My Quest Pro Review

[DaftnDirect]

I meant to write a review a while back but I like to use something for a reasonably long time before reviewing. Anyway, feel free to add your review, experiences!

Comfort

Out of the box, the headset comfort was very poor for me. The worst element was the adjustment bands on the sides pressing into my temples. Adding restraining rubbers to pull them out, against the main headset arms helped a lot. I can now wear the headset for long periods but still have a little too much pressure on the forehead pad which always leaves a mark across my head.

There are some third-party comfort accessories starting to appear for the Pro, including head straps from VR Panda, StudioformCreative and DeadeyeVR which should help with the forehead pad pressure. I haven't tried any so reviews from other people welcome. A wider softer forehead pad would have been better. The pro pads are removable so perhaps someone will come up with a simple replacement.  

Eye comfort is excellent, the lenses eliminate godrays, increasing clarity and reducing strain. The clarity is across the whole FOV which also helps eye strain when moving your eyes. Not having a facial interface is preferable to me, no glasses fogging or warmth building up to dry my eyes. I cancelled my full face light blocker order and I choose not to use the partial light blockers at all.  

Visuals

The best part of the Pro, hands down, clarity is excellent, across the entire FOV. Initially this was just a nice noticeable difference in any app that needs better text legibility but it permeates to all types of software. You don't need to move your head so much when there's no longer a sweat spot, you can move your eyes instead. Scripting in Horizons is easier, modelling is easier.

Not having the light blocker attached also gives the impression of a larger FOV, it feels like you're seeing the frames of a pair of thick-rimmed glasses rather than wearing a headset. Even in VR this effect happens. Probably the only time where I'd rather have light blockers attached is for very dark games, and your real environment was brightly lit.

AR

Resolution can seem disappointing if you're expecting similar detail to the VR generated graphics. Illumination levels need to be good to minimise grain. Most of my disappointment isn't the quality of the passthrough though but the availability of titles that make use of it. Perhaps we won't have a significant increase in developer interest in AR until Quest 3 arrives, and more still when Apple's headset is released. We'll see.

The best experience I've had with AR so far was when a mutual follower in Horizons appeared in my room when I was in passthrough mode. It was a glitch, and an amazing one, seemed like they were there with me but I haven't been able to replicate it since. Why don't we have basic communications software that does this? bringing people together within their real homes?

Edit: I hear shared spatial anchors is a thing for social meetups, allowing people to appear in your real surrounding with you... has this been implemented in any software yet???

Pro Controllers

I haven't noticed an appreciable difference in accuracy over standard controllers. Some people state occlusion problems with the standard controllers, I posted a vid some time back to demonstrate if this was an issue or not, didn't get many views but hey, I guess most people here will know if they have a problem with their controllers or not. I've played a lot of Fallout 4 with both types of controllers now (including sniper rifles) and they're both great. The area where I find the Pro controllers excel is during modelling, where prolonged extreme close proximity to the headset is unavoidable, the standard controllers struggle with this. There is also a difference in illumination levels required from controller tracking, the Pro controllers need a little more light. I'd estimate the standard controllers work fine down to around 1 lux, the Pros need maybe 5-10 lux minimum. Games that require controllers to be placed out of the sight of headset cameras will benefit from Pro controllers if they're in that position for extended periods of time, (the standard controller inertial sensors are fine for brief periods of out-of-sight) tracking. I'm guessing maybe 5% of games would show some improvement with self tracking controllers. 

Eye & Face Tracking

Nice to have for social apps but not essential. Important to have for collaborative working in my view. Unlikely to be utilised in gaming for a while yet. My experiences have been limited to Horizon Worlds, where it proves to be a curiosity for other people. However, I've found that not being able to make facial expressions means people have to say more to explain how they feel. What they say is more likely to be misunderstood, sarcasm or irony is more easily missed... people who can move their face generally don't speak quite as much, or be misunderstood as much. You also have to point or move your head more deliberately to let people know you're speaking to them in a group. For collaborative working, eye/face tracking simply saves time and reduces chatter.

For gaming, it seems that any gains from foveated rendering would largely be cancelled out by the power draw of the camera and the computations, so maybe in a few years, when it doesn't add much cost and gives more gains for gamers, it'll make sense to include it in consumer headsets but right now I think it's best to keep it within the Pro line.

Headset Battery Life

Power usage:

Headset  & controllers docked, fully charged (trickle charging) 0.33W @ 15V  (0.022A).

Connected to PC, fully charged, stand-alone mode, Quest home, eye & face tracking enabled 4.5W @ 5V  (0.96A) headset draining.

Connected to power supply, fully charged, stand-alone mode, Quest home, eye & face tracking enabled 7.7W @ 5V  (1.53A) headset charging.

Connected to power supply, fully charged, stand-alone mode, Horizon Worlds, eye & face tracking enabled 9.8W @ 5.2V (1.85A) headset maintaining charge.

Connected to power supply, fully charged, stand-alone mode, Horizon Worlds, eye & face tracking disabled 7.8W @ 5.1V (1.52A) headset maintaining charge.

I get about 2 hours untethered (no additional battery pack) with face and eye tracking in use.

It seems my PC motherboard has a USB 3 (A and C) power limit of around 4.5W, which results in the headset battery drain of maybe 15% per 30mins (rough guess), so if this is an important use case, choose a MB (or install a PCIE card) that has USB C PD capabilities. 

Face and eye tracking adds a 2W drain (25% increase), but only in apps that have it enabled. You can leave the feature switched on in the headset settings and it won't be activated until the app uses it. You're also prompted to accept permissions whenever you enable them within the app settings, so that can act as a prompt that battery usage will increase.

If you use a third-party power supply (or battery pack) for the dock, the PS (or battery pack) must be able to switch to 15V, otherwise the dock will not charge, check that they support USB C power delivery (PD). I bought an Anker 537 Power Bank (26800mAh battery pack 45W 5V/9V/15V/20V) which came with the 60W charger, both able to run the headset and the dock.

Controller battery life

About 8 hours. Good enough but you quickly get into the habit of charging them whenever they’re not in use. May be a problem if you have 2 or more people sharing a headset.

Summary

If you're a software developer that wants to start including face and eye tracking within your app, in readiness for when that eventually comes to the consumer Quest, the Pro is probably a must. If you want to do collaborative work, face and eye tracking is more important than most people think. For gaming and social apps, I think it depends how much disposable cash you have and how long you can wait for the Q3, and whether you think face/eye tracking in social apps is useful. I guess the test is, if my headset broke and was out of warranty, would I buy another one? Yes, I probably would, unless we got a very solid rumour of the Quest 3 launching within a couple months, then I'd probably wait to see how good it was, then decide, but I'm not a serious developer or collaborative worker, just an enthusiast.

[kojack]

Good stuff!

---

@DaftnDirect wrote:

There is also a difference in illumination levels requires from controller tracking, the Pro controllers need a little more light. I'd estimate the standard controllers work fine down to around 1 lux, the Pros need maybe 5-10 lux minimum

---

A little more detail on light.

There's two different tracking systems at play. Oculus Insight (SLAM based inside-out tracking based on the room) and Oculus Constellation (IR pattern outside-in tracking).

Constellation doesn't want environmental light, ideal would be pitch black so the controller IR lights are most visible. Insight requires environmental light, it needs to clearly see the room. On Quests, the headset is Insight and the controllers are Constellation. On Quest Pros, both are Insight.

The way Quests deal with the conflict is the cameras alternate exposure. They do a high exposure frame (gather lots of light for Insight) then a low exposure frame (ignore room light, look for Constellation IR spots). The Quest Pro doesn't need that, it doesn't do Constellation.

[DaftnDirect]

Yep I should have said the headset and the controllers, as a package, need more light to function, rather than the controllers!

[TomCgcmfc]

@DaftnDirect  Thanks for your review. 

My review after 3 months use is pretty short;

The Quest pro is currently the best standalone headset with PCVR capabilities, with Link or Air Link imho.

[DaftnDirect]

@TomCgcmfc yeah it was as a lot of money but it was worth it for me, sounds like you think the same. I’d still advise most people to wait for Quest 3, it’s going to be much better value for money for the vast majority of gamers. I seem remember when you ordered your Pro, that’s what pushed me over the edge. Glad I followed.

[nalex66]

Nice write-up. I’m really looking forward to those new optics when the Quest 3 releases, which I assume will be this fall. I’m also pleased that the Q3 will stick with a removable strap (assuming the leaks are accurate) rather than going with the built-in strap that they chose for the Pro. I worry that the shape of my head would not fit with the “one size fits all” design, similar to your experience.

[DaftnDirect]

The optics alone would make for a good reason to get a Q3. If there's a resolution and processor bump as well, it'll be super popular. I don't know whether it's justified to have one if you already have a pro but I'd be tempted. I'm a bit nervous about transporting the Pro around to use as an on-the-go device and I haven't bought a case for it yet. Can't really go back to using the Q2 now.

The Q3 leaks point to a single screen, but if that's one of the compromises to keep the price affordable, it's not a big deal... maybe large IPD people will see the outer screen edge if they look for it, as per the Q2.

The benefit of the Pro headstrap is not having it press against your face and the eye relief adjuster (forgot to mention that). Plus it's better for mixed reality to see your periphery... it really does seem to give the illusion of increasing FOV too, you don't register the detail or what's at you peripheral vision so if it's roughly the same brightness, it seems to be part of the AR or VR experience.

Because the Q3 will by mixed reality, I wonder if they'll have an off-the-face strap option at launch.

....oh and it's good for glasses wearers. If they're concentrating a lot on size reduction for the Q3, I'd have to hear how good it is with glasses.