Quest 2 vs Quest Pro Review

The above affiliate link help support my channel. Thank you very much if you decide to use them. But no pressure to buy anything! Only buy when you're ready and think you've found something you are confident you want to buy!

00:00 - Intro
00:33 - Specs and Pricing
01:30 - Graphics and User Experience
02:08 - Controllers
02:34 - Camera System
03:18 - Facial Tracking
03:37 - Battery Life
03:55 - Charging Dock
04:11 - Ergonomics
05:37 - Speakers
05:52 - Conclusion

[kevinbrook]

Always interesting to hear different people's takes. I have both the Quest Pro, Quest 2, Reverb G2 and had a Vive Pro 2. I only care about PCVR gaming, Microsoft Flight Simulator mainly, and for me I just want the best, regardless of cost. I also have a 13900K, 4090 PC and my own flight cockpit.

For me, for PCVR the Quest Pro is leaps and bounds better than anything else I've ever used. Whilst I understand the value proposition in relation to the Quest 2, compared to the Vive Pro 2 that cost me £1300 the Quest Pro is substantially better, to the point where the Vive Pro 2 looks like trash to me now.

The Reverb G2 was a great when I bought it a couple years ago, and still great value for money, with fantastic audio and good headset comfort. But visually it's not a patch on my Quest Pro running on the USB-C link cable at 54008 x 2736 resolution. The panels are dim, the FOV tiny and the sweet spot is just miserable. After spending three months with the Quest Pro I don't even consider the Vive Pro 2 and Reverb G2 to be full VR any more. In both headsets your eyes are forced to remain staring dead centre, inside the invisible reticle of clarity. Move your eyes even slightly and the image breaks down completely. To me now, this reminds me of my CV1 tracking when I bought that in 2017 and it was a forward facing experience only, turn around and your hands would glitch out and stop working. It took the additional sensor purchases to make it full roomscale and proper VR.

For me, the Pro's pancake lenses have done the same for visuals and immersive eye presence in VR. Being able to fully look around with my eyes, combined with the larger FOV enchances my experience to the point where this is first of the seven VR headset's I've owned that actually feels like a true 2.0 gen device, everything before it felt like the CV1 with slightly higher screen resolutions, but no other improvements to the optics, tracking and overall experience.

I still wouldn't recommend the Quest Pro for most users, the Quest 3 will be out later this year and give most consumers the gaming experience they want for around a £1000 less, but for high end PCVR users and 4090 owners, there is nothing comparable to the Pro right now.

I;m baffled you'd recommend the G2 over it for PCVR. The G2 is nowhere near as good as the Quest Pro for PCVR when the Pro is set up properly. The best example of this is Brad Lynch of Sadly It's Bradley who didn't like the Quest Pro at all because of the comfort issues and some compatibility problems he was getting in PCVR so he returned it and bought a Reverb G2 for just $299. After a few days with the G2 he ended buying the Quest Pro back again.

It's the same story even with the Varjo Aero, many owners of both devices prefer the Quest Pro now as it has better lenses and a larger FOV. Lukas Woltja did a couple of excellent technical reviews on Youtube of both devices and why he went back to the Quest Pro.

A couple final points. If you add a velcro top strap, I have Creative Studioform's strap the Quest Pro becomes the most comfortable headset I've ever used, and a much better option than using a facial interface to block light leakage is to turn off the lights and use an IR illuminator. I just play in the dark and get the benefit of having full immersion with nothing touching my face at all. Makes it really hard to go back to using a face hugging mask type headset.

[GizmoSlipTech]

One thing I meant to include, but got lost in the edit: The Quest Pro has eye tracked foveated rendering, meaning that the headset can render just what you're looking at. It also has a slightly faster processor. It's up to developers to use these to make the games look better. From what I heard, Red Matter 2 is the only game taking advantage of this to make the graphics slightly better on the Quest Pro.

[VanGohman]

The Quest Pro is the Best Pro. Nothing with fresnel lenses can even hope to compete.

[Dajlec]

Quest 2 uses a single 3664×1920 LCD panel.
Headsets with a single panel can't utilize all of the pixels because there's an unused gap between the lenses. And since Quest 2 has lens separation adjustment, Meta had to leave even more unused space. That means the resolution provided to each eye is actually around 1720×1890.
Quest pro uses almost all of the 1800x1920 per eye, making 37% better pixel density.
Combined with very high quality lenses and much better LCD screens with 500 local dimming zones and FOV rendering - the end effect is dramatically different.

[odinandsalem]

Was starting to look into VR headsets, thanks for the info!

[rushmore]

The pixels per degree are actually even lower on the Pro, since the Pro has higher FOV.

[mdtubeaccount]

I’m disappointed in the resolution I was hoping for a much better clarity while streaming movies or video

[wjveryzer]

I want the quest pro but you know why I decided against it and got psvr2? because noone makes aaa pcrvr games. I realized id be paying 1000$ to play half life alyx 20 percent sharper. Which actually sounds fun lol

[damonblackburn]

Games are starting to look a little better

[wjveryzer]

the non inclusion fo light blocker is just crazy.

[trumplostlol]

The bottom line is, both of them suck. Quest pro sucks even more cause it is way more expensive. Look at the Amazon reviews before you even think about buying it.

[humbugblet]

almost want to learn morse code to see what the heck you been saying with your eyes blinking so sporadically.

[YourMomMyBed]

Honestly...I don't see anything here that even warrants the new $1k price. Thank you for the in-depth review!