Skip to main content

I adore the Meta Quest Pro, but what I really want is an Oculus Quest 3


I can’t put down the Meta Quest Pro. Ever since I first slipped the headset on to test it out I’ve been blown away by its performance, and my Quest 2 – once the best among the gadgets I own – now sits gathering dust as I ignore it in favor of this new champion of VR. Yet even as I sit here, impatient and longing for the Quest Pro on its charging station, I know the real truth of the situation: I’m not in love with the Meta Quest Pro. I’m in love with the Oculus Quest 3 hiding inside of it.

The Meta Quest Pro is an ultra-premium upgrade of Meta’s Oculus Quest 2. The old white-plastic-clad front-heavy design has been swapped out for a sleek black shell with better weight distribution and padding for extra comfort. Internally, the Quest Pro also boasts improved specs with its all-new Snapdragon XR2 Plus chip, which offers a 50% boost in sustained power over the Quest 2’s regular XR2, and a pair of Mini-LED display panels. Each screen offers 1800 x 1920 pixels per eye and provides 37% more pixels per inch and 10% more pixels per degree than the panels found in the Quest 2.

If that wasn’t enough, the Quest Pro features improved controllers, which are rechargeable and use cameras for more accurate tracking, as well as all-new capabilities like color passthrough, hand-tracking, and eye-tracking.

The end result is a package that blows the Quest 2 out of the water. But there’s a catch: the Pro costs a lot more than the Quest 2, and it doesn’t offer quite enough bang for your buck.
Too much of a good thing

Meta’s souped-up headset will set you back $1,500 / £1,500 / AU$2,450 – almost four times more than the base Quest 2 at $400 / £400 / AU$630. Even if you compare the Pro to the more expensive 256GB Quest 2 model which costs $500 / £500 / AU$790, the price discrepancy is no less impossible to ignore.

A price jump is to be expected when you consider the plethora of upgrades the Quest Pro has versus its predecessor, but what makes the price a tough pill to swallow is that the headset’s most unique functions feel like a gimmick right now.

Avatars can mimic my funny expressions, but the whole thing feels too much like a novelty (Image credit: Meta)

Face-tracking is interesting but if you don’t spend much time in Horizon Worlds or other Horizon apps then it’s not all that useful. Furthermore, while eye-tracking has really impressed me, the only thing it can really do right now is help make sure I’m wearing my headset properly and guide me in adjusting it. Color passthrough also suffers from a lack of meaningful mixed-reality experiences – most apps that put it to use offer perfectly good VR-only options.

Over the coming year, I expect Meta and its collaborators will build a case for why users should care about face tracking and color passthrough, but right now the only real benefits it offers are its better chip and display. And while the improvements are noticeable, they aren’t worth paying an extra $1,000 / £1,000 / AU$ 1,820 or so over the Quest 2.

And this is where the Quest 3 comes in.
The Quest 3 is the VR headset for me

Meta (and a leaked design) has implied that the Quest 3 will be an improvement on the existing Quest 2, but won’t be as feature-heavy as the Quest Pro – most likely lacking face/eye-tracking and offering more basic passthrough functionality. Instead, we’ll most likely see it only pack a powerful chip and better display than its forerunner.


Oculus Quest 3 leaked model from the front (Image credit: Brad Lynch (@SadlyItsBradley))  

What’s more, the Quest 3’s likely going to be sold at a more budget-friendly price. Meta has previously explained that the regular Quest line is aimed at more casual VR fans, while its Quest Pro models will be for prosumers and professionals after a next-level experience (and willing to pay the higher cost of entry it necessitates).

But I’m not after a next-level experience with tracking and mixed reality. I just want a device that can make the best Oculus Quest 2 games run better. So if the Quest 3 can match the Quest Pro in the ways that matter most to me – i.e. a Meta Quest Pro with its eye- and face-tracking abilities stripped out – and it’s sold for $500 or less (around £500 / AU$790) then it’ll be a definite must buy VR headset when it launches.

We won’t know what Meta has up its sleeve until later this year when it unveils the Quest 3 at Meta Connect 2023 (which is due around October), but I’m already counting down the days. If you can’t wait then Meta’s Quest 2 will definitely serve you well – as will the Quest Pro if you can afford it – but considering how close we are to the Quest 3 being announced I’d strongly suggest holding off unless you see an incredible Quest 2 deal like the one from Black Friday 2022. If the Pro’s performance is anything to go by, the Quest 3 is looking like the Quest 2 successor I really want.

Source: TechRadar

Popular posts from this blog

Code-generating tools could be more of a security hindrance than help

New research by a group of Stanford-affiliated researchers has uncovered that code-generating AI tools such as Github Copilot can present more security risks than many users may realize. The study looked specifically at Codex, a product of OpenAI, of which Elon Musk is among the co-founders.  Codex powers the Microsoft-owned GitHub Copilot platform, which is designed to make coding easier and more accessible by translating natural language into code and suggesting changes based on contextual evidence. AI-coding problems Lead co-author of the study, Neil Perry, explains that “code-generating systems are currently not a replacement for human developers”. The study asked 47 developers of differing abilities to use Codex for security-related problems, using Python, JavaScript and C programming languages. It concluded that the participants who relied on Codex were more likely to write insecure code compared with a control group. Read more > These are the best laptops for progr

Port of Lisbon hit by ransomware attack

One of Europe’s busiest seaports, the Port of Lisbon, has been hit with a ransomware attack that knocked some of its digital systems offline. "All safety protocols and response measures provided for this type of occurrence were quickly activated, the situation being monitored by the National Cybersecurity Center and the Judicial Police," a statement shared by the Port of Lisbon Administration (APL) with local media earlier this week said. The incident failed to impact the port’s operations, but did take its official website,, offline. LockBit taking responsibility "The Port of Lisbon Administration is working permanently and closely with all competent entities in order to guarantee the security of the systems and respective data," the statement concludes. While the company doesn’t explicitly say it was targeted with ransomware, the LockBit ransomware operator has added APL to its leaks website, taking responsibility for the hit.  The databas

This new Linux malware floods machines with cryptominers and DDoS bots

Cybersecurity researchers have spotted a new Linux malware downloader that targets poorly defended Linux servers with cryptocurrency miners and DDoS IRC bots. Researchers from ASEC discovered the attack after the Shell Script Compiler (SHC) used to create the downloader was uploaded to VirusTotal. Apparently, Korean users were the ones uploading the SHC, and it’s Korean users who are targets, as well. Further analysis has shown that the threat actors are going after poorly defended Linux servers, brute-forcing their way into administrator accounts over SSH.  Mining Monero Once they make their way in, they’ll either install a cryptocurrency miner, or a DDoS IRC bot. The miner being deployed is XMRig, arguably the most popular cryptocurrency miner among hackers. It uses the computing power of a victim's endpoints to generate Monero, a privacy-oriented cryptocurrency whose transactions are seemingly impossible to track, and whose users are allegedly impossible to identify. Fo

Twitter has hidden the chronological feed on iOS again – and I'm furious

In a controversial move, Twitter has brought back a feature that removes the 'Latest Tweets' view for users on iOS, which is something that many users, including me, hated back in March 2022 – and it's now rolling out. The first time the company decided to do this, 'Home' would appear first in a tab at the top, and there was no way of changing it so that 'Latest Tweets' would be the default view. It was reverted back after the company said it was a 'bug' for iOS users. This time though, it's no bug. Instead, it's 'For You' and 'Following' where you can only swipe between them now, which doesn't make much sense for a platform where you're using the platform to keep up to date with who you follow. It's a bizarre change that makes me ask – who wants this, especially during a time when its new owner, Elon Musk, is bringing in and reversing changes almost every week still? This one change will have big consequenc