if inevitable all the VR enthusiasts will start complaining that whatever was on their wish list still isn't included.

      • Andrew Jakobs

        One minor thing about the DP-altmode is if you read up on it, it requires a $149 adapter to work, which will be free if you pre-order the headset, so I highly doubt the headset itself will have real native DP onboard, otherwise it wouldn't need a $149 adapter.

        • Christian Schildwaechter

          DP is actually the protocol that is independent of the connector. They also defined several standard connectors, incl. the ones typically found on GPUs and monitors for use with what is then called a DP cable, but nothing stops you from using e.g. ethernet instead.

          DP-Alt mode for USB-C means running the same protocol over a USB-C cable, and there are a number of other Alt modes to. PSVR 2 is using the VirtualLink Alt mode that again transfers the DP protocol over USB-C, but requires extra shielding for one pair of data lines that therefore can be used as an additional high speed data channel that is missing in regular USB-C with DP-Alt, where that channel is limited to USB-2 speeds.

          So unless HTC has come up with something proprietary, you should also be able to use the Sony PSVR2 PC adapter that basically just combines a DP signal and USB3 into a single cable. Or if you have an RTX 20X0 or RX 6X00 foundry edition GPU that came with a USB-C port capable of also providing VirtualLink, you should be able to connect the Vive Vision directly with a properly shielded USB-C cable.

          The Vision itself will have a secondary USB-C port and would need a simple decoder to "extract" the DP signal from USB-C DP Alt to "regular" DP. But the main problem is that the XR2 can generate DP signals, but not receive and pass them through. So the Vision needs at least a DP decoder with a small frame buffer that connects directly to the displays as a parallel video source in addition to GPU inside the XR2. Which is how the Pico Neo 3 Link did this too.

          USB Alt modes have been around for decades, and even in the early Cardboard days that seemed like a great idea to connect a smartphone as an external display, back then via Micro-USB and HDMI Alt mode. Way better than first compressing the rendered image on a PC, sending it regular USB and then decoding it on the phone, adding latency and artifacts.

          If mobile SoCs had started to integrate simple decoders that can take a signal like HDMI or DP and simply pass it through to the GPU using the exiting frame buffers etc., every single HMD based on mobile SoCs would have been able to serve as a lossless, no latency video display, starting with the Gear VR and Oculus Go. But since this is such a niche application, nobody ever wasted any die space for the required silicon, and in 2024 we are still celebrating something that should be a default feature as a win despite the company asking for a USD 149 adapter only required because PC GPUs don't include DP-Alt USB-C ports by default yet/any more.

          • XRC

            Very interesting comments as usual!

            One question about cable, my crystal has 6.5 metre fibre optic DP tether, which is super light and flexible, really appreciate the lack of drag or weight on the headset compared to copper DP tether (also have 4.5 metre version for same headset).

            How/what is the fibre optic tether and how does it connect at each end? The headset has a DP connection, the PC has DP and USB. Is there an internal conversion? (Aware from cutting open a damaged index tether it has electronics embedded)

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            This got horribly long even for my already excessive standards due to lots of background for speculation, so TL;DR: there will be (possibly passive) conversion to merge USB into the DP auxiliary channel, and what I suppose is pretty much standard "whatever electrical digital signal" to optical and back, with extra power from a second USB port; mostly because the cable has to work with all GPUs and USB ports, not only the most recent versions that would allow all that with a single USB-C cable.

            I'm not entirely sure what the cable does, but I can make a guess from the similarity to USB-C.

            USB-C uses 20 cables with some redundancy for the connector to work regardless of how you plug it in, but the main data transfer happens via four superspeed cable pairs. Pairs are used to reduce sensitivity to interference. If you'd just use four single lines that all are set to high, this would create a very different electrical field compared to them all being low, but on a pair using differential signal transfer with high as 1/0, and low as 0/1, the impedance per signal line and cable always stays the same.

            DisplayPort also uses four signal lines/twisted cable pairs, but the DP connector adds a separate pin for the shielding of each pair. Differential signaling allows for way higher speeds at longer cable length than older, four wire USB-2 cables, but anything beyond a few meters still needs a high quality cable, which usually means more isolation and thickness that DP cables with extra shielding per data line provide.

            USB-C usually uses the data lines bi-directional for the more complex USB protocol that also handles things like up to 127 devices talking over the same bus. USB-C Alt mode switches the four lines to simpler, uni-directional DP, leaving only an auxiliary data channel at about USB-2 speed to transfer data back from the HMD to the computer. VirtualLink requires the auxiliary line to be shielded, so it can be used at USB-3 speeds. There is still some confusion if this is why PSVR2 uses VirtualLink, as according to iVRy the PS5 only uses two of the DP signal lines with stream compression, leaving two superspeed lines for transferring sensor data back, but that's part of the reason why there is a PSVR2 PC adapter that takes a DP and USB-3 line and combines them to USB-C.

            DisplayPort also defines an auxiliary port to transfer data back, AFAIR also at about USB-2 speed, so the Pimax Crystal uses sort of the reverse of the PSVR2: not sending sending the DP protocol over a USB cable, but sending the USB protocol over a DP cable, again requiring spitting it into separate USB and DP ports on the PC end. For USB-C you need more than a passive adapter, as the DP-Alt mode has to be signaled to the receiver, so some active component has to do that in addition to just routing the USB3 and DP signal lines to the matching USB-C lines. The auxiliary port in DP isn't actually USB, so either the Crystal cable has to include some components for translation, or, probably simpler, the Crystal just assumes that the AUX signal it receives will actually be two USB-2 data lines, regardless of what the DP specs says. As this is a proprietary cable, Pimax could also have sped up the AUX channel by shielding it separately like on VirtualLink to bring it to USB-3 speed. The line will probably be connected to the onboard XR2, which could do some of the tracking and image preprocessing, reducing bandwidth needs for the back channel. I have no insights into how they actually implemented this. Depending on how the AUX channel is otherwise used, this might mean connecting the Crystal with a regular DP cable won't work.

            In any case you end up with a high speed digital signal transferred over four differential data pairs acting as four data lines plus some extra data from other lines. No idea how protocol specific fiber line transceivers are, but there shouldn't be much difference between translating USB-C, DP, ethernet or any other digital signal to fibre as long as the vastly larger optical bandwidth is sufficient. I'd assume these to be pretty much (cheap) standard components, so after combining DP and USB ports to USB-C plus DP-Alt in the PSVR2 adapter, or DP plus USB-auxiliary in the Pimax cable, for optical transfer the data from all four data lines then should be converted into a single fiber line.

            Apparently multi-mode transceivers using multiple light frequencies are cheaper for comparable speeds, but single-mode fiber itself is cheaper, so I have no idea what is typically used for short data cables, and whether the data from the four lines is somehow interleaved or send over separate channels, nor what kind of internal protocol these optical transceivers use. So I'll assume it works as a black box where you can pipe in an electrical digital signal on the one end, some magic made possible by the huge bandwidth of optical fiber happens, and you get back the same signal on the other side, with the part in the middle oblivious to whether the bits were USB, DP, Ethernet or whatever, mostly to reduce cost by allowing generic components.

            The matching receiver should therefore again separate the signal into four differential DP wire pairs plus extra, so there has to be a somewhat protocol aware translation involved, unless the transceivers allow for so many channels that you can transfer the redundant high/low lines separately. Unlikely due to cost.

            The remaining problem is power. VirtualLink solves this by requiring up to 27W provided to the HMD. USB-PD now allows for up to 240W with voltages up to 48V, but regular USB 3 is limited to 5V/4.5W, or 7.5W for battery charging. More is possible, but only on newer USB ports not guaranteed to be on every PC, so the second USB-connector on the Crystal cable will be used to increase the total power delivery from two USB 3 ports, transferred in parallel to the optical fiber by electric cable/mesh, probably also serving as a protective layer.

            All this is speculation based mostly on the USB-C and DP cable specs. In theory the best solution today would be a simple USB-C connection with DP Alt mode and USB-PD, but most GPUs don't offer a fitting port, and there is only limited bandwidth to transfer data back from the HMD. Enough for the results of limited sensor data or tracking results from an onboard SoC, not enough to transfer e.g. unprocessed hires passthrough video. VirtualLink worked around this by changing the specs of the cable, which would increase costs, but the spec is dead anyway and only used on PSVR2. DP can only use 1, 2 or 4 data lanes, so using 3 and leaving just one high speed lane for transfer back isn't possible, otherwise current USB-C at 3.2 speed with USB-PD and DP 1.4 DSC to reduce video bandwidth requirement would be all we need, allowing for one standard connections incl. optical transceivers/receivers, way cheaper than the expensive proprietary cables for Index or Crystal that still have work with GPUs only offering DP outputs and USB3.0, therefore requiring/including adapters.

  • The Chipset is a confusing decision. The same one of the Quest 2? This is strange

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      In an interview with MIXED, Fabian Nappenbach, HTC's director of product marketing EMEA, explained that changing the chip to the next generation would require companies to have the headsets recertified, which would be very costly.

      The HTC Focus Vision is basically still an HTC Focus 3 with some nice add-ons that make it more attractive for PCVR usage, but require neither significantly changing the existing production nor having anything re-certified. So they didn't actually choose to go with the XR2 Gen 1 again, they instead simply offer the same product with some interesting extras attached under a new name.

  • ViRGiN

    Thumbs up for surpassing Valve in VR efforts.

    • kakek

      Releasing a n-th subpar and overpriced headset brings nothing to the table. This is wasted effort. I mean, Valve pretty much brings more to VR just by vaguely suggesting they might do something again, because even vague intent is better than this.
      Hell most people commenting with enthusiasm and positivity on VR news help more.

      • ViRGiN

        No, there is no comparison, htc has done more good for vr than valve ever did or will.
        You’re calling this subpar and overpriced, like valve index wasn’t exactly that, and still sells for the same launch price

    • VRDeveloper

      Just to know; do you understand that it sounds very schizophrenic for you to post this with a photo of Gabe in your profile?

      • ViRGiN

        You’re reaching.

  • xyzs

    Fresnel? No.
    LCD? No.
    Htc? No.

  • eadVrim

    Why not with Oled, it will justify the grand and it will get the market.

    • ViRGiN

      Because valve index at a grand isn't OLED.

      • eadVrim

        That was before the release of the Oled PC PSVR2

        • ViRGiN

          And that was after Rift CV1 and HTC Vive released their oled headsets

          • eadVrim

            If their resolution is just enough, I would still be using them today, instead of all the other LCD headsets.

      • AS

        The valve index was overpriced at a grand 5 years ago.

    • Andrew Jakobs

      Because oled panels are very expensive, and would increase the price with a couple of 100 bucks. If they were only a couple of bucks more compared to same resolution/sized LCD panels, they would have used them.

      • eadVrim

        I could sacrifice some image resolution for an immersion that looks warm and alive.

        • Andrew Jakobs

          To be honest, when I switch between my Pico 4 (LCD) and HTC Vive Pro (OLED), I hardly notice any difference in 'warm and alive' image, the Pro has its negatives just as the Pico 4 has its negatives. But hee, of course I'd rather have the best possible image, but not that much that it'll cost an arm and a leg more.

          • eadVrim

            It is like comparing a LCD smartphone with an Oled smartphobe, or comparing normal LCD TV vs an Oled TV, it is the same case in VR.

          • Arno van Wingerde

            I see your point, LG OLED TV here.

            But it really depends on what OLED and what LCD. LCDs with better contrast ratios could substantially narrow the gap that I experience from my Quest3 and LG TV. Also, OLED is mostly less bright, so difficult to use, particularly with pancake lenses, lowering the HDR contrast and hence its advantage over LCD.

          • eadVrim

            Quest 3 is not a Qled, it is simple LCD screen with pancake lenses lowering the brightness too, This Htc Vive has frensel that is more optimal for Oled. I have an LG Oled TV and its HDR contrast is perfect cause of the real black. I didn't say Q3 is bad but with Oled VR is much better.

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            The problem with LCD are the dynamic filters reducing the white backlight to red, green and blue pixels not working perfectly and getting worse with higher brightness, so black becomes dark gray.The problem with OLED panels is being limited by the brightness of the self illumination pixel OLED, based on organic molecules degrading faster when driven at high brightness.

            For both issues there are workarounds. Quest Pro uses dimming zones, replacing the uniform white backlight with hundreds/thousands smaller ones with adjustable brightness. Humans can't see small color differences close to big ones, so despite a much lower "brightness" resolution dimming zones provide similar perceived contrast similar as OLED. New (still very expensive) tandem OLED displays stack two panels for increased brightness, also improving durability due to lower per panel power. microOLEDs are kind of a mix, with individual white OLED run through fixed color filters. The ones in AVP again used dual layer OLED for added brightness, while eMagin announced microOLED using RGB OLED. And longterm we'll see microLED, combining brightness and durability of LEDs with contrast and color accuracy of OLEDs.

            Each technology has advantages and disadvantages and keeps changing. The first HMDs used OLED panels for their fast switching time allowing nausea reducing low persistence, but LCDs got faster, now driving 480Hz displays, and their higher brightness allowing lower persistence than OLED. You also have to consider application, backlight type and generation that all cause displays to vary widely regarding contrast, color fidelity and image quality, blurring the difference between OLED and LCD.

            Price has an impact too, and not only the component price that's about 30% higher for OLED than LCD. Focus Vision still uses LCD because it is really a Focus 3 from 2021 with some add-ons requiring neither a significant redesign nor recertification. A new HMD with OLED and XR2 Gen 2 would have increased the retail price by much more than the added component cost, as the significant development time/cost for a new product would have to be spread over what are probably less than 100K sold units, driving the price way above USD 1000 and significantly reducing user acceptance. Something being technically possible doesn't mean it's economically feasible.

          • Arno van Wingerde

            Insightful contribution… but I am still dismayed at the Quest 2/3 lack of blacks that for me makes horror games almost unplayable. I would be willing to pony up for OLED, but it will likely either come from Meta for a Pro 2 or Pro 3 or from licensees like Lenovo or Asus …

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            My guess is that Quest 2 went with LCD because they were trying hard to stay below USD 300 retail price, and it's basically a miracle that they managed that, so the cheaper LCD won over the better looking OLED panels from Quest 1.

            For Quest 3 OLED simply wasn't an option due to lacking brightness for the pancakes they wanted to use. Carmack mentioned that the Quest 2 visuals were held back more by the lenses than the resolution, so going beyond that required pancakes, which prohibited OLED. The other option would have been microOLED, but given that the ones in AVP cost USD 200 more than a whole 128GB Quest 3, that wasn't a realistic option either. But I'm sure they'll get there sooner or later.

  • spirr9986

    What a total shame. Fresnel lenses. this company was so close

  • Ardra Diva

    / happily puts on Quest 3 and has a great time

  • AS

    Looks like htc had loads of spare parts from the unsold focus 3 and xr elites, and decided to cobble together another device instead of sending them to landfill.