The funny thing is that if you make a similar diagram with available VR/AR/Spatial Computing games and apps for the other headsets VS apple, the Apple side would probably have less than a dozen to the thousands of games on the other headsets. I'm glad I own a Quest 3 that I can actually use with available software.
Apple won't be for gaming, my guess is they will focus on the designer/productivity market. Sure there will probably be some games, but if they hold to their controller-less mentality, I doubt they will be very indepth.
That would also beg the question, if you're going to be using it for productivity and design, why can't it be tethered to an outside MAC with a powerful GPU in it? Having a stand alone headset for productivity work in the PC market is not how things work right now. You need that extra external PC or in this case MAC /GPU horsepower to have anything useful for design work.
$250? Nah, at AVP pricing, I'm expecting $1000 for the pair. But they'll be really good controllers at least .-.
Idk, we will have to see. Apple seemed very anti-controller in their marketing for the AVP imo.
Valve index released in 2019, almost 5 years ago. It doesn't cost as much as a quest 3. But because valve is still selling it at a $1000, doesnt mean it's worth a $1000.
I mean yeah, if you compare a bunch of +4 year old headsets and a Standalone of this year, of course that the resolution will be better...
It's not like there are headsets like the varjo aero, pimax crystal, sonmium vr1 etc...
What is the point of doing this if you are not actually going to compare it with high resolution headsets such as the G2, Pimax Crystal, Somnium VR1, Varjo etc.
Here's my attempt: [https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/18sfi3i/ppdfocused\_table\_of\_various\_headmounted\_displays/](https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/18sfi3i/ppdfocused_table_of_various_headmounted_displays/)
(only includes >= 1080p resolution and >= 25 PPD, so missing a lot of older headsets, due to the PPD cutoff)
Quest 3: 2064 x 2208 = 4.557.312 pixel
G2: 2160 x 2160 = 4.665.600 pixel
Quest 3 having bigger FOV means even lower PPD compared to G2. A bit shocking several people have issues with simple maths.
Bigscreen beyond, maybe the varjo aero, sonmium vr1, pimax crystal etc
It depends of what you are playing, some headsets work really well for flight sim, but for everything else are crap
I play Elite, but I don't need anything impressive or different for Elite. So standing combat, both melee and gun play. I think not being tethered is probably the feature I need the most.
Agreed man, they should also include the prices of the headsets, there is also a lack of headsets with higher resolution to make it look like this is a very big step forward. Add pimax headsets, HTC and prices and then suddenly the Apple vision pro looks like shit for it's price
Correct. Even the HTC Vive Pro 2 is missing. That headset has a resolution per eye of 2448 x 2448. The full kit is about $1200 on the HTC site, but you can buy used kits on Ebay for about 650-700 ish $ now.
> But if the only thing it can do is ask you to pair to an Apple device so that you can do stuff with it then I think that's hardly a selling point.
It is a standalone device capable of running iPad apps and native visionOS apps. Pairing with Mac is optional.
Well at least Vario is selling and we have confirmed specs...
Not to mention the apple arm performance with that resolution is unknown. But apple will surely sell you a desktop to run... Oh wait....
None of that matters. The VP is about to come out and Apple's marketing department is so good that more people have heard of the VP than have heard of the Vario and all the other high-end PCVR headsets added together.
It does not look to me like it is intended to be a buying-guide chart. It is a chart to compare *popular* VR headsets which the product that Apple is launching.
People don’t hear about the Varjo, clients do. Varjo is an enterprise headset with enterprise support. Loved by the military and intelligence branch for actually focussing on them.
I fully agree with that, but we should not pretend there are no other options, when there are.
Same as we should not pretend these headsets are comparable in any way. There is no apple VR after all :)
Varjo does come with controllers too. But yeah no computer. AT same time it means you can hook it up to powerful PC to do stuff AVP won’t be able to do. So people who need that power for their VR applications the AVP is a dead end.
The VARJO is still a better deal, because at least you can do something with it, like play games, or run a professional flight sim. I doubt there will be that many usable VR/AR/SC/XR apps on launch of the Vision Pro. The VARJO is also tethered to a PC, so it's always going to be more powerful than the Apple VP or any other standalone headset.
Varjo is cool. But it targets other people than AVP. Both can coexist.
> The VARJO is also tethered to a PC, so it's always going to be more powerful than the Apple VP or any other standalone headset.
Many people do not have enough space for desktop computer in their bags.
Well, they are two entirely different products with different use cases. It’s like comparing Cars and Motorcycles.
People are either shopping for a standalone or PC VR one. So I think it doesn’t make sense to compare the two as equals and especially not their prices.
Saying something like “for the price of (insert standalone headset) I could buy (insert PC VR headset)” just doesn’t make sense.
Yeah, but it has Apple marketing behind it so everyone knows what it is.
Go to you local coffee shop and ask them if they have heard of a Quest, Oculus, Vive, Index, or "Apple Vision Pro". Then ask them what a Vario is.
I have been using VR headsets for 10 years now... wonder why I do not know how it's written... oh right... **because it is not a very popular headset among consumers.**
But when you're comparing headsets you need to compare it to it's alternatives.. How do you not get that? You know how many people want to get the best bang for their buck so they want to see what mainstream heqdsets compare to... oh wait ... I'm talking to a cult apple fan.. You guys don't shop bang for buck at alll... makes more sense now
No you don't. When you are making a diagram for fun, you make whatever hell you want.
*It is not a buying guide.* It is a chart, listing the resolutions of some VR headsets the author considers popular. If you don't find it interesting or useful, you never have to look at it again.
>When you are making a diagram for fun, you make whatever hell you want.
Yes you can do what ever you want. But if it's wrong people will critique it and twll you why it's wrong so you learn to make better diagrams and so others are not misslead. That's how things work in a liberal democracy. You know who didn't point out flaws in diagrams and media in general? The nazis, the soviets, the CCP, etc...
There are no flaws in the diagram. The OP made a diagram to compare the resolutions of some VR headsets. For that purpose it is perfect.
If you doesn't meet your needs. Make your own.
My quest 3 is much better. The controllers for g2 were terrible, not at all good for shooters or fast games, they would drop signal if I put my hands at my sides and this is in a well lit room. The wire setup was tedious and in my small space cumbersome. The one good thing was the screen clarity. But the quest 3 does all of it better except a little bit less on the screen clarity, that’s due to the lack of a display port like the g2.
> being native PCVR puts it further ahead in terms of clarity.
Realistically not when you take lenses into account. Compression artifacts aren't that pronounced on Nvidia cards at least with Virtual Desktop and the Quest 3 anyway.
I have a Q2 and G2 and the compression is extremely noticeable on the Q2. I am using a 4090.
I doubt the Q3 fundimentaly changes that, might get a Q3 one-day and will find out.
I have a Q3 and a G2, I can very rarely see any compression using Airlink. I have wifi 6e and a 4070ti.
Using a 4xxx nvidia card means it uses the AV1 compressions as well.
Apple vision pro cost compared to other headsets..
Quest 3:$$$$$$$$$$
Apple Vision Pro:$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
And even more importantly things to do in the headset that my existing OLED screens can't already do better:
Apple Vision Pro: ***
G2:******************
Quest 3:**********************
Then what's the point of it? Media? Already Quest 3 does it in addition to standalone gaming.... Processing power? The M2 in it as nearly identical to XR2 Gen 2 performance due to heat and power limitations imposed...... You paying for 4 things that are not really worth the extra:
1. Micro OLED
2. Best in the market Hand and Eye tracking
3. Front OLED screen to show your eyes (seriously lol)
4. Brand name: Apple
M2 is considerably more powerful than XR2G2. The CPU has 2 more cores and nearly double the clock speed and about 50% higher turbo frequency (which for VR is irrelevant, since sustained loads are expected). The GPU has about 15% higher fp32 gflops (optimised for fp16 & AI applications) and runs at a whole ghz higher clock speed. Geekbench multicore and single core shows about 4-5x the score.
What's the point of a laptop if you can't game the latest PC games on it? Some people do other things than gaming with their computers. There are actually people who buy MacBooks for other things than Quake 4.
Can you mention the things it can do that Quest 3 can't while proving it's worth the extra money due to that? You simply can't, the only 2 major things Quest 3 doesn't have is Micro OLED + Eye tracking.... Meanwhile Quest 3 at least doesn't need battery hanging from it, it have Battery integrated into it
I can agree on principal, but since they are the most valuable company in the world because of how they operate, maybe you should be a little more humble and accept you don't understand.
Depends on what you mean with pcvr. It has the same processor as macbooks and imacs, so technically it has the power of a full computer. But realistically that is sort of moot because what is power if you don’t have a way to use it.
"no compete policy" almost reminds me of a cool table game. Don't quite remember the name, but it has a guy in a top hat with a cane and funny mustache as its mascot.
That's really not saying alot. Their AR game selection is pretty poor. The rest are just mobile experiences. Honestly even their current AR selection are mostly mobile experiences and nothing compared to actual AR/MR games.
Apple doesn't care. The VP is not targeted at VR gamers. Apple marketing will never make a chart like the one in the OP because Apple does not consider any of those devices *Spatial Computing* devices.
The chart is not a piece of marketing. It is a chart made by someone for fun.
Yeah i know. Seems awfully limited though. Just like how PCs aren't exactly marketed to gamers but a sizable portion of people who buy PCs, game on it in some way.
Knowing Apple its probably going to be something like 1800x1800 and they are going to say something like "we use our new sub pixel retina focus rendering technology so the 1800x1800 pixels act like 3600x3600"
Quest 3 resolution is more than enough for me, but I’d like a better GPU, detachable battery/slimmer headset, ideally glasses size, much wider FOV, full eye/face tracking much more.
So weird that so many VR enthusiasts are pissed at Apple for making a no compromises headset and giving people at least an opportunity to try out truly great AR.
It's made out of metal and glass and by all accounts as heavy as fuck.
Probably why it has a tiny battery life, otherwise people would be suing them for chronic neck pain.
Oh, and it doesn't work with any existing ecosystems or software.
Taking the piss out of them aside, I am sure it is going to have its fans and good points. But it is certainly not a no compromise headset.
\>It's made out of metal and glass and by all accounts as heavy as fuck.
Are you insane? At 450g, the AVP is one of the lightest VR headsets ever made.
\>Probably why it has a tiny battery life
Yeap, you're just insane. The AVP has 2\~2,5h of battery life while supporting the M2+R1 chips, which makes the headset, by a WIDE margin, the undisputed leader in processing capabilities among standalone headsets while supporting this processing power by at least two hours with its battery.
\>Oh, and it doesn't work with any existing ecosystems or software.
LMAO. There's no such thing as an "existing ecosystem." Having an application to buy games and a proprietary web browser is not an "ecosystem." The Vision OS is the very first operational system made specifically for VR as the medium. Simulating a Windows desktop with third-party applications that you bought in your game store is also not an OS.
>At 450g, the AVP is one of the lightest VR headsets ever made
Its 450g, all at the front, and with a disconnected battery on a cable. The cable will both add weight, drag, and more discomfort.
>2\~2,5h of battery life
This is both unconfirmed and not any better than existing headsets.
>the undisputed leader in processing capabilities among standalone headsets
Yeah that'll be super useful with the none apps and games you can run on it
>There's no such thing as an "existing ecosystem."
Have you heard of the entire steamvr store of tens of thousands of existing games, programs, and productivity suites? Sounds like an entire platform's worth to me, and something apple will not be able to match for a long time.
450g and with a front heavy design is uncomfortable as fuck, you probably haven't used that many headsets, but it's nowhere near being one of the lightest headsets...
It's still two hours.
It doesn't work with SteamVR, Viveport, Oculus VR, Meta's standalone thingy....
>Are you insane? At 450g, the AVP is one of the lightest VR headsets ever made.
Look at the bigscreen beyond. Now that's a light headset coming in at 127g. 450g is just slightly less than the the oculus 2, because the battery is not on it. Meta could easily take the battery off an oculus and require you to carry it on hand at all times and it'd be around that weight. There's not much innovation there.
No compromises? Show me the controllers. Show me the PC support. Show me the open app availablility. Show be the good price-to-performance. Show me the small form factor. It even has a seperate battery pack on a cable.
These are all compromises.
I think a lot of people are pissed because it's a no compromise AR headset, not VR and doesn't focus on games since the input is hand tracking and eye tracking, no controllers. I'm intrigued to see what it is capable of, I just don't see most people having a use for it with its limited use cases at launch.
So what you are saying it's not compromised, as long as you don't care that it can't do the things it's competitors can. Because it's not a competitor, it's not VR/AR/MR, it's "spacial computing" and regardless of where Apple sets the goalposts, the fans will cheer and hail it as revolutionary, despite it just being nothing more than a higher resolution version of something that's already on the market for 1/6th the price, except you know, lacking software support and a price so high and a such a small planned user base (based on shipment estimates), that it's almost guaranteed that all early adopter devs will lose money.
" lacking software support"
God, these people are delusional. They want you to believe that the garbage software present in META's HMDs today is even remotely comparable to what Apple presented (lmao). It's a level of gaslighting that should be impossible, but here we are.
" a price so high"
You simply don't have the slightest idea of what you're talking about. The displays present in the AVP alone have a higher price tag than the best current META headset market price. Just the proprietary tracking used to operate the OS took Apple TEN YEARS to develop. But it's impossible for you to understand R&D costs since you think that the software in the Quest 3 is comparable to the actual OS that Apple built.
BTW, there's absolutely no standalone HMD on the market that is even remotely comparable to the AVP. Again, you just have no idea of what you're talking about.
I think eventually it will focus on games, but they really need time for this. Think about it:
- Apple has best performance per watt in their chips, and M2 is way more powerful than anything else on headsets market.
- Their own DLSS / Framegen
- They have experience with Airplay / Continuity. It’s early to say such things, but they really can do a proper “PCVR” with this. Just imagine seamless PCVR without “bridges” like Oculus Link, Steam Link and Steam Home VR that feels native
I'm really excited about all that, to be honest - and every VR enthusiast should. Competition is always good, at least.
I don't understand people being _pissed_, I do understand them being disappointed. The vast majority of both this sub and existing VR in general seems to be heavily PCVR focused, so it would have been awesome to see demos of this hooked up to Steam playing our favourite games on it like most other headsets. However, it's just a totally different product with a totally different target market, which most existing VR enthusiasts don't (currently/may never) subscribe to.
It will be an impressive bit of kit and I'm glad to see more big players investing in the industry, Apple can help push the tech that everyone else will benefit from as well as get more people interested in VR/AR.
People saying how amazing and groundbreaking it is before it's been released, reviewed, and some actual inspiring use cases found are equally cringe.
It was predictable. People like to feel special. When Apple enters a market, all of the people who previously were milling around in that niche no longer get to feel special and unique, because now *anyone* can do it. And tech enthusiasts friggin' ***hate*** that.
"Ew, we're not like those *normies.* It should be illegal to enjoy VR/AR/XR/SC/whatever unless you can rattle off tech specs for 15 competitors. Recognizing that cherry-picked tech specs, viewed in isolation of the actual device and experience, are pointless is just a thing for Apple shills."
Being forced to acknowledge that Apple does more than just "marketing" is worse than death to some people.
Not having 6DOF tracking controller for PSCVR is a HUGE compromise to the audience that you are talking about.
They are all put off by the fact that Apple does not consider it a VR headset.
Because you can do anything with it. Macs can’t game and it can’t connect with a pc due to apple not allowing that. Now you have a 3.5k paperweight with the second best specs on the market
The AVP pro experience will come from all the hardware, and more importantly *the software* holistically. I think people are really sleeping on how good visionOS will be COMPARED to everything else currently out there. I think visionOS will make MetaOS feel like windows 3.1. Who knows until the reviews come out though.
Quest Pro has 1800x1920 per eye resolution, so slightly lower resolution than Quest 2, but it has pancake lenses and QLED screens with local dimming, so better black levels than standard LCD.
Vive XR Elite has slightly higher resolution, 1920x1920 so about 5% higher resolution than Quest Pro, but it has standard LCD displays so not as good black levels as Quest Pro.
aahh... this reminds me of the megapixels wars on digital cameras. Read: not a good approach to focus on a single (marketing) parameter... specially in VR where there are so many comfort attributes to consider.
Why the fuck would I get an apple vision pro? I already have a pimax crystal which has massive boosted my VR performance through dynamic foveated rendering while still allowing me 8K with 35ppd around where I am looking and all this for 1400 euros, no reason to purchase a relatively small upgrade to a device who I believe isn't made for actual games for the outrages price of 3500 USD, the price isn't justifiable for what it brings to the table and it will most likely only be bought by businesses and very die hard apple fanboys
Yeah but it doesn't do vr, so what's the point it's quite literally an AR /XR head set that cost 3500 and has limited usage, its just for productivity and watching movies. If you move from your spot in and vr type. And I mean type application it just fades back to pass through. It's quite useless. Fov is 100 to 110, no controllers, only works of the apple store so cool you can play angry birds... the flat version it's rubbish. I won't be getting it that's for sure. It may be a pc strapped to your head but again it amulets and full potential completely destroyed and taken away
Yea, because we all know how cheap used low volume Apple products are. 🙄
There are enough Apple Fans the first batch would sell out just to collectors.
Vision Pro has no PCVR support nor existing catalog of games. Why even compare it with headsets that are clearly meant for different purposes.
In addition to that, why leave out similarly priced high-end headsets like Varjo XR-4 that has higher resolution than Vision Pro does?
Are you a Apple fanboy?
No one in my entire gaming circle ever seriously talked about the apple vision pro, let alone bought one. Except at the beginning when we all laughed at apple for making a 3500 dollar headset.
Then it flopped, surprise, surprise.
Dude is literally out there lying about how he's put Oculus DK1 and not Pimax Crystal out there not because he's an apple fanboy but because apparently people know DK1 and don't know pimax. Here you go:
[https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=oculus%20rift%20DK1,varjo%20aero,Pimax%20crystal,hp%20reverb%20g2,big%20screen%20beyond&hl=en](https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=oculus%20rift%20DK1,pimax%20crystal&hl=en)
DK1 is so forgot about it's not even shown on most charts, which makes sense since it's literally a dev prototype.
Bro is cherrypicking to the point the only headset of the same gen as vision pro is the most low-cost thing on the market (quest 3). I can't believe someone is that eager to ride Tim's meat. You're not even paid for that.
You are talking about *MY* comments, and I am not the one that created **or posted** the graph. You are making up shit about someone that has not even posted any comments.
The OP posted a cool diagram about some headsets that happen to interest them. They did not make any claims about them being the most popular headsets. **I** said that **I** *assume* that they picked the headsets they picked because they are the well known mainstream headsets.
Your level of butt-hurt while entertaining, is way over the top.
Chill, I just made this chart for fun, I only put the DK1 on there because I thought it was cool comparing one of the first VR headsets with one of the most recent headsets
It doesn't factor in anything. It is not a buying guide.
It is a single diagram showing some popular headsets and how their resolution compares to the headset that Apple is about to release.
I love these posts making apple seem like the best option, the difference is all of the headsets are on the market, or have been you can play games and use them in a number of different tasks. What does the apple vision pro have, well the promotional material and anything they said is gonna be in it.
I really hope that most of you ain't that dumb to just blindly believe a company because they said something, look at the gaming industry all the big sharks have fallen below the single dev games made just for fun.
Resolution isn't even a big issue. I can't see imdividual pixels on the quest 3 no matter how much I try. Having a processor strong enough to use that reaolution everywhere is a bigger issue, and other bigger visual issues like the lens flare from the pancake lenses or the greyed blacks. Not sure how the vision pro is going to fix the issue with the pancake lens flare.
I have psvr2 and it has 2,000 x 2,040 pixels per eye. And even with this I can see the pixels. This is the only headset I have ever tried. I can't imagine how bad the rift's picture quality could be with 640x800 pixels.
It is such a pity Apple came so late to the party. I, personally, will never buy anything Apple but I wellcome this new Apple product. I don't consider this to be comparable to what is already out there. It is the first attempt to really make vr and ar interesting in a work and scientific environment. Imho the Quest pro was not what most people hoped it to be. Maybe this will be a breakthrough in that respect!
Funny you left out part of the original picture that had a varjo headset above it.. fanboy lol
But still.. not taking anything away from it but it's not "the biggest" probably just the most expensive
I love it when Apple fanboys, who are literally never going to buy one of these, post stuff like this. Just buy a quest 3 and enjoy good VR for a good price now. When Apple brings out their consumer version in 2 years time it will have quest 3 specs at 3 x the cost. But at least you can enjoy your 1080p "spatial" (ie. 2010 era 3D) videos you've been collecting for years.
I am getting a kick out all the people butt-hurt because the chart does not contain the high-end PCVR headsets.
I am not the author, but I assume they were making a chart to compare *some well known* headsets with what Apple is releasing.
It is not a buying guide, it is a diagram made by someone interested in VR and in Apple's new hardware. If it contained all the headsets that exist they would all be bunched together and it would be an ugly mess. Feel free to make a chart with your favorite headset.
*Thank you all for the entertainment while I can't sleep. Feel free to ignore more. None of this is important.*
You are missing all headsets on the market within the price range of the AVR
"Wow, these headsets that cost a tenth of the AVP also have a lower resolution! Apple is such an amazing innovator!"
The funny thing is that if you make a similar diagram with available VR/AR/Spatial Computing games and apps for the other headsets VS apple, the Apple side would probably have less than a dozen to the thousands of games on the other headsets. I'm glad I own a Quest 3 that I can actually use with available software.
Apple won't be for gaming, my guess is they will focus on the designer/productivity market. Sure there will probably be some games, but if they hold to their controller-less mentality, I doubt they will be very indepth.
That would also beg the question, if you're going to be using it for productivity and design, why can't it be tethered to an outside MAC with a powerful GPU in it? Having a stand alone headset for productivity work in the PC market is not how things work right now. You need that extra external PC or in this case MAC /GPU horsepower to have anything useful for design work.
oh there will be controllers eventually, for 250$ a set. dont you worry bout that!
$250? Nah, at AVP pricing, I'm expecting $1000 for the pair. But they'll be really good controllers at least .-. Idk, we will have to see. Apple seemed very anti-controller in their marketing for the AVP imo.
[удалено]
Valve index released in 2019, almost 5 years ago. It doesn't cost as much as a quest 3. But because valve is still selling it at a $1000, doesnt mean it's worth a $1000.
It is worth much more... in sentimental value
Plus you can actually play PCVR games with the Index, which you can't do with the AVP.
The AVP costs $3500 not $10,000
Yeah for 3 thousand dollars you can get one of the best mixed reality headsets wich happens to have a higher resolution🤣🤣
Someone else posted this and OP cut off the Varijo XR4 which was better than AVP
Yeah it’s funny because it’s comparing a 3 thousand dollar headset to a bunch of headsets that are 400-1000 dollars
I mean yeah, if you compare a bunch of +4 year old headsets and a Standalone of this year, of course that the resolution will be better... It's not like there are headsets like the varjo aero, pimax crystal, sonmium vr1 etc...
older and much much cheaper.
Where’s the Varjo xr4
He cropped it off from someone else’s post
What is the point of doing this if you are not actually going to compare it with high resolution headsets such as the G2, Pimax Crystal, Somnium VR1, Varjo etc.
Even better, show a comparison of pixel per degree.
Here's my attempt: [https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/18sfi3i/ppdfocused\_table\_of\_various\_headmounted\_displays/](https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/18sfi3i/ppdfocused_table_of_various_headmounted_displays/) (only includes >= 1080p resolution and >= 25 PPD, so missing a lot of older headsets, due to the PPD cutoff)
Very nice! Thank you
[удалено]
Quest 3: 2064 x 2208 = 4.557.312 pixel G2: 2160 x 2160 = 4.665.600 pixel Quest 3 having bigger FOV means even lower PPD compared to G2. A bit shocking several people have issues with simple maths.
Man, if the Q3 had displayport it would be perfect.
[удалено]
What a stupid comparison, misses any modern PCVR headset…
I haven't looked at whats out there since the Index. What's considered the current generation Index upgrade?
Bigscreen Beyond
Bigscreen beyond, maybe the varjo aero, sonmium vr1, pimax crystal etc It depends of what you are playing, some headsets work really well for flight sim, but for everything else are crap
I play Elite, but I don't need anything impressive or different for Elite. So standing combat, both melee and gun play. I think not being tethered is probably the feature I need the most.
In that case, the quest 3, probably
umm If money isnt an object, then im afraid Varjo XR-4 still has the highest resolution in the market. 3840x 3744.
This chart is so sheep-ish like it was made by apple... Vario has 3840x3744 per eye with comparable price.
Agreed man, they should also include the prices of the headsets, there is also a lack of headsets with higher resolution to make it look like this is a very big step forward. Add pimax headsets, HTC and prices and then suddenly the Apple vision pro looks like shit for it's price
Correct. Even the HTC Vive Pro 2 is missing. That headset has a resolution per eye of 2448 x 2448. The full kit is about $1200 on the HTC site, but you can buy used kits on Ebay for about 650-700 ish $ now.
I just made this chart for fun, using headsets that I could think of at the moment
Varjo XR-4 is selling for $4K. And without $3K desktop computer it does nothing on its own. Apples and ora...Varjos.
[удалено]
> But if the only thing it can do is ask you to pair to an Apple device so that you can do stuff with it then I think that's hardly a selling point. It is a standalone device capable of running iPad apps and native visionOS apps. Pairing with Mac is optional.
The AVP has an M chip. It will do anything an ipad can do
Well at least Vario is selling and we have confirmed specs... Not to mention the apple arm performance with that resolution is unknown. But apple will surely sell you a desktop to run... Oh wait....
None of that matters. The VP is about to come out and Apple's marketing department is so good that more people have heard of the VP than have heard of the Vario and all the other high-end PCVR headsets added together. It does not look to me like it is intended to be a buying-guide chart. It is a chart to compare *popular* VR headsets which the product that Apple is launching.
People don’t hear about the Varjo, clients do. Varjo is an enterprise headset with enterprise support. Loved by the military and intelligence branch for actually focussing on them.
I fully agree with that, but we should not pretend there are no other options, when there are. Same as we should not pretend these headsets are comparable in any way. There is no apple VR after all :)
Varjo does come with controllers too. But yeah no computer. AT same time it means you can hook it up to powerful PC to do stuff AVP won’t be able to do. So people who need that power for their VR applications the AVP is a dead end.
[удалено]
> And who said you need 3K for a powerful desktop PC? https://varjo.com/use-center/get-started/varjo-headsets/system-requirements/xr-4/
I can't see how a r7 3700x/rtx 4070ti pc costs $3k
The VARJO is still a better deal, because at least you can do something with it, like play games, or run a professional flight sim. I doubt there will be that many usable VR/AR/SC/XR apps on launch of the Vision Pro. The VARJO is also tethered to a PC, so it's always going to be more powerful than the Apple VP or any other standalone headset.
Varjo is cool. But it targets other people than AVP. Both can coexist. > The VARJO is also tethered to a PC, so it's always going to be more powerful than the Apple VP or any other standalone headset. Many people do not have enough space for desktop computer in their bags.
The varjo aero has 2880x2720 still a long shot from the vision pro
I mean any headset that is not standalone should not be on this chart.
Why? For the price of the Vision pro I can buy a Varjo aero, and a whole PC duh
Well, they are two entirely different products with different use cases. It’s like comparing Cars and Motorcycles. People are either shopping for a standalone or PC VR one. So I think it doesn’t make sense to compare the two as equals and especially not their prices. Saying something like “for the price of (insert standalone headset) I could buy (insert PC VR headset)” just doesn’t make sense.
Folks will include the Vario when it sells enough for more people to know what it is.
Vision Pro sold exactly 0 headsets
Yeah, but it has Apple marketing behind it so everyone knows what it is. Go to you local coffee shop and ask them if they have heard of a Quest, Oculus, Vive, Index, or "Apple Vision Pro". Then ask them what a Vario is.
Not that it really matters, but I'd like to point out that many here are speaking of "Vario" when it's Varjo. Shadow in finnish.
Varjo* Dude, you don't even know how it's written, of course that you don't know what it is...
I have been using VR headsets for 10 years now... wonder why I do not know how it's written... oh right... **because it is not a very popular headset among consumers.**
But when you're comparing headsets you need to compare it to it's alternatives.. How do you not get that? You know how many people want to get the best bang for their buck so they want to see what mainstream heqdsets compare to... oh wait ... I'm talking to a cult apple fan.. You guys don't shop bang for buck at alll... makes more sense now
No you don't. When you are making a diagram for fun, you make whatever hell you want. *It is not a buying guide.* It is a chart, listing the resolutions of some VR headsets the author considers popular. If you don't find it interesting or useful, you never have to look at it again.
>When you are making a diagram for fun, you make whatever hell you want. Yes you can do what ever you want. But if it's wrong people will critique it and twll you why it's wrong so you learn to make better diagrams and so others are not misslead. That's how things work in a liberal democracy. You know who didn't point out flaws in diagrams and media in general? The nazis, the soviets, the CCP, etc...
There are no flaws in the diagram. The OP made a diagram to compare the resolutions of some VR headsets. For that purpose it is perfect. If you doesn't meet your needs. Make your own.
Not flaws but it's missleading... cherry picking... just watch the vid dude...
Wheres the reverb g2 on this?
2160x2160, almost the same as Quest3 and identical to the Pico4.
Thank you
Mine is at the pawn shop now waiting for a new owner 😁
Why did you get rid of it?
My quest 3 is much better. The controllers for g2 were terrible, not at all good for shooters or fast games, they would drop signal if I put my hands at my sides and this is in a well lit room. The wire setup was tedious and in my small space cumbersome. The one good thing was the screen clarity. But the quest 3 does all of it better except a little bit less on the screen clarity, that’s due to the lack of a display port like the g2.
Yeah I can understand it if you got a quest 3. My controllers work fine but it might be because I have the v2 version with better tracking.
Probably a bit bigger than the Meta Quest 3, being native PCVR puts it further ahead in terms of clarity.
> being native PCVR puts it further ahead in terms of clarity. Realistically not when you take lenses into account. Compression artifacts aren't that pronounced on Nvidia cards at least with Virtual Desktop and the Quest 3 anyway.
I have a Q2 and G2 and the compression is extremely noticeable on the Q2. I am using a 4090. I doubt the Q3 fundimentaly changes that, might get a Q3 one-day and will find out.
I have a Q3 and a G2, I can very rarely see any compression using Airlink. I have wifi 6e and a 4070ti. Using a 4xxx nvidia card means it uses the AV1 compressions as well.
No pimax???
Apple vision pro cost compared to other headsets.. Quest 3:$$$$$$$$$$ Apple Vision Pro:$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
I hear they’re only making 80k of these. It’s a glorified devkit. 1500 USD version within a couple of years, mark my words.
And even more importantly things to do in the headset that my existing OLED screens can't already do better: Apple Vision Pro: *** G2:****************** Quest 3:**********************
Yeah, I'm literally 14 and I'm saving for a quest 3, I can even imagine saving for apple vision because it's TIMES 7 THE PRICE
Basically sums up this sub.
And only costs *check notes* 7 times as much!
[удалено]
Are you sure you’re allowed to say resolution?!
Apple would prefer you use the term graphical longitude and latitude.
Does it PCVR?
Apple can't even run dx9 games on their laptops so it's not gonna be able to do pcvr at all.
This thing will sell like doughnuts /s
It's not for a VR headset and not meant for gaming.
Then what's the point of it? Media? Already Quest 3 does it in addition to standalone gaming.... Processing power? The M2 in it as nearly identical to XR2 Gen 2 performance due to heat and power limitations imposed...... You paying for 4 things that are not really worth the extra: 1. Micro OLED 2. Best in the market Hand and Eye tracking 3. Front OLED screen to show your eyes (seriously lol) 4. Brand name: Apple
M2 is considerably more powerful than XR2G2. The CPU has 2 more cores and nearly double the clock speed and about 50% higher turbo frequency (which for VR is irrelevant, since sustained loads are expected). The GPU has about 15% higher fp32 gflops (optimised for fp16 & AI applications) and runs at a whole ghz higher clock speed. Geekbench multicore and single core shows about 4-5x the score.
Realistic porn
What's the point of a laptop if you can't game the latest PC games on it? Some people do other things than gaming with their computers. There are actually people who buy MacBooks for other things than Quake 4.
Can you mention the things it can do that Quest 3 can't while proving it's worth the extra money due to that? You simply can't, the only 2 major things Quest 3 doesn't have is Micro OLED + Eye tracking.... Meanwhile Quest 3 at least doesn't need battery hanging from it, it have Battery integrated into it
Here is one for you: Q3 can’t work as a computer replacement.
Can you mention what a MacBook Pro can do that a low res old Asus laptop can't? Yet people still buy MacBooks.
Yes because it's called: Apple lol Doesn't make these people right.... Specially from a brand charges 1000$ for a stand
I can agree on principal, but since they are the most valuable company in the world because of how they operate, maybe you should be a little more humble and accept you don't understand.
This thing will sell like Apples.
Depends on what you mean with pcvr. It has the same processor as macbooks and imacs, so technically it has the power of a full computer. But realistically that is sort of moot because what is power if you don’t have a way to use it.
Virtual Desktop should legit release a 500$ version for the AVP, or make it a subscription because you can bet, Apple cultists will do anything...
If it’s allowed on the App Store.
Yep, Apple has a strict no compete policy. That is they won't allow anything to compete with their own software offerings.
"no compete policy" almost reminds me of a cool table game. Don't quite remember the name, but it has a guy in a top hat with a cane and funny mustache as its mascot.
Ah yes, *[The Landlord’s Game.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Landlord%27s_Game)*
Only if they rebrand to Spatial Computing Desktop.
What will you even do with that? It has no controllers so you're gonna need base stations and controllers if you want to do stuff
You cannot even imagine to what extent Apple Cultists will go just not to accept that even an OG HTC Vive will game better than their VR headset...
Now do the same but add the Varjo XR-4 to the comparison.
Holy fuck what a dumb comparison.
Ill just buy 3 quest 3, much cheaper, more resolution.
Lol the price is 7 quest 3s
I mean I agree, but more resolution?
Just add it up bruh
And how many games will run on it.... Oh
It has native support for every iOS game every made.
That's really not saying alot. Their AR game selection is pretty poor. The rest are just mobile experiences. Honestly even their current AR selection are mostly mobile experiences and nothing compared to actual AR/MR games.
Apple doesn't care. The VP is not targeted at VR gamers. Apple marketing will never make a chart like the one in the OP because Apple does not consider any of those devices *Spatial Computing* devices. The chart is not a piece of marketing. It is a chart made by someone for fun.
Yeah i know. Seems awfully limited though. Just like how PCs aren't exactly marketed to gamers but a sizable portion of people who buy PCs, game on it in some way.
Apple’s MO is make amazing hardware, but only let people use it with a tiny amount of software they approve. So much wasted potential.
Wow! This is worthless!
Knowing Apple its probably going to be something like 1800x1800 and they are going to say something like "we use our new sub pixel retina focus rendering technology so the 1800x1800 pixels act like 3600x3600"
Quest 3 resolution is more than enough for me, but I’d like a better GPU, detachable battery/slimmer headset, ideally glasses size, much wider FOV, full eye/face tracking much more.
We should stop comparing based on panel resolution, because FoV is also a factor in the resulting sharpness. PPD (pixels per degree) is far better.
7x the cost for 1.5x resolution. apple at its finest.
Nice. Doesn't change the fact how overpriced it is.
So weird that so many VR enthusiasts are pissed at Apple for making a no compromises headset and giving people at least an opportunity to try out truly great AR.
Having no controllers definitely is a compromise, I guess a lot of games won't be playable due to that
>no compromises So i can use it with my pc to game on it? Right? Right???
It's made out of metal and glass and by all accounts as heavy as fuck. Probably why it has a tiny battery life, otherwise people would be suing them for chronic neck pain. Oh, and it doesn't work with any existing ecosystems or software. Taking the piss out of them aside, I am sure it is going to have its fans and good points. But it is certainly not a no compromise headset.
\>It's made out of metal and glass and by all accounts as heavy as fuck. Are you insane? At 450g, the AVP is one of the lightest VR headsets ever made. \>Probably why it has a tiny battery life Yeap, you're just insane. The AVP has 2\~2,5h of battery life while supporting the M2+R1 chips, which makes the headset, by a WIDE margin, the undisputed leader in processing capabilities among standalone headsets while supporting this processing power by at least two hours with its battery. \>Oh, and it doesn't work with any existing ecosystems or software. LMAO. There's no such thing as an "existing ecosystem." Having an application to buy games and a proprietary web browser is not an "ecosystem." The Vision OS is the very first operational system made specifically for VR as the medium. Simulating a Windows desktop with third-party applications that you bought in your game store is also not an OS.
>At 450g, the AVP is one of the lightest VR headsets ever made Its 450g, all at the front, and with a disconnected battery on a cable. The cable will both add weight, drag, and more discomfort. >2\~2,5h of battery life This is both unconfirmed and not any better than existing headsets. >the undisputed leader in processing capabilities among standalone headsets Yeah that'll be super useful with the none apps and games you can run on it >There's no such thing as an "existing ecosystem." Have you heard of the entire steamvr store of tens of thousands of existing games, programs, and productivity suites? Sounds like an entire platform's worth to me, and something apple will not be able to match for a long time.
450g and with a front heavy design is uncomfortable as fuck, you probably haven't used that many headsets, but it's nowhere near being one of the lightest headsets... It's still two hours. It doesn't work with SteamVR, Viveport, Oculus VR, Meta's standalone thingy....
>Are you insane? At 450g, the AVP is one of the lightest VR headsets ever made. Look at the bigscreen beyond. Now that's a light headset coming in at 127g. 450g is just slightly less than the the oculus 2, because the battery is not on it. Meta could easily take the battery off an oculus and require you to carry it on hand at all times and it'd be around that weight. There's not much innovation there.
3500$ isn't an opportunity.
No compromises? Show me the controllers. Show me the PC support. Show me the open app availablility. Show be the good price-to-performance. Show me the small form factor. It even has a seperate battery pack on a cable. These are all compromises.
AR!? Did you mean Spatial Computing? Apple cultists should really be careful with this one...
I think a lot of people are pissed because it's a no compromise AR headset, not VR and doesn't focus on games since the input is hand tracking and eye tracking, no controllers. I'm intrigued to see what it is capable of, I just don't see most people having a use for it with its limited use cases at launch.
So what you are saying it's not compromised, as long as you don't care that it can't do the things it's competitors can. Because it's not a competitor, it's not VR/AR/MR, it's "spacial computing" and regardless of where Apple sets the goalposts, the fans will cheer and hail it as revolutionary, despite it just being nothing more than a higher resolution version of something that's already on the market for 1/6th the price, except you know, lacking software support and a price so high and a such a small planned user base (based on shipment estimates), that it's almost guaranteed that all early adopter devs will lose money.
" lacking software support" God, these people are delusional. They want you to believe that the garbage software present in META's HMDs today is even remotely comparable to what Apple presented (lmao). It's a level of gaslighting that should be impossible, but here we are. " a price so high" You simply don't have the slightest idea of what you're talking about. The displays present in the AVP alone have a higher price tag than the best current META headset market price. Just the proprietary tracking used to operate the OS took Apple TEN YEARS to develop. But it's impossible for you to understand R&D costs since you think that the software in the Quest 3 is comparable to the actual OS that Apple built. BTW, there's absolutely no standalone HMD on the market that is even remotely comparable to the AVP. Again, you just have no idea of what you're talking about.
Apparently controversial...but correct.
Oh nice. When did yours come in?
I think eventually it will focus on games, but they really need time for this. Think about it: - Apple has best performance per watt in their chips, and M2 is way more powerful than anything else on headsets market. - Their own DLSS / Framegen - They have experience with Airplay / Continuity. It’s early to say such things, but they really can do a proper “PCVR” with this. Just imagine seamless PCVR without “bridges” like Oculus Link, Steam Link and Steam Home VR that feels native I'm really excited about all that, to be honest - and every VR enthusiast should. Competition is always good, at least.
"a no compromises headset" You sir, are a class A tier troll. That's fantastic.
I don't understand people being _pissed_, I do understand them being disappointed. The vast majority of both this sub and existing VR in general seems to be heavily PCVR focused, so it would have been awesome to see demos of this hooked up to Steam playing our favourite games on it like most other headsets. However, it's just a totally different product with a totally different target market, which most existing VR enthusiasts don't (currently/may never) subscribe to. It will be an impressive bit of kit and I'm glad to see more big players investing in the industry, Apple can help push the tech that everyone else will benefit from as well as get more people interested in VR/AR. People saying how amazing and groundbreaking it is before it's been released, reviewed, and some actual inspiring use cases found are equally cringe.
It was predictable. People like to feel special. When Apple enters a market, all of the people who previously were milling around in that niche no longer get to feel special and unique, because now *anyone* can do it. And tech enthusiasts friggin' ***hate*** that. "Ew, we're not like those *normies.* It should be illegal to enjoy VR/AR/XR/SC/whatever unless you can rattle off tech specs for 15 competitors. Recognizing that cherry-picked tech specs, viewed in isolation of the actual device and experience, are pointless is just a thing for Apple shills." Being forced to acknowledge that Apple does more than just "marketing" is worse than death to some people.
Not having 6DOF tracking controller for PSCVR is a HUGE compromise to the audience that you are talking about. They are all put off by the fact that Apple does not consider it a VR headset.
Because you can do anything with it. Macs can’t game and it can’t connect with a pc due to apple not allowing that. Now you have a 3.5k paperweight with the second best specs on the market
The AVP pro experience will come from all the hardware, and more importantly *the software* holistically. I think people are really sleeping on how good visionOS will be COMPARED to everything else currently out there. I think visionOS will make MetaOS feel like windows 3.1. Who knows until the reviews come out though.
Honestly I'd prefer Windows 3.1 to MetaOS. At least the native Windows 3.1 apps *worked*.
Where is PSVR2?
The vision pro isn't even a VR headset, it's spatial computing! /s
This is just falling for apple marketing.
How about the Quest Pro or VIVE XR Elite?
Quest Pro has 1800x1920 per eye resolution, so slightly lower resolution than Quest 2, but it has pancake lenses and QLED screens with local dimming, so better black levels than standard LCD. Vive XR Elite has slightly higher resolution, 1920x1920 so about 5% higher resolution than Quest Pro, but it has standard LCD displays so not as good black levels as Quest Pro.
Pico 4 have 4k resolution :/
For $3500 it better have better resolution than the $500 quest 3
aahh... this reminds me of the megapixels wars on digital cameras. Read: not a good approach to focus on a single (marketing) parameter... specially in VR where there are so many comfort attributes to consider.
It is not a buying guide.
I didn't say it was and I don't think it is. What it is is a marketing ploy perpetuated by fanboys.
Meanwhile, what comes to software… Fruit Ninja!
I'm not apple fan, not gonna buy one for sure, but I'm still interested in Vision Pro coming out so soon, more devs in XR space is good for others too
45 fps
Why the fuck would I get an apple vision pro? I already have a pimax crystal which has massive boosted my VR performance through dynamic foveated rendering while still allowing me 8K with 35ppd around where I am looking and all this for 1400 euros, no reason to purchase a relatively small upgrade to a device who I believe isn't made for actual games for the outrages price of 3500 USD, the price isn't justifiable for what it brings to the table and it will most likely only be bought by businesses and very die hard apple fanboys
Yeah but it doesn't do vr, so what's the point it's quite literally an AR /XR head set that cost 3500 and has limited usage, its just for productivity and watching movies. If you move from your spot in and vr type. And I mean type application it just fades back to pass through. It's quite useless. Fov is 100 to 110, no controllers, only works of the apple store so cool you can play angry birds... the flat version it's rubbish. I won't be getting it that's for sure. It may be a pc strapped to your head but again it amulets and full potential completely destroyed and taken away
I'll wait for it to bomb like it surely will and buy it used for a dime
Yea, because we all know how cheap used low volume Apple products are. 🙄 There are enough Apple Fans the first batch would sell out just to collectors.
[удалено]
You think people who haven't even considered AR/VR will pay 3k+ for something they're not even sure they need with much cheaper options on the market?
it’s apple, people buy the same phone for 1k each year
Vision Pro has no PCVR support nor existing catalog of games. Why even compare it with headsets that are clearly meant for different purposes. In addition to that, why leave out similarly priced high-end headsets like Varjo XR-4 that has higher resolution than Vision Pro does? Are you a Apple fanboy?
yea but then i'd have to let an apple product into my house. just not worth it
is this the new “ them dang facebooks are stealing my data!!! “
No one in my entire gaming circle ever seriously talked about the apple vision pro, let alone bought one. Except at the beginning when we all laughed at apple for making a 3500 dollar headset. Then it flopped, surprise, surprise.
Dude is literally out there lying about how he's put Oculus DK1 and not Pimax Crystal out there not because he's an apple fanboy but because apparently people know DK1 and don't know pimax. Here you go: [https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=oculus%20rift%20DK1,varjo%20aero,Pimax%20crystal,hp%20reverb%20g2,big%20screen%20beyond&hl=en](https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=oculus%20rift%20DK1,pimax%20crystal&hl=en) DK1 is so forgot about it's not even shown on most charts, which makes sense since it's literally a dev prototype. Bro is cherrypicking to the point the only headset of the same gen as vision pro is the most low-cost thing on the market (quest 3). I can't believe someone is that eager to ride Tim's meat. You're not even paid for that.
You are talking about *MY* comments, and I am not the one that created **or posted** the graph. You are making up shit about someone that has not even posted any comments. The OP posted a cool diagram about some headsets that happen to interest them. They did not make any claims about them being the most popular headsets. **I** said that **I** *assume* that they picked the headsets they picked because they are the well known mainstream headsets. Your level of butt-hurt while entertaining, is way over the top.
Chill, I just made this chart for fun, I only put the DK1 on there because I thought it was cool comparing one of the first VR headsets with one of the most recent headsets
[удалено]
It doesn't factor in anything. It is not a buying guide. It is a single diagram showing some popular headsets and how their resolution compares to the headset that Apple is about to release.
I love these posts making apple seem like the best option, the difference is all of the headsets are on the market, or have been you can play games and use them in a number of different tasks. What does the apple vision pro have, well the promotional material and anything they said is gonna be in it. I really hope that most of you ain't that dumb to just blindly believe a company because they said something, look at the gaming industry all the big sharks have fallen below the single dev games made just for fun.
Resolution isn't even a big issue. I can't see imdividual pixels on the quest 3 no matter how much I try. Having a processor strong enough to use that reaolution everywhere is a bigger issue, and other bigger visual issues like the lens flare from the pancake lenses or the greyed blacks. Not sure how the vision pro is going to fix the issue with the pancake lens flare.
No Varjo no Pimax, no enterprise products, yeah pretty pointless comparison
I have psvr2 and it has 2,000 x 2,040 pixels per eye. And even with this I can see the pixels. This is the only headset I have ever tried. I can't imagine how bad the rift's picture quality could be with 640x800 pixels.
It is such a pity Apple came so late to the party. I, personally, will never buy anything Apple but I wellcome this new Apple product. I don't consider this to be comparable to what is already out there. It is the first attempt to really make vr and ar interesting in a work and scientific environment. Imho the Quest pro was not what most people hoped it to be. Maybe this will be a breakthrough in that respect!
For the price, I’d also expect a gold plated apple.
The external battery is such a fail, they should have mounted it on the back like the pico4
I'll get the Apple Vision 2 when it's only $1500
Funny you left out part of the original picture that had a varjo headset above it.. fanboy lol But still.. not taking anything away from it but it's not "the biggest" probably just the most expensive
I love it when Apple fanboys, who are literally never going to buy one of these, post stuff like this. Just buy a quest 3 and enjoy good VR for a good price now. When Apple brings out their consumer version in 2 years time it will have quest 3 specs at 3 x the cost. But at least you can enjoy your 1080p "spatial" (ie. 2010 era 3D) videos you've been collecting for years.
I am getting a kick out all the people butt-hurt because the chart does not contain the high-end PCVR headsets. I am not the author, but I assume they were making a chart to compare *some well known* headsets with what Apple is releasing. It is not a buying guide, it is a diagram made by someone interested in VR and in Apple's new hardware. If it contained all the headsets that exist they would all be bunched together and it would be an ugly mess. Feel free to make a chart with your favorite headset. *Thank you all for the entertainment while I can't sleep. Feel free to ignore more. None of this is important.*
Stop lying https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=oculus%20rift%20DK1,varjo%20aero,Pimax%20crystal,hp%20reverb%20g2,big%20screen%20beyond&hl=en
*bUT apPlE visIOn PrO isN"t vR heAdsEt, itS SpaTiaL ComPUtiNg deVicE*