Quest Pro Revealed with Snapdragon XR2+, Face-tracking, & More; Ships October 25th for $1,500

By
Ben Lang
-
207

Today during Meta Connect the company finally revealed its high-end Quest Pro headset (formerly called Project Cambria). Priced at $1,500, the headset packs a new Snapdragon XR2+ processor along with a bevy of sensors for tracking the user’s expressions and the world around them for improved passthrough AR capabilities. Alongside new and improved controllers, the company also revealed the full Quest Pro specs, pre-order date, and release date.

Key Quest Pro Coverage:

Quest Pro Hands-on – The Dawn of the Mixed Reality Headset Era

Quest Pro Technical Analysis – What’s Promising & What’s Not

Touch Pro Controllers Revealed – Also Compatible with Quest 2

Quest Pro was just announced and is already available for pre-order starting today in 22 countries. Priced at $1,500 and with a release date of October 25th, Quest Pro is fully compatible with Quest 2 content while bringing improvements that will enhance passthrough AR functionality and social interactions thanks to face-tracking capabilities. Let’s take a look at the on-paper specs:

Quest Pro Specs
Resolution 1800 × 1920 (3.5MP) per-eye, LCD (2x)
Refresh Rate 72Hz, 90Hz
Lenses Pancake non-Fresnel
Field-of-view (claimed) 106ºH × 96ºV
Optical Adjustments Continuous IPD, contiguous eye-relief
IPD Adjustment Range 55–75mm
Processor Snapdragon XR2+
RAM 12GB
Storage 256GB
Connectors USB-C
Weight 722g
Battery Life 1–2 hours
Headset Tracking Inside-out (no external beacons)
Controller Tracking Inside-out (headset line-of-sight not needed)
Expression Tracking Yes (eyes, face)
On-board cameras 5x external, 5x internal
Input Touch Pro controllers (rechargeable), hand-tracking, voice
Audio In-headstrap speakers, dual 3.5mm aux output
Microphone Yes
Pass-through view Yes (color)
MSRP $1,500

Compact Optics & Form-factor

Image courtesy Meta

From a resolution and field-of-view standpoint, Quest Pro is actually quite similar to Quest 2, boasting an almost identical resolution of 1800 × 1920 (3.5MP) per-eye, but with a much more compact optical pipeline thanks to the use of ‘pancake’ lenses which moves the headset more toward a ‘goggle’-like form-factor than the old box-on-the-face of its predecessor. At 722g, Quest Pro is heavier than Quest 2, but may actually be more comfortable thanks to a rear-mounted battery for balance and a rigid headstrap.

And while the resolution isn’t higher, Meta claims Quest Pro has better clarity thanks to the headset’s new optics: a 25% improvement in sharpness at the center of the field-of-view, and a 50% improvement across the periphery (meaning larger ‘sweet-spot’ of clarity). As of now we’re not sure if those claims are merely about the lenses, or if they include the display as well, though we’ve reached out to Meta for clarity (pun intended).

Image courtesy Meta

Meta also claims Quest Pro includes a 500-element local dimming backlight which enables improved contrast up to 75% compared to Quest 2, while also allowing for a 1.3 times larger range of color.

New Controllers & Capabilities

Image courtesy Meta

Quest Pro’s controllers, which Meta is calling Touch Pro, are similar in shape but majorly upgraded under the hood. Gone are the tracking rings, which are instead replaced by three cameras which allow the controller to perform its own inside-out tracking. Not only does this make the Touch Pro controllers more compact, it also means they don’t need line-of-sight to the headset in order to maintain their position.

What’s more, the Touch Pro controllers feature improved haptics and new capabilities. The thumb rest of the controller has been angled and now includes a pressure sensor which allows for a natural pinch-like gesture. The controllers come with stylus tips which can be attached to the bottom, allowing you to flip the controller over to use like a bulbous white-board marker. The stylus even has a pressure sensor to determine how hard or soft you’re pushing against a surface.

SEE ALSO
OpenXR 1.1 Update Shows Industry Consensus on Key Technical Features

Despite the new capabilities, the Touch Pro controllers maintain the same button and trigger layout as the Quest 2 controllers for full backwards compatibility with Quest 2 content. Touch Pro controllers are also the first from Meta that are rechargeable.

Though they are included with Quest Pro, the Touch Pro controllers are compatible with Quest 2 and can be purchased as an accessory for $300 starting later this year.

Better Sensing, Inside and Out

Image courtesy Meta

Quest Pro doesn’t just bring improved form-factor and controllers, the headset is also equipped with a bevy of sensors for better integrating the real world into the user’s experience, and better integrating the user into the virtual world.

Quest Pro packs five external sensors for passthrough AR capabilities, offering a higher resolution color view with improved depth-detection, making the headset better at understanding the geometry of the room around the user, and allowing it to more convincingly merge the virtual and real world.

The headset also includes five internal sensors for tracking the user’s eyes and face. In addition to using eye-tracking as input (potentially for things like foveated rendering), the sensors track much more information about the user’s face, allowing for significantly more expressive avatars than what’s possible on Quest 2.

Powered Up Processor

Given all the new and processing happening on Quest Pro, it’s a good thing the headset also sees both a processor and RAM upgrade. Quest Pro uses the newly revealed Snapdragon XR2+, an upgraded version of the processor that’s in Quest 2 but with better cooling, allowing for 50% more processing power. The headset also doubles the RAM over Quest 2 from 6GB to 12GB. As of now it isn’t clear how much of this increase in performance will be available to developers vs. how much will be retained for system functions like tracking.

More Features, Less Battery

Though Quest Pro includes a heap of enhancements over Quest 2, it comes with a cost… and not just in price. Meta says users can expect 1–2 hours of Quest Pro battery life. Luckily the headset includes a charging dock for both the headset and controllers, hopefully ensuring it’s ready to go whenever you are. Meta says the headset can charge to full from the dock in about 2 hours.

Complement Not Replacement, Says Meta

Image courtesy Meta

Meta says Quest Pro represents the company’s first entry in a line of “high-end” headsets, while Quest 2 and its progeny will continue to co-exist as an entry-level option.

Quest Pro is fully compatible with Quest 2 content, and while the headset is designed with an emphasis on passthrough AR (with an open peripheral view to keep users more grounded in their environment), the headset also includes magnetically attachable peripheral blinders to dial up the immersion for VR. A separate ‘full light blocker’, which blocks out even more of the surrounding view is available as a separate accessory.

– – — – –

Quest Pro is priced at $1,500 and pre-orders are available today, with headsets poised to ship starting on October 25th.

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 Lang
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."
  • xyzs

    Too expensive.

    • Bob

      How much does your phone cost?

      • xyzs

        Not $1500.

        • Bob

          How many screens, cameras, lenses, batteries, and processors does your phone have?

          • KRAKEN

            I have 12 max pro, in same price league.
            But its a phone, its compact, i can do lots of thing with it.
            You cant compare it like this, my phone provides much more value to me than this thing that is not good for anything, i mean what can you do on it?
            There is no current nor future [like next year or 2 years in future] chipsets thats good for VR, its all PS2 graphics with a dose of Vaseline, low resolution, low details

          • kraeuterbutter

            thats not true…
            PS2: most games 25-30fps and resolution: 1024×1200
            the Quest Pro does 90fps and a resolution of 1,830 x 1920 for each eye
            so: the Quest Pro handels about 20 Times the pixel-amount than the PS2 did, and the PS2 had only 6 Gigaflop gpu power
            the Quest2 crosses the 1Tflop-mark, so 1250Gflop
            its realy no comparison, PS2 and Quest2/pro

          • KRAKEN

            Im comparing visually, Quest 2 native games visually are less sharp than PS2,Wii, Gamecube, Xbox360 games
            They outright unplayable.

            Mobile VR has no reason to exist, the gap between PC and Mobile is like walking from USA to IRAQ
            I had all major VR devices and I can tell you that even PSVR running on my PS4Pro looked far sharper, and more detailed than Quest 2 native games.

            Its just doesn’t make sense, to take a high tech device and combine it with something that is not ready, we dont have a VR ready Mobile soc yet [including the impressive Apple M2] that can provide acceptable graphics, resolution, refresh rate, and world detalization.
            You will see that even PS5 is too weak for that, sony knows about it and thats why they have fovated rendering with eye tracking, its better than nothing.
            To get acceptable VR [lets not forget that you need to render twice and at high refresh rates], you need a MINIMUM RTX3070

            When I had RTX3090 and tried to play Alex on HP reverb G2, when i enabled super sampling to get sharper image, it killed my FPS to crawl, like 10 fps

            So any game with good graphics that runs bad on PC, on VR has to be rendered twice and if you can play 30-40fps on PC and be ok, on VR you will puke, so they lower resolution and lower graphical settings
            Thats why all Quest 2 games are extremely basic, low resolution, lack in graphical features, and so on

          • kraeuterbutter

            when you have only 10fps in Alyx, with a 3090 and the Reverb G2 (i have alos the G2) than you make something wrong !
            that would mean that Alyx is not playable on a 3090 – and for sure not playable on ANY other, weaker graphics card..
            thats wrong
            friend of mine has the Varjo Aero (around 70% more pixels than the Reverb G2) it runs – even with supersampling – very ok-ish
            you seem to crank up super-resolution to a silly high amount (maybe you get problems with GPU RAM at that kind of Resolution?)

            for “VR needs twice at rendering” (two eyes)
            as you know: in reality its even more – you need some overhead for distortion proviles

            for “mobile VR has no reason to exist, the gap between PC and Mobile”
            sorry, but look at the numbers…
            PC VR has not managed to generate enough momentum in 7 years
            iam a PC VR enthusiast.. Rift, PSVR, Vive, Odyssey+, Index, HP Reverb, HTC Vive Pro 2, Pimax 5k, … went to all them
            Quest1, Quest2, , Pico 4
            i love PC-VR
            BUT: nevertheless: PC-VR does not drive VR industrie
            there are maybe 2 Millionen People willing to buy a PC VR Headset..
            there are 20 Million that are willing to buy a mobile device
            Price? WMR-Headsets where even cheaper than Quest2 – still no success
            so its not only the price

            the industrie is shifting to mobile VR
            many games have reduced graphics on PC so the game is also easy portable to Quest

            PCVR is nerdig
            so: there is no place for mobile VR ????
            even Pimax want to cramp a XR2 into there next device (weird) *lol*

          • KRAKEN

            How many quest 2 uers are like me that got it for PC? I only tested quest2 native games, because i knew they look like trash, i got the device for PC with cable and from what i see online tons of people buy it for wireless setup to play PC games.
            I tested that too, looks OK, but honestly a single USB cable doesnt bother me to get better image quality.
            Mobile VR is good for this very reason, to get decompression soc on the device for cheap wireless setup

          • kraeuterbutter

            infact: the Quest 2 and the Quest pro are even more powerfull than the PS3 (200 gflops)
            its more Xbox360 / PS4 territory
            but: it has to render so much more, so thats why people think, the units were not powerfull.. but: not correct

          • KRAKEN

            The power is comparative vs what needs to be done, and this soc or any other and im sure even Apples M2 is too weak for this
            Even if its as powerful as PS4, ill give you PS4 Pro or even xbox one X, its not enough
            Hell even PS5 and Series X is not really enough for quality graphics in VR, thats why PSVR has eye tracking with fovated rendering, it can save the situation somewhat but somehow im sure we will NOT get native PSVR2 resolution in ANY game, except maybe some simple indie games.
            But the AAA games sony announced, i can bet my balls that they wont be running native res + 120fps per eye, hell they wont even do 60fps per eye if they run at native res

          • kraeuterbutter

            its the question, if in VR that is realy needed
            i can play – and have fun – with Games in VR and simpler graphics
            games i wouldn´t play on flat monitor today with that kind of graphics
            however: its wrong to compare it with PS2, in so many ways

          • Karsus

            It’s better understood as a laptop replacement that gives you far more flexibility on the UI side. And eventually on the human interaction side.

            As long as they hook it up to some cloud servers, all kinds of intriguing things should be possible with even this hardware.

        • Bob

          How much though? And what do your get for that price?

      • Till Eulenspiegel

        Following Meta’s pricing – If the iPhone is $800, then the Pro model should cost $4000.

        • kraeuterbutter

          the quest2 was always too cheap, compared to all its competitors…
          for example: Reverb G2 -> 600 at release..
          nevertheless it had cheaper lenses, no XR2, no RAM, no battery, cheapish controller
          but twice the price the Quest2 had at some time

          the Quest2 spoild us, thinking a headset is that cheap
          but all other headsets, which are not sponsored – cost a lot more
          (HTC, Valve, HP, …)

          • Till Eulenspiegel

            Are you saying Quest Pro will be cheaper if Facebook sign-in is still a requirement?

          • Karsus

            Probably not, since they don’t have much of an ad integration into Quest, nor a plan to make it primarily ad focused, ever.

            Even if that was the case, it’s only in countries like the US that Facebook can maybe manage an average ad revenue of $40 / year or something. It’s less in the rest of the world.

        • Karsus

          It’s superior to the Quest 2 in almost every way, unliek the normal Pro version of a phone which is almost the same but with a slightly bigger screen or slightly better camera.

          Quest Pro is obviously a next-gen device that addresses most of the weaknesses of the Quest 2.

          It’s just not possible to offer all that for cheap yet.

    • Dave

      Not really. It’s an enterprise headset and you are also paying for the research. What headset do you have for comparison, case closed!

      • xyzs

        Well for the first time the “pro” name is not an usurpation then.

      • kontis

        The ONLY reason it’s “enterprise focused” blah blah is because they couldn’t make it cheap enough for normal consumers to justify.

        It’s called and excuse.

        • Bob

          And how exactly are they going to subsidize $1200 dollars per unit to bring the price down to a Pico 4?

          Given the feature set of this device, it’s not exactly rocket science to figure out that the product isn’t for the average Joe such as yourself and 80% of the other moaning individuals cash strapped on websites such as this.

          • Shuozhe Nan

            Is it a 1.2k? From hardware pico neo 4 pro gaming edition seems pretty similar for ~ 500-600$, both are made by goertek.

            Quest 2 for enterprise started at similar price, got reduced to 1k and got merged into consumer q2 iirc

          • Ryan Thomas

            But the Neo doessn’t have face tracking and all of the extra cameras needed for the functionality. Nor does it have any MR/AR functionality… not to mention the cheap controllers (lack of finger tracking and lack of apps). I think the whole thing with this “Pro” headset; is that we need to look at it as more of a competitor to the HoloLens, rather than other standard VR headsets. From that perspective, it’s actually reasonable in price. And if it works well for gaming, that’s a huge plus. If you only want a great VR gaming experience then this obviously isn’t a great value and certainly it’s not the headset you should be looking at. I think a Q2 paired with the new controllers could be great for gaming — I guess we’ll wait and see how the performance of the controllers stack up once people start testing them out with Beat Saber and the like.

          • Smanny

            There is also two Qualcom Snapdragon 662 SoCs in each controller. I have seen Android smartphones using that same 662 SoC. Yet they are using 2 of those Qualcomm mobile processors, and each controller has RAM, and storage, and camera’s. As well as the touch and stylus functionality. There is no mention of any of that information. Each controller is a full fledged mobile computer that does full 360 degree tracking, and each controller communicates, and sends back that tracking information back to the Meta Quest pro headset.

        • MosBen

          I mean, what you call an excuse I would call an explanation. Yes, it’s enterprise focused because they couldn’t make it cheap enough to be targeted at consumers. When they can make one cheap enough to be targeted at consumers they will do so, and it’ll be called the Quest 3. That’s how technology products work, no some ad hoc excuse for this device.

          • Alexander Sears

            With my having limited knowledge on the exact goal of Meta with this product, I suspect it is also likely that they intended to build an enterprise headset without the intention to subsidize their losses and or make a profit with software sales. I suspect we are also seeing one business give other businesses the good ol’ ‘business tax’. Much of the tech seen here is cutting edge as well and contains many features that will not be present in the consumer oriented Quest 3.

      • Andrew Jakobs

        Yeah, just look at the HTC Vive focus 3, which was also 1300+

    • Till Eulenspiegel

      It is expensive, with $1500 you can buy three Quest 2 and still have $300 left over for buying games. Then again, this headset is not for the average consumers. It’s for people with deep pockets who wants the latest front-end tech toys that Zuck crafts for them.

      Quest 2 has 2x longer battery life, maybe this should have been a Rift Pro – without the battery it will be even lighter. Since they are targeting so called Pro users, they are sitting by the desk anyway.

      • sreams

        Zuck didn’t craft this.

        • Till Eulenspiegel

          How dare you. Zuck is going bankrupt making toys for all of you. Be grateful.

          • Newlot

            This but unironically.

      • kraeuterbutter

        John Carmack stated, that the Quest Pro runs only that fast dry when “everything” is on, full power…
        when used like a quest2 (for gaming, no face tracking, no eyetracking, …) it – so said john carmack – even last longer than the Quest2

        • Till Eulenspiegel

          No one will buy it to run like a Quest 2. Out of the box, it’s an AR device, it doesn’t even comes with a light blocker, it’s an option for the user – VR is an option.

    • Cless

      Its not expensive if its focused on enterprise market, it is overpriced if you want to buy it as a costumer/enthusiast though, there are way better price/quality options out there.

      • Karsus

        It’s like buying a laptop. And even at $1500, there are no really good standalone VR devices.

        • Cless

          Yeah, but if you are going to have to charge it every 2 hours, it might as well not be, if I’m being honest.

          • Karsus

            Having a battery pack in your pocket is pretty minor. And if you’re sitting , you can afford to keep it connected.

  • kool

    Ouch, I think we all just got a lesson on the true cost of standalone VR. I dont expect to see a quest 3 with all this and a new chip for $400 anytime in 2023.

    • Bob

      Exactly! Look what apple charges for a phone that they are selling at scale that dwarfs vr headsets. The true cost of this is probably very close to $1500, if not more. I bet they are selling for below cost

      • KRAKEN

        PC Gamers dont need mobile SOC,we plug in anyway, who wants PS2 Vaseline graphics?
        And if we plugin than HP Reverb is better.
        But the upcoming PSVR2, excluding the unnecessary mobile soc, has MUCH MUCH more features that actually matter.
        Like Real RGB OLED display [not pentile AMOLED like previous meta devices had or current LCD]
        First VR device with HDR screen
        Real Fovated rendering with eye tracking
        Tad higher resolution
        Haptic feedback in the headset for higher immersion
        Gamepads that were done by a company that been doing gamepads since 1993.

      • Lucidfeuer

        Apple had to lower their margins to lower the cost of phones, why do you think that is?

      • Karsus

        Meta no longer seems to be able to bleed money to subsidize headsets. But yeah, it’s possible that their profit margin isn’t huge.

        Or even if the margin is huge on hardware, it definitely isn’t on the research investment that it took to get here.

        They’ve built a ton of VR headsets over the last couple of years to try to advance this technology – this is just the one we’re seeing.

    • poltevo

      It won’t have most of these pro features, but I do expect new optics, a new chip, slightly better cameras & a higher resolution display. That’s achievable for a subsidised $400. The Pro is using lots of premium components, where the Q3 doesn’t need to.

      • kool

        It’ll be heavily subsidized for sure but they could easily ask for $800. If this sells well. Demand is already high enough to put a premium on the next quest. The better the pro does the higher the quest 3 will be basically.

        • poltevo

          They could ask for $800, but that would reduce their sales a lot. While the Pro is marketed as a high-end laptop replacement the non-pro line is more like a console. While I could see the Q3 price rising, it can’t be more expensive then say an PS5: it just won’t sell in the volumes which Meta needs.

          Maybe there will be a future Q+ which aims for that $800 bracket. Who knows.

          • kool

            Not really in the first year, with hype and scalpers proved price isn’t an object to early adopters. They can’t subsidized the quest 3 like they did the 2. Every million sold is a billion dollar loss, if it doubles in sales thats 30billion. They will need ads or subs or something else to keep from hemorrhaging money when this becomes a hit.

      • Karsus

        It may need to because the Pico 4 has many of these features already, for around the same price as a Quest 2.

    • Karsus

      Given that Pico 4 has the same style lenses, color pass through, automatic IPD adjustment and some of the other features for increased comfort… Much of this should be possible in the Quest 3. And for around that $400 price.

  • Pedro Garbim

    Wow. I thought it was gonna be expensive. But that’s much more than I expected (I was thinking about a thousand).

    • Karsus

      I was expecting $1200. But yeah, it’s expensive.

      Of course, you can always buy it on credit.

      My only objection is that they didn’t improve the resolution. It’s not quite there yet.

      But the next pro version… Is likely 2 years away, minimum.

  • Rogue Transfer

    I very much doubt those ‘claimed’ FOV numbers, considering how physically small the lenses are. Light from a lens into the eye can only travel in straight lines through the air inbetween. It seems impossible to get that FOV with smaller lenses that aren’t concave, but flat facing the eye.

    But then, we’re used to companies often stating higher FOV numbers than what is reality for people using the device. So, I look forward to actual hands-on measuring of it.

    Not that it matters, with only 1~2 hour battery life. Imagine how little time you’ll get to use it in AR or VR, before needing a two hour charge time! Similarly, with the controllers, how long do they last? Since you can’t replace the batteries any more, once their charge dies, you’re time playing is done, until they charge again. It’s not even like you can use USB to power them and finish what you’re doing, either(with their custom power dock pins instead, and no USB port, I presume?).

    It’s going to be an expensive paperweight most of the day for work too, with very little time to use it developing with, before it’s dead. It’s going to be cumbersome to add an extra battery mounted on it, or in a pocket, with even more often charging needed too. More fuss that it seems worth for daily work.

    • MeowMix

      I very much doubt those ‘claimed’ FOV numbers, considering how physically small the lenses are

      IPD adjustment up to 75mm, that’s the largest lens separation for a Meta/Oculus headset yet. The FOV could in fact be that big.

    • It’s going to be an expensive paperweight most of the day for work too

      For desk work they likely expect most people to use it plugged into power a fair amount.

      • alxslr

        If so then what was all that teterless buzz about? For that price I can buy a PCVR headset AND a VR-capable PC (which will also run MSOffice) :-D

    • Andrew Jakobs

      You can continue/charge through cable, so using an extra external batterypack on your belt and you can go on for much longer. Shame thet didn’t go for a hotswappable design like third parties have created for their Quest 2, those are awesome.

    • Ben Lang

      I very much doubt those ‘claimed’ FOV numbers, considering how physically small the lenses are. Light from a lens into the eye can only travel in straight lines through the air in between. It seems impossible to get that FOV with smaller lenses that aren’t concave, but flat facing the eye.

      Don’t forget, the displays themselves are closer to the lenses. All things the same, a closer display is going to fill a larger portion of your FOV.

  • Wow, I mean it’s an interesting concept. Maybe mostly because it insinuates the kind of device Apple is planning to release. Those last few statements in the conference about “open” ecosystems vs “closed” ecosystems to me suggest it’s going to be Meta and friends vs Apple.

    I’ll be keeping an eye on QP to see who ends up actually using it. The concepts discussed seem substantive in their own merit. I would love if a headset could facilitate my work life in some capacity. I think we’re definitely starting to get a better idea of where this is all headed.

    • Does your worklife consist of a 90 minute span …?
      Hope so, ’cause that’s all yer getting outta QuestPRO.
      Sure, you can just plug it in instead.
      But then, what are you paying $1500 for …?? lol

      • Andrew Jakobs

        But it can be extended with the batterycable, so wearing an extra batterypack on your belt, like the HTC Vive Pro wireless, and you can go on much longer, yeah, it isn’t the best, but at least you’re not tethered to a fixed space.

        • Cless

          At least the 3 at old vive pro has oled displays….

          • Andrew Jakobs

            Yeah, but the god rays and the screen door IS getting annoying now you know there are much better lenses and displays around. Shame Sony is the only one using OLED’s on their new headset, but then again, we’ll still have to wait and see if those are really much better.

          • Cless

            They most likely are in all specs, since, I mean, we are comparing it to 3 year old hardware.
            We might see some other companies getting in the OLED train specifically because Sony is going to be making so many, it will cheapen the price further.
            I basically wouldn’t be surprised to see the same panel or very similar on other headsets once PSVR2 comes out

          • Andrew Jakobs

            Let’s hope so, but sadly not yet on any if the newly presented headsets.

      • ViRGiN

        LMAO if for your producitivity $1500 is way too much… what kind of work do you do?
        You know car mechanics buy power tools for way more than that cause… IT ALLOWS THEM TO BE MORE PRODUCTIVE?

        such a lame come back dude. you sound like a grocery store employee. yeah, it’s not gonna influence you whatsoever. you’re just an after-hours gamer.

  • Molmir

    Same resolution as quest 2.
    Same refresh rate as quest 2.
    Same field of view as quest 2.
    Same shit in-headstrap speakers as quest 2.
    Same shit LCD display type as quest 2.
    1 hour shorter battery life.
    44% heavier.
    1500 dollars.
    Fucking geniuses.
    What are we paying for? a few cameras?

    • VR5

      Effective resolution is higher.
      Refresh rate is already high enough.
      Horizontal FoV is higher.
      Better colors for the screen.
      Better weight distribution.
      Better controllers.
      Facial expressions.
      Better hand tracking.
      Color pass through.
      Not for gamers, for productivity.

      • Fundamentalist Daleks

        No one will be productive with this garbage. There’s nothing here that would help in a business environment.

        • ViRGiN

          dude, you aren’t going to do your amazon warehouse shift with quest pro.
          it’s not meant for your type of work.

          • Ohhh, ROASTED!!

          • Max-Dmg

            I would, use the AR to have naked strippers dancing about the warehouse.

          • Lucidfeuer

            Nobody actually does

          • ViRGiN

            if you are incapable of thinking how VR can increase productivity/supplement your work, then clearly you’re more of a physical or entry level job at the office.

            Producitivity is not just about virtual 3 screen setup.

        • lol

        • VR5

          People are already productive using VR. Designing of cars and planes, which formerly could take several years, can be cut down to one year or less, because they don’t need to build prototype models, instead creating them virtually. At Connect, they mentioned (and showed) sneakers being designed using VR and joined molecule editing by a group of researchers.

          Work from home with meetings in joined spaces, working together on whiteboards are interesting usecases for any business even if they don’t do 3d modelling.

        • Max-Dmg

          Surgeons can use it to perform operations on people, but they must finish within 2 hours or they will die.

          • Karsus

            Connecting to a power bank in your pocket for an extra 6 hours of battery time is easy enough though.

        • kraeuterbutter

          i already use the Quest2 for productive work..
          my main-concerns with the Quest2: EdgeToEdgeClarity, readbility of text (so perseived resolution), Colors and Komfort…

          all these points are adressed by the quest Pro

          john carmack said: if you use the quest Pro like the quest2 (so no face tracking, no facial tracking) it even runs longer than the quest2 (!)

          the 1-2hours runtime is “all on”, full power

          • Karsus

            Going to have to wait for actual reviews by people before we commit on the point of increased visual clarity though.

          • kraeuterbutter

            the pico4 – cheaper than the quest2 now – has also pancake-Lenses and indeed much better E2EC and more clarity than the Quest2
            so it would be very strange when a 1800Euro Quest Pro does not give more visual clarity
            i think in the moment: quest 2 is for 99% not suitable for productive work.. you have to ba a VR-Geek to use it..
            with the Quest pro its maybe not suitable for productive work for “only” 75% of people
            for sure we will not be “THERE”, replacing monitor setups..
            but closer

          • Karsus

            So, some people are saying that it’s something of a testing product – in that the software that will make it really worth having hasn’t been developed yet.

            But I think, with a battery pack, it might do well.

            Even for the Pico 4, the reviews on comfort are much higher. So that it feels natural to wear it for hours.

      • Scott C

        LOL @ Not for gamers.

        • VR5

          Lower battery life, and the features that warrant the price increase don’t relate to gaming. It’s not for gamers.

          • Scott C

            Not trying to be disrespectful, but VR is entertainment. Period. The fatigue and discomfort of wearing these things negates productivity from the start. The helmet has got to go.

          • VR5

            That’s why they greatly increased comfort with this device. You’re absolutely right that if headsets cannot solve comfort for as many people as possible it doesn’t have a future for work as they are presenting it. But I don’t think this is an unsurmountable problem and VR is already being used for work with great success, reducing time required to design of planes and other vehicles or for training surgeons.

            It’s not just for entertainment. Its use beyond entertainment is already benefitting humankind more than entertainment ever could.

      • KRAKEN

        PSVR2 does it better and for 400$

        • Cless

          Oh man, 400$? I’m not so sure about that…

          • KRAKEN

            Its a game device for game console, it cant cost more than console, it will be at least 100$ cheaper than PS5, people need to feel trhey buying add-on and not whole new device

          • Cless

            Well, let’s hope you are right! I would agree with your logic though…

        • VR5

          Obviously PSVR2 is the better gaming device. But I don’t want the Pro for gaming.

      • Lucidfeuer

        Who gives a shit about your loser latecomer opinion, I hope you’re paid to shill

        • VR5

          If you can’t argue with the facts, you try to distract, make it about something else so people forget about what was pointed out as right. Nice try. It really doesn’t matter why I speak the truth. What is important that it is the truth and people can tell it.

    • Thomas Coyote Baxter

      Resolution can’t really be measured as the displays are totally different tho i’d need to test it myself to see if it’s noticeable. It’s claimed Horizontal FOV is nearly 10 degrees more. I’d need to see this too. I think this will be a major flop tho. The “features” it offers aren’t in demand by anyone atm

    • Charles

      I agree with the general sentiment, though I do think pancake lenses and the drastically less-deep shape is a big deal and should be the future. And 75% inproved contrast means it MIGHT just barely be acceptable – I’d give it a try.

      • ViRGiN

        Never understood the ‘bashing controllers together”. Are you guys just clumsy? What’s out there that really needs controllers so close together?
        Even weapon reloading and handling never gave me issues.

        • silvaring

          If had a lot of bumping of controllers on the front of the headset, but with pancake lenses making headsets much smaller im not even sure this is an issue anymore.

        • Charles

          Wasn’t talking about bashing them together.

          I was talking about hitting objects in the room, and having to subconsciously worry about avoiding that.

          It’s more of a problem in small / cluttered areas – which are common.

          Also, hitting the headset happens sometimes, or at least needs to be worried about avoiding, as silvaring mentioned.

      • silvaring

        Other companies catching up? There are two, three other headsets already with pancake lenses and the quest pro isnt even out yet.

        • Charles

          That’s not every company, or every headset.

    • GunnyNinja

      Well at least I could use it unlike every other fixed IPD headset.

    • andy cooper

      Lol typical Meta garbage.

    • ViRGiN

      slap valve sticker on it, remove slam tracking, remove hand tracking, remove any standalone capabilities, and you have valve deckard for the same price.

    • ViRGiN

      also fun fact, even if every single feature doubled the value, twice the resolution, twice the refresh rate, twice the fov and so on, you would still be playing either beat saber/rec room or flight/race simulator. and never, ever checking out any other features ever. closed in 4 walls.

      • Sky Castle

        twice the resolution and fov would make that $1,500 price super cheap.

        • ViRGiN

          no, it wouldn’t. it would make a headset incapable of really driving that resolution either in standalone or even driven by pcvr.
          only to be brushed off with a cool-story-bros smug “higher resolution still has benefits of smaller pixel grid” or a variant of such coming from people who have zero freaking idea what they are really talking about other than repeating hype words.

          • lol Not untrue!

          • Enke

            It is you who have zero freaking idea, those who talk about smaller pixel grid understand that size of pixel grid determined readability of text on screen.
            Higher resolution, higher pixel density mean text on virtual monitor is sharp, readable, not pixelated.
            Higher FOV mean you look at several virtual monitor with a glance not by moving your head.
            Desktop screen rendering is 2D so PCVR with weak GPU can render desktop screen just fine.
            Lower resolution when gaming, native high resolution when desktop (watch video, edit video/photo or any productivity).

          • ViRGiN

            So, that’s why noone has ever done it? LOL

    • Max-Dmg

      But its a better colour.

  • hells86

    price is no bueno

  • dk

    is that the panel res or the render res

    • Ben Lang

      Panel res

  • VR5

    1800€ and still no official release in Germany. I really shouldn’t even consider buying this at that price… but I probably will. Not up on amazon dot fr(ance) yet or I might have already preordered.

    • Isn’t anything Meta illegal in Germany …?

      • ViRGiN

        It’s not that it’s illegal. They decided not to adhere to whatever demands german goverment presented to them. And nobody is really able to name the exact laws they have to adhere to, other than generic tiktok driven ‘my privacy and data’.

        • Lucidfeuer

          No, we simply are more civilized and regulated in Europe. Germany is a bit too crazy with their restrictions but maybe that’s because they know better from history.

          • ViRGiN

            > they know better from history
            lol. looking at the past half year, they forgot about their ancestors, you know, the mythical naz1s, not germans.

      • VR5

        No, we still have FB, IG, WhatsApp and German support for Oculus devices, even though they aren’t sold anymore. But the investigation about forcing users to use a unified account for different services is still ongoing. The outcome is yet unknown but Meta seemingly wants to avoid penalties in case the investigation results in a guilty verdict.

  • kontis

    Apple has even more abusive anti-privacy plans than Meta, so better stay away form that thing.

    It’s no longer the consumer-focused company it was.

    • Privacy, schmivacy ….
      If you still have “a reasonable expectation of privacy”
      in today’s online tech world, then I have a bridge to sell ya. lol

  • kontis

    With that primitive limited android-based OS it will still not offer even 10% of capabilities of a laptop and be 100x less convenient than a smartphone (friction!), so the user value / $ ratio is probably horrible, unfortunately.

    • Michael S

      I think the use case is casting your computer into the VR world, you do get a huge screen inside VR and can collaborate with people etc. The primitive android OS features inside the VR world are just a bonus.

      • KRAKEN

        If you use a PC than you can use HP Reverbg2 with better resolution, lower price and do the same, or even the normal Quest 2 with USB cable

        • ViRGiN

          Or you can get a 4k monitor, supersample windows resolution, and forget whatever fake high end headset you can name.

          Why does it sound like most people hear ‘productivity in vr’ as someone working in amazon customer service? There are high-end/creative jobs that will really make use of it beneficially. You aren’t going to write spreadsheets in excel primarirly, just like you never did with PocketPCs in early 2000s.

  • andy cooper

    I don’t get it. Wireless means garbage bandwidth. You already lose so much detail and effects with the current model. This one seems to copy this bad design.

    • 15 minutes or more

      5ghz wifi supports more than a gigabit of bandwidth

      • Trex laser

        valve index uses about 16gbps on displayport

        1gbps is absolute garbage.

        • ViRGiN

          valve index was abandoned in 2019

          • Trex laser

            it’s about the bandwidth of 5g not being enough not the headset.

          • ViRGiN

            it’s more than enough.
            what’s not enough is the games quality to keep people connected.
            you could have the raw-est cabled signal in the world, it’s not going to bring people in.
            quit being elitists and selfish about your own desires.

        • 15 minutes or more

          quest pro 2 uses 750 – 1000 gbps on air link

          • Trex laser

            mbps which is about 20 times slower than a simple displayport cable

    • Michael S

      plenty of bandwidth on 5GHz, get a dual band router and have two WIFI access points. I have everything sit on 2.4GHz and the Quest on 5GHz for best performance.

    • ViRGiN

      Whining about existing wireless means you’re an entitled prick playing extremely low end games tethered. Problem with VR is the problem with software, never the hardware.

    • Lucidfeuer

      Choice between wire and wireless would have been nice.

  • JakeDunnegan

    WHEW! Them’s is FIGHTIN’ words.

    Or, another way to put it – too rich for my blood!

  • mike

    Fantastic having new lenses but whatever happened to higher resolution displays being the way to go for better visuals. Shouldn’t we have 8k displays in the vr headset by now. We’re almost into 2023. Moving away from the deep blacks oled too due to SDE. Will we ever see those deep blacks ever again. Hate those grey lcd’s.. Don’t know about anyone else but I’d rather see big immersive improvements over face/eye tracking, avatars and productivity

  • Ad

    I’m amazed by by how little this is worth and how much it costs.

  • Fundamentalist Daleks

    Layoffs for their AR/VR divisions obviously coming in 2023

  • KRAKEN

    What a waste of money, PSVR2 beats it hands down.
    Low resolution LCD, vs RGB OLED
    Horrible mobile soc VR with blury Vaseline covered graphics, vs sharp graphics.
    No eye tracking and real fovated rendering [which mobile soc needs more than PS5]

    Its made good for some specific work, not for gaming for sure. A step back and looks like Dinosaur vs PSVR2

    • ViRGiN

      Oh hey look, this device that was teased for months as non gaming device is not focused on gaming!

    • Cless

      At least it will have backlit LED array with quantum dots… which will make it be on the top of the LCD ladder, which isn’t saying much but… hey, its something, it could be worse, it could be the Rift S

  • Cless

    I’m a bit confused… This headset would have made sense coming out simultaneously to the Quest 2. Right now… Who wants such a headset…? They say it’s their high end entry but, LCDs at those resolutions in 2022 don’t feel very premium to me…

    • ViRGiN

      What? I already pre ordered mine, and the 50 euro full light blocker.
      Unless you exclusively used Q2 with PCVR, you don’t really know much about resolution. We’ll see what’s the native standalone resolution factor for actual rendering once it’s out and backward compatibility tested. Noone has used Quest Pro for long yet.

      Nonetheless, you’re coming off a bit entitled. It’s been known for nearly a year that this is not Quest 2 replacement or a succersor. That’s like being disappointed with some enterprise grade Varjo headset not shipping with controllers.

      At $1000 3-year old tethered index set with external base stations in october 2022, Quest Pro at $1500 shipping in 14 days is a freaking robbery. It’s 1800 euro in Europe, when shitdex is still 1079, so that’s bigger discrepancy, but for those with money to spend, i dont see an issue when pimax fanatics are buying old stock with a promise of full price deduction lol.

      • Cless

        Its cool you did! I’m sure it will be a cool experience to have, its just not something I would want or like. You probably know better than most around here how much I value headsets with OLED/uLED displays.

        Like I’ve told you before too, I’m a dev, so I’ve had the privilege to test quite a lot of headsets, specially have them side by side, which sometimes, to be honest, is a necessity to make fair comparisons, many headsets would just feel like they are similar if I would go off by memory alone, and once you do the side by side is when suddenly you think “oh, fuck, so this is X characteristic that makes//breaks it!”.
        On top of that, I’ve had a couple I wasn’t even allowed to talk about, so its not by lack of experience of testing headsets.

        And I mean, its just that I feel developers for Q2 would have absolutely loved having this headset instead of the overpriced “Q2 enterprise” (which is around $800 if I remember properly).
        My issue mostly is that really good headsets are coming out soon that will leave this headset looking way overpriced for what it is, something similar to what happens to the Index.

        What I’m sure is that this headset probably has the highest precision tracking in the market though, so that’s something to look forward to! Hopefully they can find a way to get fullbody motion in there as well, which would be its only limitation into its tracking tech atm.

        Yeah, the index like I’ve said previously is ridiculously expensive. If you bought it back when it came out, it was pricy, but worth it, now not anymore unless you find a good 2nd hand deal. And Pimax… well, I guess they have their own public, I couldn’t care less about FOV atm if I’m being honest.

        For me the 2 most important things in a VR headset are Contrast and visual clarity, everything else can go to hell pretty much lol

  • ViRGiN

    the same people that you’ve heard from also shilled for hp reverb g1, everything pimax and so on.
    get that mrtv out of your head.

    • Lucidfeuer

      But you’re shilling for the worst company that is Meta. I think all of them fall short, but have a way better offering

      • ViRGiN

        Shilling in what way? You’re incapable of proving anything.
        There is being a happy customer, and there is straight out shilling like MRTV does. Guy incapable of playing any sort of game, telling you how great and excellent tracking is on HP G2.

  • Sky Castle

    For $500 more you can get the varjo aero with 2,880 x 2,720 (7.8MP) resolution

    • ViRGiN

      and for $1500 less you can get 4k monitor and get 4x more work done.

    • Lucidfeuer

      Way more interesting for enterprises.

  • GuroTeeJa

    if there are no trade-in for OQ-2 with 256g. case closed.
    I will keep OQ-2 and love it.

  • ViRGiN

    LOL i can’t wait to see how it turns out. If they are to respect full price deduction for whatever wanna-be headset they clarified for, then i expect the price to be overinflated by the highest amount they said they will deduct, meaning no discount at all. Imagine that 3500 headset.

    • Cless

      Wait, what happened?

      • ViRGiN

        i think at beginning of this year, they enticed customers looking for the next-gen headset to already commit to pimax brand and buy whatever headset suits you. 5k, 8k, you name it. if it’s pimax headset and you have receipt for it, you will get 100% off of that price from their next-gen headset. a headset that nothing is really known for. they always mix everything up with everything mixed, it’s either the pimax 12k or pimax crystal. Are you living under the rock or in a pineapple under the sea?

        check out the video called ‘pimax frontier’ from october 25 2021. if you focus on specs, it puts quest pro to shame technology wise. pimax patented anti-distortion algorith; naturalness in display; 2nd generation CLPL; QLED and mini-led technology; 200hz; DFR; eye tracking; body tracking; bionic lens system.

        dude, nothing but good times.

        • Cless

          Oh shit, I totally forgot about this.
          I don’t know, if you like tweaking and fixing stuff Pimax can be worth it, its not for me though, specially since I’m not that into the FOV thing they mostly are based in.

          Will you be getting one if reviews are good?

          • ViRGiN

            pimax?
            no, i’m not getting pimax. they never invented anything and never kept to their promises, obviously. they aren’t advancing vr, they are trying to make something like making the fastest car in the world, by taking number one car and glueing two of them together. pimax is a monster sized headset because instead of innovating, to gain speed they just put bigger horses there.
            it has it’s place, but that is essentially 100% limited to the hardcore niche of simmers, where brute-force approach to a headset can pay off. but it never was and never will be a giant inventor like many of its fanatical users claim.
            it will get good reviews from the good kind of people.

          • Cless

            I see! Well, as long as there are more headsets out there, the healthier the competition, so at least we got that going on!

          • ViRGiN

            Oh come on, don’t jump into this loop please.
            pimax has captured 0.25% of the market according to steam hardware survey. and everyone uses steam primarirly on pcvr right?
            that’s like what, 5-7000 people? lol
            if pimax did not exist, they would contribute more to vr as a whole by becoming quest 2 users and recommending it to their friends or even buying it for their families. maybe they would not be so grumpy nowadays.

            the most expensive pimax right now is 1470 euro. the 8kx dmas. needs external tracking from steamvr, so you can add pimax kit for 600, or the valve kit for 679. so that’s already way above quest pro price. and you still need to replace every part in your pc to get that solid 30 fps vr experience lol.

            +160 for hand tracking module
            looks like they stopped selling eye tracking module; they never ever really supported it

          • Cless

            … huh? You would prefer there was a company less making the market more unified onto Facebook, of all companies? That’s just fucked up dude.

            How would they contribute in any way more to VR by becoming Quest 2 users? Could you explain that to me?
            The literally 4 quarters and a half Facebook would make would make absolutely no difference whatsoever would it?

          • ViRGiN

            VR needs software and users, not exactly more diverse hardware. The more users there are, the more software will be built. PCVR has struggled for years to gain any real adoption that makes quality development worth the cost/risk.

            I’m not going to get excited about brute-force approach company that exists for 7 years, never really delivered anything beyond wide low quality lens, capturing 0.25% of the market. that’s less than 1%, not 25%.

            looks like the usual market laws don’t really apply to vr.

          • Cless

            I agree, but VR also needs a competitive and alive market. A place where only 1 or 2 headsets are fighting for dominance would be as stale as the console market, where all consoles have been basically cut down PCs since last decade.

            Its fine, as long as they are there doing what they’re doing. If lets say, Meta for the Meta 4 wants to start making higher FOV headsets, instead of starting from 0, they can look at what went wrong on this company, even if small.

            Also, a market where there is many companies trying to get your atention will get better prices, we have seen this. There is NO WAY Facebook would have sold the Q2 at the price it did if there was no competition out there. They would have done exactly what HTC did.

          • ViRGiN

            > A place where only 1 or 2 headsets are fighting for dominance would be as stale as the console market,
            that’s literally all it ever has been. noone has ever competed with meta. ever. it’s just illusion of choice for having multiple products, 95% of which are pure absolute trash. HTC vive was the first by having full good room scale and 6dof controllers out of the box, but oculus has caught up within 7 months, by making golden standard Touch. Yes, Touch is the golden standard, not valve index, not vive wands. Meta could be literally the only company in the world, and they would still push further. They don’t need “competition” to innovate – they are set on this super long journey. Why did they release Quest 2 a year after Quest 1? What other standalone headset came out to force them to make better products?

            I really do not understand how can anyone seriously think that ‘the more the merrier’. Noone has done anything valuable. And i’m talking about potential 95%+ of existing customers and future ones. Those nerds into flight sims or vrchat fanatics does not make a market. HP G2 is just all about resolution and lacking everything else; pimax is all about crappy wide fov and nothing beyond that. Failures. Never forced anyone to make better products.

            You are still dead set on on the idea of Meta charging more money for Quest 2 if they really wanted. It’s like you ignore everything they have ever said. They are trying to build userbase first and foremost. And Quest 2 did exactly that. Meta isn’t the kind of company to make money on hardware. I don’t think even Steam Deck makes profit, at least the base versions; but index surely does. And look, there are more steam deck users in few months than there ever was or will be on pcvr.

          • Cless

            Jesus man, the start of your comment reads like a textbook definition of what to expect a fanboy to argue. For someone that complains so much about valve fanboys you sure give unstoppable praise to Facebook and never criticize their flaws.

            I’m 100% neutral, because I don’t have a care in the world who makes the headset, I just want it to match X specs that I like.

            We can make an easy question here a quick fanboy check. If tomorrow you could receive instead of the Quest Pro, the… uhh… Myspace Pro, which is hardware and software wise a copy paste of the Quest Pro, but just with better specs in each and every point, including software, and for 3/4ths price to boot. Would you buy that instead and drop Meta?

            Because if your answer is anything different than “Yes, of course” All your arguments will lose all credibility by showing massive bias.

            And yeah, of course facebook wouldn’t have been confident enough to throw the ammount of millions they did into subsidizing the Quest 2 if there wasn’t a whole market that came before it.

            Also, again, comparing apples to oranges. Steam Deck is a low cost portable PC, why the hell are you putting it into the conversation? It doesn’t have ANYTHING to do with VR. The only argument I could make that is tangentially related is, that probably there wouldn’t be a Steam Deck if there hadn’t been other portable PCs just like it before.

          • Lucidfeuer

            You say he’s fanboy, who tells you he’s not a paid account to shill. That or an absolute degenerate nobody has the patience for anymore.

          • Cless

            Nah, they have their moments, but I don’t think there is nothing sketchy like that going on. Sometimes they make good points, and sometimes they lose their mind a bit it seems…?

            Having tried most headsets out there, the quest for me are like… definitely the most boring ones, there is nothing really remarkable about them besides “they come without cables and don’t need a PC ready!”.

            Literally any other headset is more interesting. Sure its great for the average VR consumer because its cheap and its plug in and just works… But feels weird in an enthusiast VR site like this one finding someone so fixated in such an… painfully average VR headset.

          • ViRGiN

            > Literally any other headset is more interesting.
            after years of going through different headsets, and testing pretty much all of them out there, there is nothing really to improve other than comfort to improve the experience _today_. It’s always the software that gets really boring. Including PCVR, i can never feel like i am getting any moneys worth out of them. 8k per eye with 150 fov today would not make my VR experience any better. There are not enough games out there.

          • Cless

            Wait, but… There is plenty to improve, literally al those things you mentioned need to be improved in all headsets.

            You bought the pro for productivity right? Like, it’s not a gaming headset, it would be like buying a nvidia quadro to play games… Right…?

          • ViRGiN

            Pro for the novelty of comfort and productivity, and the Meta software support/collaboration with Microsoft.
            It’s a no risk purchase for me. I have 30 days to try it out and decide if i want to keep it or return it.
            Many already decided it’s fate without ever holding it in hand.

            I don’t see true issue with battery life when dock is a thing. I’m not going to use it (primarirly) as “conference” tool. It seems like it will be good for VR development through PC. Make some changes to the level, put on the headset, test stuff, put it back and go back to working. I don’t need to have XX hours long battery life.

            It’s funny how super-heavy index is overall praised among it’s users for being “all day comfort” headset, when slightly lighter Pro is “not good for working” lol.

          • ViRGiN

            > We can make an easy question here a quick fanboy check. If tomorrow you could receive instead of the Quest Pro, the… uhh… Myspace Pro, which is hardware and software wise a copy paste of the Quest Pro, but just with better specs in each and every point, including software, and for 3/4ths price to boot. Would you buy that instead and drop Meta?
            if it’s not a kickstarter campaign, but purchase from online webstore with support for paypal/credit card, yeah sure. Not instead, but together with Pro. Why anyone on earth who is willing to buy a latest tech product from company that supported everything VR seriously for the past several years? My experience with headset replacement (CV1) and controllers (Q1) was nothing but positive and effortless.

            I wouldn’t wait for reviews, cause why would i? Because it’s new company, i would use payment method that protects me. If it does not arrive tomorrow, i’ll just contact my bank. If it does come – well, i’ll give it a test. And if i felt scammed, with under-delivered features, i would send it back. Simple as that. I don’t know what sort of answer did you expect. That I’m loyal to Meta? I don’t care who makes what, but time and time again, Meta is the only company who proved themselves and are commited to it. I’ve stated multiple times that I am interested in PSVR2 once i see relevant games for me, even though i will hate the wire. I’m also curious about what Apple has to offer.

            You’re a joke. There was no real market before Quest 2. Quoting Mark or Boz, Q2 made it into the mainstream. And while it’s not mainstream in a smartphone way, it’s the biggest VR thing VR has ever seen.

            Steam Deck was relevant to add, cause they made it to profit from even more steam sales. PCVR does not bring any real money for valve. There is no motivation to do anything with it, other than hosting files for VR games.

            There is nothing fanboyish about “hating” on everything non-meta. I’m not sure what kind of things do you expect me to criticize.

            I bet you think the only reason Oculus even added Touch controllers to CV1 was because of “competition” from HTC Vive?
            Touch was teased already in 2015… nobody has put any pressure ever to add anything to Meta headset. They are doing what they think is right. Never as a response to other products.

          • ViRGiN

            oh and they launched new store front recently.

            the more storefronts out there, the healthier the competition and prices of software will go down?
            lol

          • Cless

            And yes, in fact that’s how it usually goes. VR is still a nieche market, and most likely, it will be split in about 3, Consoles, Mobile and PCVR, with a couple headsets maybe touching a couple markets at the same time.

  • ViRGiN

    No favorites? No dislikes?
    I mean, i watch it sometimes at 1.5x speed for that cringe effect, but come on. He has his favorites as always, and he has his likes as always. Sometimes they get mixed up, and his favorite becomes the disliked, for butthurt reasons and online drama about not prising stuff enough. Remember pimax? His shilling for pimax from years ago claiming everything else is ‘toilet paper roll fov’ and there is ‘no going back’? That guy has never stood up to his beliefs.
    And LMAO, wasn’t even invited to meta to try out quest pro like many much smaller channels did.

    That guy has had a hate boner for anything meta, he even blamed mobile quest for pcvr decline. But his wife needs to eat too and buy new fashion bags; so the obvious business wise decision was to do cover quest stuff and do recommend quest headset. You aren’t going to grow ever by focusing on anything PCVR.

    His patreon is still a joke lol. He isn’t growing as a channel.

  • Cless

    No man, you are getting it wrong, you should like Pimax and their customers!
    They suffer in those headsets so that the rest of us, will get eventually better more refined FOV headset technology lol

  • Till Eulenspiegel

    You don’t get what I am saying:

    iPhone 14 = $800
    iPhone 14 Pro = $1000

    That’s 25% increase for the price of the Pro model.

    Quest 2 = $300 (what I paid for months ago)
    Quest Pro = $1500

    That’s 500% increase for the Pro model.

    • Mr.Philgood

      If you bought a Quest for business 2 years ago it was $1000

    • MosBen

      It feels like you’re suggesting that there’s a universal meaning or usage for the term “pro”, or that the iPhone 14 Pro is actually an enterprise device like the Quest Pro.

      • Till Eulenspiegel

        Exactly, Pro is a marketing term. You think only ‘Pros’ will buy the Quest Pro?

        • MosBen

          Of course not, but the price and features of the product are targeted primarily towards professionals, rather than average consumers. So it’s kind of silly for people to complain that this product is expensive because the primary target for its sales are people for whom this is a normal and expected price range. No model of iPhone is primarily intended for professionals. They’re all consumer devices, so comparing prices between models of iPhones and models of VR HMDs doesn’t really give us any additional information or insight.

          • Till Eulenspiegel

            Tell it to the OP.

    • Karsus

      It’s more the difference of an iPhone 12 and an iPhone 14. A two year old iPhone is worth a lot less than the latest and greatest.

      • Till Eulenspiegel

        iPhone 12 and 14 use different chip.

        Quest 2 and Pro use the same chip, John Carmack said the XR2+ is the same chip with better heatsink.

        • Karsus

          You could also mention that the iPhone had the same camera for years, and that except for the top model, the new iPhone has last year’s processor.

          In all important ways, the Quest Pro is an outright superior product. The lenses are better. Tracking is better. Cameras are better. Controllers are better. AI is better. Comfort is better. And it enables mixed reality experiences as well as human interaction experiences that were plain not possible before.

          The visual quality is supposedly also a lot better. Although I’m not sure why given the similar resolution.

          And the heatsink makes for 50% better performance (in exchange for worse battery life…)

          Overall though, it’s just an entirely different product. It would be a complete game changer if not for its higher price tag.

          • Till Eulenspiegel

            The iPhone 14 Pro uses the new A16 chip, only the cheaper iPhone 14 uses last year’s A15. What do you mean same camera? From 1 lens to 2 then 3 and even LiDAR – most people bought the new phones for the improved camera.

          • Karsus

            They upgraded the main camera this year. But for the last several years they were sticking to the same lens and just improving software on it.

          • Till Eulenspiegel

            Are you an Apple engineer? You know it’s the same lens? They integrated LiDAR and use the best Sony’s image sensor – the camera is the thing Apple is constantly improving because all those so called ‘influencer’ likes using iPhone for their Instagram and shit.

          • Karsus

            They’ve been using a 12 Megapixel sensor for years where Samsung was continuously upgrading their hardware. It’s only now, after many years, that the iPhone 14 Pro Max has a 48 Megapixel camera.

            Whereas the Samsung S22 Ultra has a 108 Megapixel main lens.

            The differentiation, is in how Apple processes the image. And Apple’s usually look quite nice, despite the limited hardware. Also, a smaller image can be processed faster, which is a good thing in itself.

          • Daniel Beckman

            No. This is an inaccurate statement. The QUALCOMM snapdragon chip is inferior to even the A14 chipset in all ways that matter. It does have more cores but ask intel how that’s been working out. It’s little processor in it’s Big.little architecture is the Cortex-A55 which is a 2-wide decode in-order superscalar pipeline which is to say, slow. This is not third gen XR. It’s 2.1 Gen.

  • Cpt. Haddock

    What type of external lenses are used? Tunable Lens, TLens? Are they providing Autofocus and constant/continuous autofocus?

  • poltevo

    Is the video resolution support and codex support the same as Q2?

    Also, I wonder if it will also support 120hz in a future update.

  • Totius

    I am on the fence.. not sure if I will buy it.
    -I was expecting a dedicated stylus, instead the solution they proposed seems too imprecise and useful only for scratching huge words.
    -Battery life is very low, so you will need being tethered most of the time for long working sessions. Then the question: why they stopped supporting Rift and Rift s? Crazy
    -Despite the OS is Androidish, they claim they will support Windows 11 through cloud.. How much stable will this be? They were very explicit about the fact that this device should substitute a PC (what would make sense to justify the price). If you could really rely on Windows OS, with a bluetooth keyboard and mouse, I can see Quest Pro bypassing a PC, but I want to see this tested properly, before pulling the trigger.
    -It seems to me that most of the huge increase in price is justified in order to make facial expressions to work. I definitely believe that this will be important eventually, but the cost/benefit seems to me not very mature yet. It is fundamental to arrive to the mass (as Carmak pointed out (again) yesterday).
    -I believe that if you could make a game enthusiast a bit happy, some of them might have decided to jump into Quest Pro, but:
    –why xbox cloud is not making VR games available? This would have made everybody happy, maybe including in the device something to optimize the internet connection (like stadia tried). I know they said that this is the beginning of bla bla, so we might expect this in the future… but how cool would have been to bring this in beta to quest pro?
    — at this price, for people exclusively interested in gaming (not my case), I recommend to look at Nvdia series 4000, or equivalent, and look to the great new achievements in modding AAA flat screen games to VR. This is getting really exciting! You just need a very powerful video card.
    –final question that I have not seen discussed anywhere: what happened to GTA San Andreas VR?

  • ArchAngelPyriel

    FOV is still to shit FFS.

  • Max-Dmg

    I see they improved the battery life lol :P

  • Andross

    Since we are speak of fake “non for gaming device” statement, this product had to be immediately presented with a easy removable battery feature and a second dock for other batteries, like for example the barcode guns we use.

    Despite all our different needs i don’t see a single useful example of business usage of a wireless Device with that battery life, except a cool useless presentation for some customers.

    please make me an example, because otherwise:
    (1) for our assistance job we use hololens, obviusly real AR is the best.
    (2) virtual tour using drones for maintenance is perfectly done with a wired solution, if it’s required for a job for security/risk and not just for flexing, 1-2 hrs is clearly not enough. and don’t require controllers that are clearly made to gaming.

    (2.1) if it’s a fast job that require 1 hour, usually it’s a job that require to travel to more than one customer, so i’t necessary a comfortable travel dock to charge all devices otherwise if it has to be used in office, still a wired solution is the best investment.

    please let me know if you know a REAL useful case, I’m not sarcastic, i want to know nd maybe i can change my mind about it. sorry for my bad english.

  • Sky Castle

    Far too expensive, especially if you already have a quest 2. People who reviewed it said image looked the same or only marginally better. I’ll be saving that money for a PSVR2 with change to spare.

  • Lucidfeuer

    Hopefully I can get one from my friend at Meta, but the FOV would be a deal break if I had to consider it. This is at best yet an other experimental toy for the limited pass-through RGB, but the terrible ergonomics and battery makes it moot. However if they managed to make a portable Quest 3 with pancakes and optimized battery, that’d be killer for consumers.

    • ViRGiN

      lol, are you a race/flight sim fanatic?
      who’s paying you to shit on meta?

      • Lucidfeuer

        Well done. I’m also noting you’re referencing sim games which shows you know nothing and are indeed a latecomer shill.

        • ViRGiN

          ok, so you’re getting paid by third party to shit on meta.

  • Abion47

    I was prepared for it to be expensive. Maybe not quite that expensive, perhaps, but given the technological improvements, that price tag isn’t a total deal breaker for me. I’m happy to pay the premium to ride the cutting edge and help support further development in VR technology.

    What is a deal breaker is the battery life. 90-120 minutes on a single charge? And it takes at least that long to recharge it? What gives, Meta? I know it’s geared toward enterprise and productivity rather than gamers, but are you expecting people to only use it sitting down and plugged in or something? All of the business people I know who would be even remotely interested in something like this spend more than two hours in meetings every single day. And creative production? Can you imagine a 3D modeler only being able to work for 4-6 hours a day in 2 hour sessions, then having to wait 2 more hours between each session?

    That alone is reason enough to give this headset a pass, and that is a huge letdown. The Quest 2 Pro needs at minimum another hour of battery life, preferably two more. If all else fails, throw a belt-mounted battery pack into the box. They had that “technology” figured out with the wireless kits that came out way back for the original Rift.

    For $1500, surely they can do better than this. Combined with all the ways that it just looks like a slight linear upgrade to the Quest 2 (on paper, anyway), that’s too much money to drop on a headset with such a heavy skew toward compromise.

  • Karsus

    My main point of disappointment here is the resolution. All the rest is fine. Like $1500 is a bit exaggerated, but in the end, it’s meant to be a laptop replacement.

    But… With that resolution and FoV, doing regular office work isn’t entirely pleasant.

    Even if they didn’t upgrade the resolution on the software side much, they really needed to upgrade the resolution in front of our eyes so that text doesn’t look fuzzy.

    • DarkCSS

      Resolution alone doesn’t say much. I’d really like to see a through the lens video. Pico 4 image looks very crispy and vivid.

      • Karsus

        Yeah, the pancake lenses themselves seem to somewhat improve video quality. On the resolution side, the Pico 4 has a somewhat higher resolution than even the Quest Pro (as far as specs say)

  • Bernard Cozier

    15 fucking hundred and they can’t include the full light blocker accessory!

  • David Mills

    What a total disappointment! The resolution is no better than the Quest 2. And with a mere 1-to-2 hour battery life, how are “Pro” users supposed to work all day with this stupid headset on? If VR is to be successful, it needs to be marketed as a porn-enhancing device.

  • Diana

    Omg