***Quest Pro Owners Club***

The screenshots look great. We all know the resolution is not ground breaking but sometimes it's not all about specs on a sheet, this is 1 of those times, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. I think the same about the Quest 2.
As I mentioned in my OP, the higher PPI and pixels per degree really makes the difference in Clarity. It's like comparing a 55" 4K TV with a 32" 4K, the pixels are going to be smaller on the latter.
I'm still waiting for a headset to replace my Index. I was hoping Quest Pro would be it, but it's just too expensive unfortunately.
Yeah, it is pricey, at a reduced price of say £999 I'm sure many people would jump on it. But the technology on the HMD is why it has a premium.
Colours and contrast look really good. Am interested if there’s been a change to the video encoding over USB/wireless compared to Quest 2. Difficult to see in the photos if distance objects are fuzzy and compressed looking such as trees and end of the track in ACC. Could be an upgrade to my G2 for PCVR sims stuff
I couldn't say, as I don't have a Quest 2 to do side by side comparisons.
As for the panels, they are very bright at max brightness, but in the screenshots in the OP, the Brightness was set to about 50%.
I have some more pictues to share on the distance, espeically in ACC. It's pretty clear looking into the distance, but then I am running VR Epic, View Distance Epic, DLSS Quality in the upcoming Pics. (The ones in the OP is VR Epic, View Distance High, DLSS Quality)

I am running all PCVR games with in the Oculus app at 90Hz 1.4x 4480x2256
In Steam VR, it is set to Auto for the resolution.
Better processor in theory can decode more information in the same time. I don't know if it actually does, just makes sense to me.
I couldn't say, all I know from owning a Quest 2 in the past, is the Quest Pro looks Amazing.
To be honest if my work bonus comes through I might be tempted.

The biggest issues I have with Quest 2 are the FOV, the IPD leaving screen edges visible and the visible compression on PCVR.

What's the FOV like on the Pro?
You always have a 14day return window, just pick a company to buy from that doesn't quibbly over the return. Main factor is how comfortable it feels, as everyones head is different...
FOV is a massive step up over the Quest 2, the closer you get to the lenses, the bigger the FOV. I will have an image to replicate as best I can the FOV in ACC to what I see with the headset on.
just been comparing the specs to the likes of pico 4, and the resolution per eye is lower, which surprised me
As I mentioned in my OP, it is not just about Resolution, but the PPI and pixels per degree makes the biggest difference.
that looks amazing getting lost in reality in reality.
It sure does! I was shocked, as I was convinced from owning a Quest 2 in the past, that USBC compression for PCVR sucks compared to DP. Quest Pro shows that is not really the case.
 
The proof in the pudding for me will be how it looks in a modded Skyrim VR.

On Quest 2 even with the link cable this can look pretty muddy and compressed.
 
OP thanks for the summary, much appreciated.

Couple of questions:
- Do you suffer from lag spikes when playing PCVR via the USB-C cable connection? I had some of those with the Pico4 and found them MUCH more jarring and annoying than say a lag spike into my Rift S via DP connection
- I see that you have MS FS2020. Have you tried foveated rendering? My understanding is that it now works, and as your headset supports eye tracking, I assume that you can enable dynamic foveated rendering. If you've got it running, what kind of frame rate improvement did you get?
 
Why you can't just go off a screenshot of what the quality of looking through the lenses of a VR HMD, or Monitor for that matter when using a camera.

Here's an extreme example looking at my LG C1 48" OLED. Now if my Monitor looked like this with my eyes, then It wouldn't be on my desk!

udHoI0L.jpg

Notice how the camera can create artifacts that are not there? This is why it is important not to take what you see as face value.
ML3DJQI.jpg

Closer to how you see it with your Eyes.
I9g77QI.jpg

And here in through the lenses of the Quest Pro, depending on how you angle you Camera, and how it focuses, will depend on how close it looks to what you really see.
(Out of focus off center, but showing SDE that really isn't there in the central point.)
cfCwi1A.jpg

Now for some closer to what you really see images below. All pictures are taken with an S21 Ultra, no enhancements, just what you see, is what it captured.

Using these settings in Oculus App;
M7tneXF.jpg

VR Epic Settings, + View Distance set to EPIC, DLSS set to Quality.

ge2fIxR.jpg
vO1f4Um.jpg
cdKHxup.jpg

The last image is with a wide angle 0.6 Zoom, to give you a look at the FOV and how much you see with the Quest Pro HMD on.
lBGeVmm.jpg
 
The proof in the pudding for me will be how it looks in a modded Skyrim VR.

On Quest 2 even with the link cable this can look pretty muddy and compressed.
I don't have that game for VR unfortunalty.
OP thanks for the summary, much appreciated.

Couple of questions:
- Do you suffer from lag spikes when playing PCVR via the USB-C cable connection? I had some of those with the Pico4 and found them MUCH more jarring and annoying than say a lag spike into my Rift S via DP connection
- I see that you have MS FS2020. Have you tried foveated rendering? My understanding is that it now works, and as your headset supports eye tracking, I assume that you can enable dynamic foveated rendering. If you've got it running, what kind of frame rate improvement did you get?
You're welcome.
No lag spikes that I can really notice, though the games I'm showing are Simulators, where you would be sat playing. Half-Life Alyx seemed very smooth even at max settings, but then I am running a 4090.

I haven't tries foveated rendering. TBH I didn't know it supported till you just made me aware.
For whatever reason, I'm having issuses where DLSS is not selectabe, yet DLSS Frame generation is, (But not supported in VR). This is with the latest update from the game store, Win 11 etc. DX12 enabled.

Going back to the foveated rendering, I will turn on the HMD eye tracking sensors, and see if I can get it to work, and will update you with my finding.
 
Last edited:
@Mr_Sukebe So I installed OpenXR Tool Kit. As of right now you can only do Fixed foveated rendering, no eye tracking support for the Quest Pro yet.
I also found this post https://forums.flightsimulator.com/...cale-hand-tracking-release-thread/493924/2806

That said, there was performance improvement when you enable Fixed Foveated Rendering. Quality + Wide was about 10% increase in FPS.

OK, so lets max out every slider in Oculus and MSFS and see what the Quest Pro and 4090 can do...

sRmiXnv.jpg
eK6w8Ty.jpg
AiqdUPX.jpg
PkFvOgk.jpg
UNr0fFL.jpg
gq5mqbb.jpg
RYgKmVN.jpg

And heres a good example of a bad image as it looks like you can't even read the FPS counter, and some may take that as what you see. (Which you don't!)
Dfb6apg.jpg
 
In FS2020, I got DLSS running with DX11, might be worth a try. I found that DLSS with DLAA seemed to work really well.

One other question. Are you using the Oculus Tool? If so, what data rate are you running with?
 
In FS2020, I got DLSS running with DX11, might be worth a try. I found that DLSS with DLAA seemed to work really well.

One other question. Are you using the Oculus Tool? If so, what data rate are you running with?

I'll try in DX11 again, but every trick I've tried it doesn't show up. Only shows AMD FSR 2...
Fresh install, wiped drivers with DDU, reinstalled etc. you name it... Very weird, but there has been other people saying the same thing.

I've not adjusted Oculus Tool yet. What settings should I try? (Memory is blank from when I did this with the Quest 2 last year...)
 
No idea on the data rate, just have a play.

Ref DLSS, it's not an option within OpenXR tool. Don't use either NIS or FSR with the OpenXR tool. Enable DLSS and DLAA within FS2020 itself.
 
No idea on the data rate, just have a play.

Ref DLSS, it's not an option within OpenXR tool. Don't use either NIS or FSR with the OpenXR tool. Enable DLSS and DLAA within FS2020 itself.
DLSS is not showing up in MSFS at all, only AMD FSR 2 when you enable DX12. Reverting back to DX11, I still don't have that option.
I'm going to role back my Nvidia drivers to see if that is the issue.

ODT 500Mbps is the max permitted bit rate, so I kept it fixed at that.
I can see an improvement in image quality.
c0Pvc9g.png

Setting as to my last post, but now with the above ODT settings.

17aWthP.jpg

This is image is to demonstrate the viewing distance clarity.
gWXKgpn.jpg
ArgTriM.jpg
 
Last edited:
tbh the through the lens shots look similar to what I see in a Vive Pro 2 but without the godrays & flair from the fresnel lenses so better yes but not by much imho.... possibly a larger sweet spot too though as you say that could be a camera lens vs human eye thing
 
Last edited:
Quest Pro Horizontal FOV is 108° at 71mm IPD, at my 67mm IPD FOV is 104° from my testing.


26o3a9tcu9c81.png
 
tbh the through the lens shots look similar to what I see in a Vive Pro 2 but without the godrays & flair from the fresnel lenses so better yes but not by much imho.... possibly a larger sweet spot too though as you say that could be a camera lens vs human eye thing
I haven't owned one of those to compare it. But in the video that @ShiWarrior linked, there is a comment from someone who owns both.
The sweet spot on the Quest Pro is almost the entire lense, it is that clear.

One major factor to the Quest Pro, with or without the side blinkers, it doesn't steam up, and you don't feel hot wearing it.
 
Last edited:
tbh the through the lens shots look similar to what I see in a Vive Pro 2 but without the godrays & flair from the fresnel lenses so better yes but not by much imho.... possibly a larger sweet spot too though as you say that could be a camera lens vs human eye thing
I have the Quest Pro and am upgrading from a Vive Pro 2 and Reverb G2. I have to say the Pro, despite being my seventh VR headset is the first one since the original Rift CV1 that has actually fully impressed me, and finally feels like a truly next generation device.

Despite having a relatively low resolution of 1800 x 1920 per eye, it makes my Vive Pro 2, with 2448 x 2448 per eye look like absolute trash. Now I should preface this by saying I have never liked the Vive Pro 2, I found its lack of binocular overlap, startling absence of depth perceptions and incorrect stereopsis along with the glare, godrays and tiny edge to edge clarity to make it the most disappointing headset I've ever bought, and the only one I've returned. So it's fair to say that for me, that headset didn't work out at all and your experience might be very different with a different head and eye shape, IDP etc.

But I think even allowing that some of my bad experience might just have been personal, there is something truly exceptional about the Quest Pro's lenses.
It is an order of magnitude more immersive for me as the whole entire display is clear and in focus, something I've never experienced in a headset before.

For me this is the biggest visual jump in clarity and quality that I've ever experienced between headsets so I've been a bit amazed at how relatively poorly received its been. It seems like most reviewers just reviewed it using Horizon Workrooms and standalone apps and didn't even test it as a PCVR headset, where for me it literally smokes everything else I've used.

It's easily the best PCVR gaming headset I've ever used, and I reckon on balance the best overall VR headset available right now.

For most gamers waiting for Quest 3 makes more sense though.
 
Last edited:
Welcome to the forum @Kjaye767 - I am glad to read that you have experienced what I have with the Quest Pro. It is a great HMD for PCVR when you crank the resolution rendering up.
I think a lot of the usually VR YouTubers bashed on the Quest Pro due it's price point.
So their review negatively reflexed on that, especially when the Pico 4 just launched too.

What I have noticed in the comparisons of the likes of MRTV, they use Virtual Desktop and set the Pico 4 at God-Mode, and test the Quest Pro at it's 1x resolution render from the Oculus Desktop app.
Now if they set the Quest Pro to 1.7x render resolution, as to the maxed VD mode -God-Mode, the Quest Pro would trump the Pico 4 in picture quality and clarity. They didn't do that, and I feel they have manipulated their viewers in thinking the Pico 4 is superior.

Now to compare Apples to Apples, they should be using the native apps, which at current the Pico 4 looks like trash with the native PCVR HD render setting.
 
I haven't owned one of those to compare it. But in the video that @ShiWarrior linked, there is a comment from someone who owns both.
The sweet spot on the Quest Pro is almost the entire lense, it is that clear.

One major factor to the Quest Pro, with or without the side blinkers, it doesn't steam up, and you don't feel hot wearing i
Welcome to the forum @Kjaye767 - I am glad to read that you have experienced what I have with the Quest Pro. It is a great HMD for PCVR when you crank the resolution rendering up.
I think a lot of the usually VR YouTubers bashed on the Quest Pro due it's price point.
So their review negatively reflexed on that, especially when the Pico 4 just launched too.

What I have noticed in the comparisons of the likes of MRTV, they use Virtual Desktop and set the Pico 4 at God-Mode, and test the Quest Pro at it's 1x resolution render from the Oculus Desktop app.
Now if they set the Quest Pro to 1.7x render resolution, as to the maxed VD mode -God-Mode, the Quest Pro would trump the Pico 4 in picture quality and clarity. They didn't do that, and I feel they have manipulated their viewers in thinking the Pico 4 is superior.

Now to compare Apples to Apples, they should be using the native apps, which at current the Pico 4 looks like trash with the native PCVR HD render setting.

Thanks! I only joined to comment on this thread! To be honest Sebastian's content and some of the other Youtubers really grates me, they genuinely have people thinking the Pico 4 is better than the Quest Pro which is mental. The problem is that Meta are not liked, and are so monolithic that they are subjected to a far greater scrutiny than anyone else. It's just easy to hate on them. The irony though is that they placed into our hands probably the best consumer headset released so far. It's absolutely magnificant for PCVR, I have had it since launch day and it still wows me everytime I put the headset on. I loaded up Lone Echo today to compare the visuals to MRTV's through the lenses and oh my god it looks incredible, her spacesuit if perfectly orange, not red like in his videos, and the overall image absolutely blows away how its looked on any of my other headsets. It somehow looks more 3D and lifelike. Your own through the lens footage does a better job of conveying what its like, and especially your photos.
 
Last edited:
Despite having a relatively low resolution of 1800 x 1920 per eye, it makes my Vive Pro 2, with 2448 x 2448 per eye look like absolute trash. Now I should preface this by saying I have never liked the Vive Pro 2, I found its lack of binocular overlap, startling absence of depth perceptions and incorrect stereopsis along with the glare, godrays and tiny edge to edge clarity to make it the most disappointing headset I've ever bought, and the only one I've returned. So it's fair to say that for me, that headset didn't work out at all and your experience might be very different with a different head and eye shape, IDP etc.
I do experience disappointing binocular overlap and yes the glare can be strong in certain scenes but depth perception and edge to edge clarity is decent for me it looks like the Quest Pro videos. Is that a face head shape thing, an IPD/vision thing, bad design or simply quality issues on a defective unit? Impossible to say as a consumer...

We need some VR physical retail stores to test different headsets but ideally test/check the actual product you end up purchasing and take home.
 
Back
Top Bottom