Which VR headset would you recommend ?

[=RS=rulezcz]

Hi, I played a lot on Oculus Rift S.  2 years ago I was a VR guru, knew everything. Now i have lost track a bit. Anyone with fresh knowledge who could recommend 2 headsets to choose from for 400-600 EUR ? What is the hot stuff in PC VR and Flight SIms at the moment ?

Cheers

[dburne]

Meta Connect will be going on this afternoon and seems they will be showing and taking orders for the new Quest 3.

You might want to check that out later today.

[chiliwili69]

For that price range definetly Quest3.

Or Pico5 is you can wait for Feb-2024.

All the other devices are well above that range.

 

More here:

 

[Freycinet]

Hmm, mixed reality?

 

https://www.meta.com/be/en/quest/quest-3/

[dburne]

Just now, Freycinet said:

Hmm, mixed reality?

 

https://www.meta.com/be/en/quest/quest-3/

 

Yep - at some point some of the Meta fans are going to finally realize - Meta is moving away from PC-VR.  It was a means to an end for Meta.

 

[Charger_]

8 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

For that price range definetly Quest3.

Or Pico5 is you can wait for Feb-2024.

All the other devices are well above that range.

 

More here:

 

This table is very good.

 

Really, it's how sharp a display is that really counts for IL2. 

[=RS=rulezcz]

thank you for your suggestions. What about the data compression needed to connect the new headsets to PC ? Isn't that a problem for example with  Quest 3 ?

[chiliwili69]

On 10/1/2023 at 7:08 AM, =RS=rulezcz said:

What about the data compression needed to connect the new headsets to PC ? Isn't that a problem for example with  Quest 3 ?

 

Unfortunately, none of the current Meta devices rely on the DisplayPort cable to play PCVR games.

I am a big hater of Meta for that. But Meta is only interested in Standalone games and social, so people buy games from their closed garden.

So they closed the line of PCVR (Rift and Rift-S) and everything from now on will be standalone.

 

Eventhough, the Quest2, QuestPro and Quest3 can connect to a PC either via USB (called Link) or via Wifi (called AirLink).

I have been always against that versus DP. But along this year I have been able to test the Pico4 and QuestPro which uses the preious XR2 chip (1st gen).

I was impressed by the quality of the image having on mind that it is a compressed image. There were no artifacts or gosthing.

You can see Pico4 pictures here using H265.

So I believe that the quality of the Quest3 will be better since the XR2 chip 2nd gen will have better bandwidth and also the new AV1 codec option.

 

There will be three codec options AVC (H264), HEVC (H265) and the new AV1.

The AV1 is only available for lastest 40XX nvidia cards (and also AMDs equivalents). 

So my current 3080 will not be valid to try the AV1, but perhaps the H265 with the larger bitrate support of 2nd gen could be enough.

I am thinking to buy a 4080 or a 4090 or wait for 4080Ti, just to see if AV1 could bring an extra quality to the Quest3.

 

Edited October 2, 2023 by chiliwili69

[savagebeest]

What about hmds that tax your hardware? I’ve had amazing luck with the cv1 and rift s. I tried the quest 2 and noticed frames were suffering. 

[chiliwili69]

The hmds tax the hardware depending on the rendered resolution, the FOV, the frequency (it is not he same 80Hz than 90Hz), the compression method if applicable and the software ecosystem.

So the hardware needs to be on pair with the hmd.

[Capt_Hook]

I'm slightly behind with the processor (5800X3D), but running a 4090 and Reverb G2, and it's hard to see the point of any of the VR sets with massively more pixels.  I can keep 90 most of the time, but not all of the time, especially online.  And DCS is just a joke in VR at virtually any rez.  

 

We need either much better / more efficient game engines, or 2-3 times the rendering power to go much beyond 2200x2200 per eye IMHO.

[Charlo-VRde]

2 hours ago, Capt_Hook said:

I'm slightly behind with the processor (5800X3D), but running a 4090 and Reverb G2, and it's hard to see the point of any of the VR sets with massively more pixels.  I can keep 90 most of the time, but not all of the time, especially online.  And DCS is just a joke in VR at virtually any rez.  

 

We need either much better / more efficient game engines, or 2-3 times the rendering power to go much beyond 2200x2200 per eye IMHO.

 

I agree, as at this point we may have reached about the best IL-2 can look in any  VR headset.

 

I don't know that I would actually recommend the Pimax Crystal to anyone but an enthusiast, but with mine I have a 4090 and 13700k, so generally get close to 90 fps most of the time in MP, where I do 95% of my flying. Even at that resolution I don't see IL-2 getting much clearer in any expected headset.

 

The Crystal's sweetspot is noticeably better than the Reverb G2 and I get 3596 x 4256 per eye, which has improved my distant contact spotting and bogey tracking compared to my Reverb G2 - but that G2 is a better deal and frankly much easier to use. 

 

The only other main advantage with the Crystal is the increased vertical FOV allows me to track enemy fighters during a dogfight. In my G2 it was harder to track someone in the vertical, so I am now hooked on the Crystal's vertical FOV, much to the detriment of my wallet and neck muscles.

 

So long as I use an Apache strap and add 100 grams of counterweight (20 American nickles) just above the rear strap adjuster knob, I can wear the Crystal for hours. But I'd still generally recommend a gently-used Reverb G2 over it for someone just starting out in VR.

 

[DBCOOPER011]

4 hours ago, Capt_Hook said:

I'm slightly behind with the processor (5800X3D), but running a 4090 and Reverb G2, and it's hard to see the point of any of the VR sets with massively more pixels.  I can keep 90 most of the time, but not all of the time, especially online.  And DCS is just a joke in VR at virtually any rez.  

 

We need either much better / more efficient game engines, or 2-3 times the rendering power to go much beyond 2200x2200 per eye IMHO.

 

I recently got the crystal and am rather impressed by it so far. It took around 3-4 days to configure everything pretty much they way I want it, but it does deliver a lot more clarity throughout the entire field of view over every other HMD I had so far. This HMD is definitely not plug and play though. The eye tracking (DFR) and resolution are the main benefits of this headset for me. Its pretty large, the controllers are mediocre, and I wouldn't be using it for any other games other then sims. But with an apache strap thats setup correctly, its actually quite comfortable.

 

My IL2 sweet spot settings are pretty much everything maxed out but with MSAA x2 and opencomposite at 3700x4378 resolution. Everything is nice and clear and I can hold 90 fps with a 7800X3d/4090. DCS though is much better though due to quad views foveated rendering and DFR. I am able to run it 100% above the base resolution (3234x3826) with 2x msaa in the foveated area. It looks really nice and much better then what my G2 could accomplish. DCS settings are below. Hopefully IL2 is able to get something like DFR created..

 

[dgiatr]

6 hours ago, Charlo-VR said:

 

I agree, as at this point we may have reached about the best IL-2 can look in any  VR headset.

 

I don't know that I would actually recommend the Pimax Crystal to anyone but an enthusiast, but with mine I have a 4090 and 13700k, so generally get close to 90 fps most of the time in MP, where I do 95% of my flying. Even at that resolution I don't see IL-2 getting much clearer in any expected headset.

 

The Crystal's sweetspot is noticeably better than the Reverb G2 and I get 3596 x 4256 per eye, which has improved my distant contact spotting and bogey tracking compared to my Reverb G2 - but that G2 is a better deal and frankly much easier to use. 

 

The only other main advantage with the Crystal is the increased vertical FOV allows me to track enemy fighters during a dogfight. In my G2 it was harder to track someone in the vertical, so I am now hooked on the Crystal's vertical FOV, much to the detriment of my wallet and neck muscles.

 

So long as I use an Apache strap and add 100 grams of counterweight (20 American nickles) just above the rear strap adjuster knob, I can wear the Crystal for hours. But I'd still generally recommend a gently-used Reverb G2 over it for someone just starting out in VR.

 

 

3 hours ago, DBCOOPER011 said:

 

I recently got the crystal and am rather impressed by it so far. It took around 3-4 days to configure everything pretty much they way I want it, but it does deliver a lot more clarity throughout the entire field of view over every other HMD I had so far. This HMD is definitely not plug and play though. The eye tracking (DFR) and resolution are the main benefits of this headset for me. Its pretty large, the controllers are mediocre, and I wouldn't be using it for any other games other then sims. But with an apache strap thats setup correctly, its actually quite comfortable.

 

My IL2 sweet spot settings are pretty much everything maxed out but with MSAA x2 and opencomposite at 3700x4378 resolution. Everything is nice and clear and I can hold 90 fps with a 7800X3d/4090. DCS though is much better though due to quad views foveated rendering and DFR. I am able to run it 100% above the base resolution (3234x3826) with 2x msaa in the foveated area. It looks really nice and much better then what my G2 could accomplish. DCS settings are below. Hopefully IL2 is able to get something like DFR created..

 

 

Hello to all.

 

i want to ask the two of you guys, with so high resolution settings how can you achieve a better spotting ability compared to , say G2 with lower resolution settings, since each others plane pixel size is much smaller in pimax case compared to g2. I can understand that you can achieve better identification ok, or better sweet spot area or better vertical FOV during dogfight but why better spotting ability?

I am really thinking of pulling the trigger to pimax crystal but that's the only downside i am afraid to deal with. i fly only MP and alone so for me the best spotting ability is the most important factor using my reverb g2 headset. Of course other plane lower identification ability and general screen clearness is a compromise for having better spotting ability with lower resolutions..

 

Do you think that in my case , buying a pimax crystal headset and setting it to lower resolutions ( the same as g2 i fly now) would have any meaning as far as better spotting ability is concerned? ( except better sweet spot, better FOV..) .

For the same resolution levels between g2 and pimax , does the image inside pimax look better or about the same compared to G2  ( except better sweet spot and better verical FOV)? 

 

Thank you!

Edited October 4, 2023 by dgiatr

[chiliwili69]

There are not direct footage comparison of the Crystal versus G2, but there is a comparison video from Tyrel that shows the Aero and the G2 (and Index as well).

 

The Aero has almost the same panel resolution than Crystal and similar PPD, so you can get an idea of what it look like. But remember that this footage is taken by a camera, not a human eye.

 

 

[dgiatr]

15 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

There are not direct footage comparison of the Crystal versus G2, but there is a comparison video from Tyrel that shows the Aero and the G2 (and Index as well).

 

The Aero has almost the same panel resolution than Crystal and similar PPD, so you can get an idea of what it look like. But remember that this footage is taken by a camera, not a human eye.

 

 

Thank you chiliwili69 for that informative video,

 

at what resolution each headset works?

[chiliwili69]

5 hours ago, dgiatr said:

at what resolution each headset works?

I suposse Tyrel used default resolution ofr each headset he is trying out. But it is something he hardly explains.

In this post you can find a table with panel resolution and the default rendered resolution (100%Supersampling) of each headset:

 

[Charlo-VRde]

9 hours ago, dgiatr said:

Hello to all.

 

i want to ask the two of you guys, with so high resolution settings how can you achieve a better spotting ability compared to , say G2 with lower resolution settings, since each others plane pixel size is much smaller in pimax case compared to g2. I can understand that you can achieve better identification ok, or better sweet spot area or better vertical FOV during dogfight but why better spotting ability?

I am really thinking of pulling the trigger to pimax crystal but that's the only downside i am afraid to deal with. i fly only MP and alone so for me the best spotting ability is the most important factor using my reverb g2 headset. Of course other plane lower identification ability and general screen clearness is a compromise for having better spotting ability with lower resolutions..

 

Do you think that in my case , buying a pimax crystal headset and setting it to lower resolutions ( the same as g2 i fly now) would have any meaning as far as better spotting ability is concerned? ( except better sweet spot, better FOV..) .

For the same resolution levels between g2 and pimax , does the image inside pimax look better or about the same compared to G2  ( except better sweet spot and better verical FOV)? 

 

Thank you!

I’m sorry to write that I can’t help with your question, since I don’t have any experience with setting the Crystal to a lower resolution to help with spotting. With both my G2 and Crystal I always opted for the highest resolution I could get because I want to see the cockpit and my aircraft as photo realistically as I can achieve.

 

For my use case I am creating an experience for myself, with Slaw rudder pedals, SimShaker Wings software driving a HF8 haptic seat pad and a Buttkicker, and a Next Level Racing V3 motion chair. Even if it’s a competitive disadvantage for me in MP, I prefer the clearest visuals I can get in VR, as well as believable physical movement that tricks my brain (and helps prevent VR nausea while also throwing me around a little).

 

With 3596 x 4256 per eye in the  Crystal I can spot tiny dots of moving bogeys in the distance better than I could with the G2. I haven’t flown looking at a monitor in more than three years, but the tiny bogey dots I can now see in my Crystal remind me of what I recall I used to be able to see on my 4k monitor.

 

(Off topic: Those I fly against in MP who use monitors and/or reduce their resolution or refine their colors to help with spotting may have a competitive advantage over me, but I’d rather get beaten by them then reduce the clarity I can achieve with my hardware. I’m fine with getting shot down by someone who is a better dog fighter then me, and figure getting bounced sometimes is just a part of the experience ?)

 

It took me a few weeks of trial and error and physical adjusting on my head to achieve the clarity and comfort I now have with the Crystal. The G2 was an easier headset to make comfortable since it’s lighter and frankly appears better designed for my head and face shape. But once dialed in I prefer the Crystal.

[Nanook_]

If flight or racing sims are all you are going to do, then I recommend the HP Reverb G2 due to its superb resolution for its price. The only issue I have with the Reverb, is the controllers suck unless you have the lighting in your room absolutely perfect. Because of this, it's pretty much useless for games where you are needing the controllers. 

 

I've also just purchased the Quest 3 as its controllers are fantastic, especially for games like Half Life Alyx. Side by side on IL-2, its resolution is close to the Reverb however its biggest downside is that the battery only lasts around 2 hours which is not good for long flights in a sim. With the Reverb being tethered to the PC, it will never run out of power and this is where the Reverb blows the Quest away. 

 

 

[chiliwili69]

10 hours ago, Nanook_ said:

With the Reverb being tethered to the PC, it will never run out of power and this is where the Reverb blows the Quest away. 

 

You can also play unlimited time with the Quest3 using these kind of cables:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Kuject-Separate-Charging-Ultra-Durable-Accessories/dp/B09TN25765?th=1

 

I am using this one and never run out of power:

https://www.amazon.es/Syntech-Compatible-auricular-independiente-suficiente/dp/B0BGM12LWL

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

The frensel lenses of G2 was for me the only one thing to stop me from enjoying the overall expiernce. I have Q3 but I still prefer to choose 2D gameplay during  competitive multiplayer because I have good monitor. I don't say that could change if I had better headset like Areo or Cristal and 4090 but I don't have those yet.

Edited October 30, 2023 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[Koziolek]

9 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

You can also play unlimited time with the Quest3 using these kind of cables:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Kuject-Separate-Charging-Ultra-Durable-Accessories/dp/B09TN25765?th=1

 

I am using this one and never run out of power:

https://www.amazon.es/Syntech-Compatible-auricular-independiente-suficiente/dp/B0BGM12LWL

I'm using one of those as well, works perfect for Pico4. The only problem is they are all 5m, I couldn't find anything shorter. Just wonder if usb-c splitter would work here. one cable for data and another for power. Anyone tried that?

Edited October 30, 2023 by Koziolek

[Nanook_]

11 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

You can also play unlimited time with the Quest3 using these kind of cables:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Kuject-Separate-Charging-Ultra-Durable-Accessories/dp/B09TN25765?th=1

 

I am using this one and never run out of power:

https://www.amazon.es/Syntech-Compatible-auricular-independiente-suficiente/dp/B0BGM12LWL

That's good to know. I'd been looking into ways to extend battery life but haven't come across these before. Just using the Quest link cable alone isn't enough although it helps a little so this could be the solution. 

 

I was having a look at these yesterday, ZyberVR Quick-Charge Neck Power Bank With Detachable Battery which I was thinking of ordering. 

 

 

[Qcumber]

On 10/3/2023 at 9:48 PM, Capt_Hook said:

  And DCS is just a joke in VR at virtually any rez.  

Try DCS again since the 2.9 update and use DLSS/DLAA and quad view foveated rendering. I can now get a similar performance to IL-2.

 

5800x3d, 4070, 64gb ram, Pico 4 using VDXR at godlike.