Are wireless headsets up to the task?

[Jyge]

I gave my old Reverb G2 to my son and he's playing with VR. Now, since there is this talk about Microsoft pulling the plug on Windows Mixed Reality, he started speculating, whether it might make more sense to sell the Reverb in ebay and get a replacement. At this moment, also considering the games that he plays we were talking about the wireless solutions, Pico 4 or Quest 3.

How is actually the performance without the cable, is it playable, can somebody throw in some numbers?

Then the next question would be, how is the quality in comparison to Reverb G2 - I think some folks have switched from G2 to Quest - was it a good idea or a downgrade?

We are on the fence here, from what I understood WMR might go on working if it is installed on the system and maybe somebody will provide a solution, but be as it may I would really appreciate a take on the wireless headset's performance. Is there something that you need to buy to get, for example a Quest 3 to run with wire? Is it just a USB-C cable (which would be way less bulky than DP+USB cable of Reverb). Is it a standard cable, that you could look for any given replacement in amazon to get some range? I would like to keep an open mind here, but I think Oculus might have a better compability than Pico 4?

[speed-of-heat]

So there is also this option https://docs.realmlist.eu/tutorials/retaining-windows-mixed-reality-support-on-windows-11 which will enable him to stay on a supported version of Windows 11 and get security updates and still use wmr.

But that is just pushing the problem to the right, my personal view is that wireless solutions aren't quite there yet, mostly due to wireless bandwidth solutions or compression over the cable because of its own bandwidth solutions, and the last thing dcs needs is additional softawr introducing additional latency....

That said the G2 was itself flawed outside of the sweet spot, due to the fresnal lenses, but maybe something like the pimax light would be a good fit, depending on budget.

 

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

I used to use Oculus Link (cough) cable and now switched to Virtual Desktop with my QPro, which is sadly not available anymore, and go wireless, unless I am doing benchmarks.

Good:

• No cables
• VDXR is more efficient than Oculus OpenXR, at least on paper
• Desktop mode by default
• Not sure if it is better than AirLink in terms of quality and performance
• Colour adjustment option available without the use of Reshade
• Handtracking support is far better than Oculus Link
• More customisation and options available like bit-rate, upscaling without leaving the VD environment

No so good:

• No cable means there is short battery life
• Like other wireless solution, a dedicated wifi router is a must, which also comes with the need to setup a subnetwork and it is not for everyone.
• VD has no USB connectivity support.
• Even with the best wireless solution, the transfer rate is still no match with USB-C and other wired solutions, which are more direct and less expensive

 

Edited October 20, 2024 by VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

[Qcumber]

I would agree with VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants. Oculus link and VD are comparable with oculus having a slight edge, but not major difference. 

My only experience with DP connection is with my rift s. Obviously the quest Pro has better visuals due to higher PD. I don't notice any compression artefacts with QP Vs rift S. 

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Just call me VRFGiPJP will do. My handle is quite a handful I know.

[Mr_sukebe]

A key drawback of wireless is battery life.  With my QP it’s at best a couple of hours.

Do you really want to be limited to a flight time max based upon the battery?

If not, you’ll need a charging cable.  Add that, you might aswell have the charging cable also able to pass data.

[Jyge]

So one should rather look at Quest Pro than Quest 3? From the little I read, the Quest 3 has a slightly better resolution and stuff?

G2 is doing just a great job, no complaints about the picture or the sweet spot, I am not sure if there one can expect a real step change from

the other available headsets when it comes to picture quality. I think the resolution path is done and I am trying to figure out if there is some other criteria

to justify an upgrade - wireless would be one feature that might actually be nice for my son as he also plays other games, not just DCS like me. I just sit in front of my computer, I don't need the controllers or any other gimmicks. Cable or not, does not really rock my boat

[Phantom711]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Jyge:

G2 is doing just a great job, no complaints about the picture or the sweet spot, I am not sure if there one can expect a real step change from

Trust me, the pancake lenses of a Quest 3 or Quest Pro are just so much better than the fresnel lenses of a G2. 

You simply can‘t just compare VR headsets by their resolution. The Quest headsets can also be used at refresh rates of 72 or 80Hz without flickering. Indirectly that also helps in performance compared to the 90Hz of the G2.

Now since you also look for a headset that your son can use for other standalone games, I out of the 2 I would recommend the Q3. If it was only for DCS, I would argue that the QPro is the overall better choice due to it‘s eye-tracking feature. I‘ll die on that hill.

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

QPro has eye tracking but Q3 only has functioning AR, which implies that QPro is not only worse, actually it is rubbish.

[maxTRX]

WiFi is cool... the only hustle for me would be wearing an aluminum scull cap underneath the headset. I already have enough s*** swirling around my head   

[Phantom711]

@VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

Can you elaborate further on that? Because I don‘t understand your reasoning here.

[Qcumber]

2 hours ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

QPro has eye tracking but Q3 only has functioning AR, which implies that QPro is not only worse, actually it is rubbish.

Are you saying that Q3 is the better standalone headset over the QP? That might be true but for someone with a mid tier PC the QP wins for me when it comes to DCS. 

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

4 hours ago, Phantom711 said:

@VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

Can you elaborate further on that? Because I don‘t understand your reasoning here.

Sorry.

First I meant that in terms of Augmented Reality, both QPro and Q3 support this, which is called "pass through". I tried Q3 in department store and the pass through is great, but QPro's pass through is just a bunch of colour blurs.

Some may think AR is still not very applicable in our hobby -- flight sim. But I have seen videos using AR where the cockpit is physical and the outside view is rendered entirely inside the headset.

3 hours ago, Qcumber said:

Are you saying that Q3 is the better standalone headset over the QP? That might be true but for someone with a mid tier PC the QP wins for me when it comes to DCS. 

No, I have no experience with Q3 in terms of PCVR. I would say it is a much better headset in terms of AR which is supported by both Oculus Link and VD. And, as above, we start seeing somebody using AR in flight sim.

And in my narrow understanding, USB-C does not have the bandwidth for high-res PCVR, I would agree to some that DP or LAN is the way to go, and to be clear, I have no experience with DP-based headset.

[Phantom711]

@VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

Well yes, the passthrough of a Q3 is was better than that if the QPro. But how many people have setups with like even just the front section of a cockpit and can make use of those early adoptions of an AR cockpit? 

You only take that one aspect to call the QPro „rubbish“ while disregarding the performance advantage of eye-tracking/DFR.

vor 45 Minuten schrieb VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants:

And in my narrow understanding, USB-C does not have the bandwidth for high-res PCVR, I would agree to some that DP or LAN is the way to go

 As far as I can tell my USB-C connection is better than my WiFi6. DP would be superior though.

[diego999]

13 hours ago, Mr_sukebe said:

A key drawback of wireless is battery life.  With my QP it’s at best a couple of hours.

Do you really want to be limited to a flight time max based upon the battery?

If not, you’ll need a charging cable.  Add that, you might aswell have the charging cable also able to pass data.

 

Pretty much this.

My Quest 3 dies in under two hours using it over wifi. WIth a generic USB-C cable the battery won't go lower than 80-85% no matter how long I use it. Not to mention the slightly worse visual quality.

[Maddaawg]

1 hour ago, diego999 said:

 

Pretty much this.

My Quest 3 dies in under two hours using it over wifi. WIth a generic USB-C cable the battery won't go lower than 80-85% no matter how long I use it. Not to mention the slightly worse visual quality.

Yes but there are headset accessories that improve comfort, balance and have rechargeable battery packs. I use a BoboVR S3 Pro halo type headgear that uses rechargeable batteries. It's very comfortable and let's me play for as long as I want at DCS or other games.

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

13 hours ago, Phantom711 said:

@VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

You only take that one aspect to call the QPro „rubbish“ while disregarding the performance advantage of eye-tracking/DFR.

Sorry, I just say one aspect and in no way implies I dislike any other properties of QPro. Quoting myself again:

21 hours ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

QPro has eye tracking

 

On 10/20/2024 at 10:00 AM, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

QPro, which is sadly not available anymore

Thank you. :-¦

[slughead]

"Are wireless headsets up to the task?"

Yes, very much so. As for the battery life, buy a power bank, stick it in a pocket, and connect it to your headset with a short cable. You still get full movement and don't feel tethered to your PC. If you buy two power banks, you can hot-swap them. So far, I've only needed to use one, and it lasts hours.

[Jyge]

On 10/21/2024 at 9:16 PM, slughead said:

"Are wireless headsets up to the task?"

Yes, very much so. As for the battery life, buy a power bank, stick it in a pocket, and connect it to your headset with a short cable. You still get full movement and don't feel tethered to your PC. If you buy two power banks, you can hot-swap them. So far, I've only needed to use one, and it lasts hours.

Thanks, just the one open question though. Is Quest 3 or Quest Pro the only viable options here? Pico 4 or so not to be recommended? Well, at least with Oculus you should have rather good combability with the games, I suppose. If game developer starts integrating a VR interface, most likely the Oculus is the go-to VR-headset?

[Qcumber]

1 minute ago, Jyge said:

Thanks, just the one open question though. Is Quest 3 or Quest Pro the only viable options here? Pico 4 or so not to be recommended? Well, at least with Oculus you should have rather good combability with the games, I suppose. If game developer starts integrating a VR interface, most likely the Oculus is the go-to VR-headset?

I have used both the QP and P4 and they are both good headsets. The reason I ended up preferring the QP is eye tracking. I used the P4 with fixed QVFR and it's pretty good. If you can find a QP for the same price as a P4 then get that. Otherwise try a P4. 

[slughead]

7 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

I have used both the QP and P4 and they are both good headsets. The reason I ended up preferring the QP is eye tracking. I used the P4 with fixed QVFR and it's pretty good. If you can find a QP for the same price as a P4 then get that. Otherwise try a P4. 

Why not the Q3? If his machine is up to spec, there isn't a need for QVFR, which can actually make the performance worse. So, there is no need for eye tracking in that case.

[Qcumber]

12 hours ago, slughead said:

Why not the Q3? If his machine is up to spec, there isn't a need for QVFR, which can actually make the performance worse. So, there is no need for eye tracking in that case.

Fair point. But just offering my personal opinion based on my own experience. You also don't need to spend huge amounts to play DCS in VR. The P4 is quite a lot cheaper than the Q3. 

[slughead]

12 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

Fair point. But just offering my personal opinion based on my own experience. You also don't need to spend huge amounts to play DCS in VR. The P4 is quite a lot cheaper than the Q3. 

For sure.  

[Phantom711]

@slughead

Even with a 4090 I feel that there still is a lot of benefit and performance gain with QVFR.

[slughead]

43 minutes ago, Phantom711 said:

@slughead

Even with a 4090 I feel that there still is a lot of benefit and performance gain with QVFR.

Over cities it causes a performance hit. So I guess it depends on where you fly the most.

 

Edited October 24, 2024 by slughead