Magic Leap today announced pricing and release date details for the company’s latest AR headset, Magic Leap 2.

Magic Leap 2 Release Date and Price

Magic Leap 2 is finally set to officially launch on September 30th, 2022. The company says the headset will come in three versions priced for different groups:

Magic Leap 2 Base (for “professionals and developers”)
  • $3,300
  • One year warranty
Magic Leap 2 Developer Pro
  • $4,100
  • One year warranty
  • Access to developer tools, sample products, enterprise-grade features, and “monthly early releases for development and test purposes”
Magic Leap 2 Enterprise
  • $5,000
  • Two year warranty
  • Two years of access to enterprise features and updates
  • Manageable via enterprise UEM/MDM solutions

The headset’s starting price makes it clear that Magic Leap is positioning its latest headset as an alternative to Microsoft’s HoloLens 2; the $3,300 base price of Magic Leap 2 undercuts Microsoft’s offering by $200.

On September 30th Magic Leap 2 will release first in the US, Canada, United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and Saudi Arabia. The company expects the headset to launch in Japan and Singapore by the end of the year.

Magic Leap 2 Specs

Image courtesy Magic Leap

Alongside the announcement of the headset’s price and release date, the company also shared an official list of Magic Leap 2 specs:

Field-of-view 70 degrees
Resolution 1,440 x 1,760
Refresh Rate 120Hz
Brightness 20 to 2,000 nits
Colors 16.8 million
Weight 260g
Camera 12.6MP autofocus RGB camera
4k at 30fps or 1,920 x 1,080 at 60fps video
Storage 256GB
Volume-of-view 37cm to infinity
CPU AMD 7nm Quad-core Zen2 X86 core (8 threads)
14 core CVIP engine
Up to 3.92 GHz max with 512kB L2 per core
4MB total L3 cache
GPU AMD GFX10.2: 1SE 1SA 4 WGP (8 CUs) 2RB+
1MB L2 Cache 964 MHz / Max 1.8 GHz
Audio Built-in stereo speakers
Sensors 3x wide FoV World Cameras
Depth Camera
RGB Camera
Ambient Light Sensor
4x Eye-tracking Cameras
4x IMU
3-axis Accelerometer and Gyroscope
2x 3-axis Magnetometer
2x Altimeter
Battery 3.5hrs continuous use
7hrs sleep mode
Security WPA3
AMD Platform Security Processor
TMR
Security fencing between x86 and CVIP

Interested in Magic Leap 2? Check out our recent hands-on with the device.

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. See here for more information.


Ben is the world's most senior professional analyst solely dedicated to the XR industry, having founded Road to VR in 2011—a year before the Oculus Kickstarter sparked a resurgence that led to the modern XR landscape. He has authored more than 3,000 articles chronicling the evolution of the XR industry over more than a decade. With that unique perspective, Ben has been consistently recognized as one of the most influential voices in XR, giving keynotes and joining panel and podcast discussions at key industry events. He is a self-described "journalist and analyst, not evangelist."
  • ApocalypseShadow

    As much as I like the look of it and the idea of processing moved away from the headset to allow better form factor and less weight. I really can’t see the point of a list of specs that doesn’t have a list of benefits. There has always been this mystery around this product that you had to see for yourself. At least VR does a better job at it because you can SEE the software you get. With Magic Leap, you have to go on a leap of faith. No known developers, no known software, no known marketing but it’s supposed to release soon in its second form.

    When computers came out, it sold on its productivity and entertainment benefits. You could do many things with one. When cellphones came out and since then, it has provided calling on the go, replaced GPS, cameras, MP3 players, the need to go home to get information from a PC, provided games and video entertainment.

    What is Magic Leap doing that justifies the cost and the limited warranty? What increased output do you get by using it? As much as I’m not a fan of Facebook, even their subsidized headset does more for less and has AR features. With Cambria looking to do more for less cost.

    What should we get impressed with besides the look and form factor?

    • Malkmus

      Well, first it’s probably best to not even have intentions for this. It’s geared at enterprise and its main competitor is Hololens. But beyond that, if yopu’re wondering what is impressive about it, it’s the specs which include a feature set no one else has been able to bring to market yet, specifically the large FOV, and perhaps most importantly the ability to display black and the “holograms” no longer being transparent. But for people like us, it won’t be until a version 3 that there will be reason to look at this. And honestly, they may never be able to bring the cost down enough to get into the consumer space.

      • ApocalypseShadow

        I agree on what you and the guest are saying. But even if I was running a business, I’d want to know what I’m getting. Specs don’t mean much unless there’s applications for them.

        And over at Upload VR, they say consumers can buy one too. Unless they suck at journalism… Lol.. But even with Facebook, you can see all the demonstrations of VR, AR, room scale or even football field scale capable gaming, watch movies, multiple screens inside the headset, chat, etc. I can see their R&D. I still won’t buy it. But I can see what they are accomplishing. Even with the face tracking and cloth physics.

        Some of these things are already implemented on Quest 2. I’m expecting Cambria to outdo Quest 2 with more features. Of course, I believe Facebook should be making more games and building more studios. But you can see something right off.

        Why do we have to guess what Magic Leap does? Even if it’s not for regular consumers or too expensive? I can go to Best Buy to see very expensive TVs that go beyond what I got. I can see the immediate benefit of larger, movie like screen, more detail and HDR. With this company, you got to track the information down and get clues from behind the scenes hands on demonstrations.

        If I had the money, I just wouldn’t buy it based on lack of information and company experience to deliver compelling software regularly.

        • Malkmus

          The answer to nearly all your questions are that business and developers go to trade shows to get the information you’re talking about. No one is going to be buying it sight unseen or without knowing the use cases. If you really want to know eaither read the hands on from trade shows or simply go tot heir website where they talk about the various use cases.
          About your question regarding consumers— anyone can buy it, just like Hololens, but that doesn’t mean it’s geared towards consumers.

    • Guest

      What impresses me is they now support existing development tools, so it is possible to port apps. That is more important than the other things I hate about that company.

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      This isn’t a consumer device, and for all your examples we saw commercial releases without an impressive showcase long before it ever reached regular consumers.

      When PCs came out in the 1970s, there wasn’t any obvious use case for most. This changed with the release of VisiCalc for the Apple II in 1979, the first desktop spreadsheet, which, according to the developer, caused accountants to start shaking and shoving credit cards in his face. It still took several years for IBM to release their PC and first Microsoft Multiplan and then Lotus 1-2-3 to take it to a bigger market. And about 15 more years and the invention of the WWW for PCs to go consumer mainstream.

      When cellphones came out depends a lot on your definition, going back about a century, but the first automated small cell networks and actually portable phones appeared in the 1980s, and the first digital ones in the early 90s. The first generations had a few thousand users and were almost exclusively used for business, where staying connected had a very high value. Feature phones still took a decade to become widespread and smartphones weren’t even on the horizon for much longer.

      The first VR headset is from 1968, had to be suspended from the ceiling due to weight and could only render tiny wireframe models due to lack of computational power, and VR caves and headsets have been in industrial and academic use since the 1990s.

      Use cases for mobile phones and GPS were easy to come up with before launch, because land lines and maps had been in use, but computers had also always been used for accounting, so the main change was the form factor. And we already have augmented apps on smartphones and mono ocular head mounted displays and head up displays have been in use since the 1960s. So we already have some ideas what a working AR headset could do.

      Magic Leap tried to go more consumer with the first device, but had to acknowledge that AR simply isn’t ready for that, so for now the target group is people who already know what they want from such a device and have the resources to create the software they need themselves, with a price reflecting that. And unless Apple has something that is significantly more advanced coming up, it will still take many years for AR headsets to become useful for a larger group of people and even more for them to become so small and convenient that they may go mainstream. And no, Cambria or Quest 3 will not make AR popular, they at best will make experimenting with AR more bearable.

  • Max-Dmg

    Me: Dear Santa, I’d like a Magic Leap 2.
    Santa: Fuck off.