Quest Pro vs G2 Impressions - 4090/7950x3D

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Find this video on improving comfort:

 

[Sile]

vor 45 Minuten schrieb VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants:

Find this video on improving comfort:

 

thanks!

[Cytarabine]

I’ve found it really comfortable, one thing I did listen to was not over tightening it so I don’t get the forehead discomfort others have reported with it. I find it more comfortable than the Pico 4 (with the facial interface on that being rather uncomfortable).

I guess it is kind of a suck it and see. If you find it uncomfortable then trying the head strap idea to improve comfort.

It’s actually the first headset since the Rift S that for me I’ve found it comfortable without after market add ons (I use an elite strap on the quest 2, a custom facial interface, strap and weights on the Reverb G2 and custom facial interface on the Pico 4.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nikoel]

Just received mine

$2000AUD is a lot of money. After unboxing it all, and turning on the headset - I am convinced Meta is selling this headset either at cost or at a loss

I would like to thank the shareholders for multibillion dollar losses for financing my virtual F16

[diamond26]

40 minutes ago, nikoel said:

Just received mine

$2000AUD is a lot of money. After unboxing it all, and turning on the headset - I am convinced Meta is selling this headset either at cost or at a loss

I would like to thank the shareholders for multibillion dollar losses for financing my virtual F16

eager to hear your detailed analysis on the use of QPro. These discussions have been really made my wallet worried 

[nikoel]

Alright, not a detailed analysis, but more of a first impressions kind of thang. Probably going to rehash what everyone else was saying

First of all the lenses are best the industry, bar none - dont @ me. I have tried G2 (obivously) Q2, XTAL and Aero, haven't tried Crystal but Pimax can kiss me' A$$

FOV noticeably larger - (this is coming off G2 with aftermarket gasket that had my eyelashes touching the lenses. In both vertical and horizontal plane. Don't expect to be wowed, but it's 100% noticeable, no A-B comparison required and it's nice. Anything with more FOV will only be marginally better 

Revelation - with this headset you are getting the pixels that your GPU has "paid for" and by association if you purchased your computer "you have paid for". Don't get me wrong, G2 is sharper and clearer in the sweet spot, no question. I can no longer see the fingerprints on the F-14 screen for instance, something I was easily able to see on the G2. But I can now properly see behind me without having rotate like an owl and it's clear up to the last 5' where it gets a little bit chromatically meh (eg Like the Aero under normal conditions). I can actually see the pixels outside the 10' sweet spot. That alone make it worth it

My GPU runs DCS faster at roughly the same render resolution and settings with QP. Free GPU Upgrade

I still think that the Aero is a slightly better headset for sims. If money is any consideration for you then QP walks away with it. For around half the price, it carries many advantages and loses in things like resolution and DP connection (DFR to a lesser extent, as I am able to run QP at 1.3x maxed out with my <profanity>ty 6900XT so it's not really needed). It's a no brainer, I am happy

I like that I can disable ASW, which is far, far, far better than WMR, and Aero doesn't even show up to the fight. It's still ASW and I'm firmly in the anti reprojection camp. I use 90hz and run 45 with 2frame hold in the developer settings. Regardless when I was accidentally using ASW, I was amazed by how good it was on my AMD card

I wouldn't call this a 'generational improvement'. Advantages are plenty, but you are giving away a few perks of the G2, however I will be keeping the headset and it's a solid upgrade. In my opinion I have only tried one headset that I would call a "generational upgrade" and it's the XTAL

The build quality is outstanding, and whilst I believe it's a second to Aero in DCS, it's much better when playing say Half Life Alyx, controllers feel awesome, I no longer need a new graphics card and getting better picture than those on G2's with 4090. (And I don't have the letterbox FOV of the Aero)

Edited May 13, 2023 by nikoel

[freehand]

So you receive more bang for your buck vs the G2.

Edited May 13, 2023 by freehand

[Cytarabine]

So you receive more bang for your buck vs the G2 ?

For me the answer was yes because with the G2 I was always feeling like I was missing out compared to flat screen flying, and with the QP I don’t feel that way anymore.

Having blurry vision outside of the sweet spot was for me always a deal breaker and in a way the G2 exacerbated this vs for example the Rift S because it was so sharp dead centre and so blurry out or centre meaning head movement was needed to look at instruments as opposed to just glancing down.

Currently all of the headsets on the market are a compromise. If a headset combined DP input of a G2/Aero with Meta’s ASW, the QP lenses, the FoV of the Aero, OLED display of the PSVR2, comfort of the QP and the resolution of the Aero it would be perfect. Right now you just have to choose your compromises and it’s either the best optics, tracking and reprojection (QP) vs uncompressed video, higher resolution and field of view.

The other factor is cost. The perfect DCS headset is always going to be expensive because it will always lack the mass market (such that there is in VR) appeal that the stand-alone headsets can offer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[freehand]

7 minutes ago, Cytarabine said:

For me the answer was yes because with the G2 I was always feeling like I was missing out compared to flat screen flying, and with the QP I don’t feel that way anymore.

Having blurry vision outside of the sweet spot was for me always a deal breaker and in a way the G2 exacerbated this vs for example the Rift S because it was so sharp dead centre and so blurry out or centre meaning head movement was needed to look at instruments as opposed to just glancing down.

Currently all of the headsets on the market are a compromise. If a headset combined DP input of a G2/Aero with Meta’s ASW, the QP lenses, the FoV of the Aero, OLED display of the PSVR2, comfort of the QP and the resolution of the Aero it would be perfect. Right now you just have to choose your compromises and it’s either the best optics, tracking and reprojection (QP) vs uncompressed video, higher resolution and field of view.

The other factor is cost. The perfect DCS headset is always going to be expensive because it will always lack the mass market (such that there is in VR) appeal that the stand-alone headsets can offer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

cheers, yes sweet spot on the G2 pisses me off think I will go on the hunt for a deal in UK.

[Mr109]

3 hours ago, freehand said:

cheers, yes sweet spot on the G2 pisses me off think I will go on the hunt for a deal in UK.

This was my motivation for the change. I am really happy I moved and wouldn't go back. I wasn't expecting the motion reprojection to be better, but it is.

The only hesitation I would have is if you do a lot of night flying. Black levels are either meh, without local dimming, or very bloomy with it - to the extent that I didn't enjoy the experience very much. I don't have the full light blocker which may improve this. Having said that, the fresnel lenses in the G2 were pretty crap in the night too.

[Cytarabine]

This was my motivation for the change. I am really happy I moved and wouldn't go back. I wasn't expecting the motion reprojection to be better, but it is.
The only hesitation I would have is if you do a lot of night flying. Black levels are either meh, without local dimming, or very bloomy with it - to the extent that I didn't enjoy the experience very much. I don't have the full light blocker which may improve this. Having said that, the fresnel lenses in the G2 were pretty crap in the night too.

Yeah night flying is one of the reasons that an OLED based headset would be fantastic. The local dimming is better than muddy grey even with the blooming but I would still love to see a similar headset with OLED panels in it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dentedend10]

Hi! Great reading this discussion. 
I would have a question to Quest Pro users - are you able to get dynamic foveated rendering to work with this headset? I know you can do that with the Aero through OpenXR toolkit. Hoping that’s the case for QP as well 

[dburne]

30 minutes ago, Dentedend10 said:

Hi! Great reading this discussion. 
I would have a question to Quest Pro users - are you able to get dynamic foveated rendering to work with this headset? I know you can do that with the Aero through OpenXR toolkit. Hoping that’s the case for QP as well 

Actually that is not quite right, in fact using DFR with eye tracking of the Aero in DCS one can not be running the Open XR Toolkit. So if having Open XR tools available to you is essential then you will not want to run DFR with DCS. If you would rather have DFR/eye tracking of the Aero with DCS, then you need to disable the Open XR Toolkit but yes you will need to run DCS-MT in Open XR runtime. Grab this little program from @mbucchia to set  your DFR settings for the Aero. https://github.com/mbucchia/Varjo-Foveated 

Also insure you have eye tracking enabled in Aero.

I found the results to be phenominal and am a big advocate of using that feature of the Aero with DCS. 

Sorry no idea if this can be done with Quest Pro. I just wanted to make that clarifcation for using it with the Aero.

Edited May 13, 2023 by dburne

[Dentedend10]

19 minutes ago, dburne said:

Actually that is not quite right, in fact using DFR with eye tracking of the Aero in DCS one can not be running the Open XR Toolkit. So if having Open XR tools available to you is essential then you will not want to run DFR with DCS. If you would rather have DFR/eye tracking of the Aero with DCS, then you need to disable the Open XR Toolkit but yes you will need to run DCS-MT in Open XR runtime. Grab this little program from @mbucchia to set  your DFR settings for the Aero. https://github.com/mbucchia/Varjo-Foveated 

Also insure you have eye tracking enabled in Aero.

I found the results to be phenominal and am a big advocate of using that feature of the Aero with DCS. 

Sorry no idea if this can be done with Quest Pro. I just wanted to make that clarifcation for using it with the Aero.

 

Thanks! I don’t have the Aero so wasn’t quite sure how DFR works exactly, just read it’s possible  

now is there a third party software that allows the same for QP?

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

My Quest Pro arrived yesterday and wifie pretended not to notice... Love it so far. More later.

[Sile]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Dentedend10:

Thanks! I don’t have the Aero so wasn’t quite sure how DFR works exactly, just read it’s possible  

now is there a third party software that allows the same for QP?

No DFR for Quest Pro in DCS.

[Dentedend10]

2 hours ago, Sile said:

No DFR for Quest Pro in DCS.

That’s a bummer, especially considering I’ve put the order in xD well anyways I need controllers so the Aero is kinda ruled out for now (even if I could use generic controllers with Steam)

[Sile]

vor 9 Stunden schrieb Dentedend10:

That’s a bummer, especially considering I’ve put the order in xD well anyways I need controllers so the Aero is kinda ruled out for now (even if I could use generic controllers with Steam)

That's not a problem. DFR plays it strength on high res headsets. Think it's not needed for the relatively low res QPro.

Citing the @mbucchia here:

Zitat

I'm not going to implement this on Pro. The Pro is too low resolution to benefit from the quad views. When doing some quick math earlier, it looked like the gains on Pro would be perhaps one quarter of the gains of Aero/Crystal.    ...

[YoYo]

On 5/13/2023 at 3:50 AM, nikoel said:

Alright, not a detailed analysis, but more of a first impressions kind of thang. Probably going to rehash what everyone else was saying

First of all the lenses are best the industry, bar none - dont @ me. I have tried G2 (obivously) Q2, XTAL and Aero, haven't tried Crystal but Pimax can kiss me' A$$

FOV noticeably larger - (this is coming off G2 with aftermarket gasket that had my eyelashes touching the lenses. In both vertical and horizontal plane. Don't expect to be wowed, but it's 100% noticeable, no A-B comparison required and it's nice. Anything with more FOV will only be marginally better 

Revelation - with this headset you are getting the pixels that your GPU has "paid for" and by association if you purchased your computer "you have paid for". Don't get me wrong, G2 is sharper and clearer in the sweet spot, no question. I can no longer see the fingerprints on the F-14 screen for instance, something I was easily able to see on the G2. But I can now properly see behind me without having rotate like an owl and it's clear up to the last 5' where it gets a little bit chromatically meh (eg Like the Aero under normal conditions). I can actually see the pixels outside the 10' sweet spot. That alone make it worth it

My GPU runs DCS faster at roughly the same render resolution and settings with QP. Free GPU Upgrade

I still think that the Aero is a slightly better headset for sims. If money is any consideration for you then QP walks away with it. For around half the price, it carries many advantages and loses in things like resolution and DP connection (DFR to a lesser extent, as I am able to run QP at 1.3x maxed out with my <profanity>ty 6900XT so it's not really needed). It's a no brainer, I am happy

I like that I can disable ASW, which is far, far, far better than WMR, and Aero doesn't even show up to the fight. It's still ASW and I'm firmly in the anti reprojection camp. I use 90hz and run 45 with 2frame hold in the developer settings. Regardless when I was accidentally using ASW, I was amazed by how good it was on my AMD card

I wouldn't call this a 'generational improvement'. Advantages are plenty, but you are giving away a few perks of the G2, however I will be keeping the headset and it's a solid upgrade. In my opinion I have only tried one headset that I would call a "generational upgrade" and it's the XTAL

The build quality is outstanding, and whilst I believe it's a second to Aero in DCS, it's much better when playing say Half Life Alyx, controllers feel awesome, I no longer need a new graphics card and getting better picture than those on G2's with 4090. (And I don't have the letterbox FOV of the Aero)

 

Thx for opinion. Did you try 72Hz without reprojection? How it works? On Reverb with 60Hz, the screen flickers terribly, but 72 FPS is achievable with most 40xx series cards, so I'm also a bit confused. 90Hz is a bit too much still, maybe for 5090 :).

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Well again the numbers depend the scenario, but I would give this a try.

BTW, I think I may need to redo all the benchmark vids.

[Cytarabine]

Well again the numbers depend the scenario, but I would give this a try.
BTW, I think I may need to redo all the benchmark vids.

In my experience with keeping resolution set to maximum in the Oculus software with no addition multiplier in OTT and shadows at medium instead of high I can maintain 72Hz the vast majority of the time on any map except Mariana which still kicks me down, which is fine as it is the map I fly least.

I’ve found the Turbo option in OpenXR toolkit to help a bit here. This is how I have things set now and I am really happy with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nikoel]

25 minutes ago, YoYo said:

Thx for opinion. Did you try 72Hz without reprojection? How it works? On Reverb with 60Hz, the screen flickers terribly, but 72 FPS is achievable with most 40xx series cards, so I'm also a bit confused. 90Hz is a bit too much still, maybe for 5090 :).

Yeah I did. The problem is that I have gone through training and one montage later, Im now one with the force, and no longer affected by the 60HZ flicker. So my opinion reflects this

72hz was great when I was achieving 72fps+ but the problem is when you no longer achieve 72FPS it's stutter city or ASW at 36FPS. I preferred to run with higher settings, resolution and encoding (900) at 90hz/45fps and deal with a little bit of ghosting instead of ASW and the other crap

I may still go for 36 with 2 Frame hold at 72hz with everything on maximum. But I coudn't see this in the ODT settings. I only got 45FPS with ASW and 45FPS without ASW (or disabled) where can I find 36 without ASW????

What this experience has taught me, is that optics, not resolution are the true king of VR. It is wrong to look at specs alone - I am now beginning to think that they would lead you to brands which make some of the worst headsets out there

Edited May 14, 2023 by nikoel

[YoYo]

3 minutes ago, nikoel said:

72hz was great when I was achieving 72fps+ but the problem is when you no longer achieve 72FPS it's stutter city or ASW at 36FPS. I preferred to run with higher settings, resolution and encoding (900) at 90hz/45fps and deal with a little bit of ghosting instead of ASW and the other crap

Yes, over London its hard to have 72fps, however over Paris its possible on my GPU ;). Aleppo generates about 70-80 on my GPU, so without any reprojection it cold be kind of solution. Personally I dont like reprojection in OpenXR, it gives blurry screen and big ghosting effect (especially in G2).

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Okay. just run a modless version DCS (I was building some missions again, no spoilers) BFM with J-11A. QPro at 72Hz, max resolution.

Well, the Flanker showed no ghosting, smooth, most of the time. However, when I look at the forest from the side, about 45 degrees left or right, with nothing else on the map, the trees show sever ghosting. At 90Hz, full res, not so much. I think I may need to step down the resolution a bit.

 

 

[slughead]

12 hours ago, nikoel said:

Yeah I did. The problem is that I have gone through training and one montage later, Im now one with the force, and no longer affected by the 60HZ flicker. So my opinion reflects this

72hz was great when I was achieving 72fps+ but the problem is when you no longer achieve 72FPS it's stutter city or ASW at 36FPS. I preferred to run with higher settings, resolution and encoding (900) at 90hz/45fps and deal with a little bit of ghosting instead of ASW and the other crap

I may still go for 36 with 2 Frame hold at 72hz with everything on maximum. But I coudn't see this in the ODT settings. I only got 45FPS with ASW and 45FPS without ASW (or disabled) where can I find 36 without ASW????

What this experience has taught me, is that optics, not resolution are the true king of VR. It is wrong to look at specs alone - I am now beginning to think that they would lead you to brands which make some of the worst headsets out there

 

The 45FPS setting just means half rate. So if you use the same setting with 72Hz you will get 36FPS.