The #1 XR Blog in the World
- English
- Sign In
No other VR headset is as popular among consumers as the Meta Quest 2. The device, which is also commonly known as the Oculus Quest 2, offers outstanding features like 120 Hz refresh rate, wireless streaming and hand tracking. In this review, we will take a close look at the headset from Meta formerly known as Oculus and see how it stacks up against its biggest competitors from Pico, the Neo 3 Link and Neo 3 Pro.
In this comprehensive review of the Meta Quest 2 (Oculus Quest 2) we will take a deeper look at the following points:
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Standalone | Facebook account required |
| Hand tracking | Poor weight distribution |
| Up to 120 Hz refresh rate | Uncomfortable when worn for long periods |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2 | |
| Wireless Streaming | |
| Access to Oculus Store |
The Meta Quest 2 comes in a sleek white box. The following items can be found inside the box:
The design of the Meta Quest 2 is very similar to its predecessor, the Quest 1. The biggest change has been in the color of the device. While the Quest 1 came in all black, the Quest 2 relies on a white design for the newer edition.
The Quest 2 is ergonomically shaped and fits the face well. A big drawback of the design, however, is that the battery is built into the headset, which means that the entire weight is on the front when wearing it. This problem is not the end of the world, however during extended periods of use it can cause some discomfort. This issue does not appear with the competing devices from Pico and HTC. Both Pico Interactive and HTC have installed the headset’s batteries on the back, inside the headband, which results in a more balanced weight distribution and a more comfortable wearing experience for prolonged sessions.
The weight of the Oculus Quest 2 is 503 grams, making the headset 68 grams lighter than its predecessor, the Quest 1. The Pico Neo 3 Link and Neo 3 Pro, on the other hand, weigh 620 grams, although, as mentioned above, the weight of the headsets is better distributed due to the rear-mounted battery.
The interpupillary distance (IPD) can be adjusted in 3 notches on the Quest 2. The user can switch between an IPD of 58, 63 and 68 mm. It is likely to ensure cheaper production costs and scalable operations Meta chose for the 3 most common IPD’s. However, since each person has an individual interpupillary distance, a seamless adjustment option, which can also be found in other VR headsets, would certainly make more sense.
The setup of the Meta Quest 2 is very intuitive and self-explanatory. You are easily guided through the initial setup, including small games that teach you how to control the device.
A very useful feature is that the play areas can be set up quickly on the Oculus Quest 2, and the headset even saves them. When entering a familiar room again, the device recognizes it and sets the appropriate playing area.
However, it has to be said that you are forced to log in with a Facebook account at the beginning. In addition, Meta collects data from Quest users and uses it for marketing purposes. A fact that is a thorn in the side of many users and has, for example, led to an official ban on the sale of the headset in Germany.
Having an account to use a headset is not per se a bad thing for operating a VR headset, however, the relation to an official Facebook Account is the biggest drawback. In the past Meta allowed for the creation of an Oculus Account, which was a good middle ground. However, this was removed in favor of the Facebook Account.
This is a big disadvantage compared to the Pico Neo 3 models, which can be used without the Facebook requirement. Especially for enterprises, this is often an exclusion criterion that makes them decide against buying the Oculus Quest 2.
The Meta Quest 2 has received a significant performance boost compared to the Quest 1. Thanks to the Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2 chipset, the headset is capable of handling demanding VR applications like “The Room VR” or “I Expect You To Die”. The first Quest version only had the Snapdragon 835.
The RAM has also been increased from 4 to 6 GB in the Oculus Quest 2. This increase also contributes to the fact that VR games can be played smoothly and without problems on the Quest 2.
For comparison: Pico uses exactly the same processor and has the same RAM for the Neo 3 Link and Neo 3 Pro.
The Meta Quest 2 has a 4K display with a resolution of 1832 x 1920 pixels per eye. This is a big step up from the Quest 1, which only had 1440 x 1600 pixels per eye. You can actually see this improvement very clearly in the headset. While you could still see noticeable lines between the rows of pixels in the Quest 1, the so-called “screen door” is no longer visible in the Oculus Quest 2.
We also saw an increase in the refresh rate of the Quest 2 from 72 to 90 Hz compared to its predecessor. Meta has also continued to improve the Quest 2 since its launch and is now capable of 120 Hz. However, it has to be noted that the battery life is then dramatically reduced. However, the 90 Hz is already sufficient to enable a smooth and realistic viewing experience. The Pico Neo 3 Pro & Link also have refresh rates of 90 Hz by default, with the option to increase to 120 Hz.
In terms of the horizontal field of view, it has been increased from the previous 93° to now 97° on the Oculus Quest 2. However, the headset still doesn’t do very well here, as there are now headsets with fields of view well over 100 degrees. The Pico Neo 3 has a razor-thin lead in this respect and offers a field of view of 98 degrees.
| Quest 1 | Quest 2 | Pico Neo 3 | |
| Display resolution | 1440 x 1600 pixels per eye | 1832 x 1920 pixels per eye | 1832 x 1920 pixels per eye |
| Refresh rate | 72 Hz | 90/120 Hz | 90/120 Hz |
| Field of view | 93° horizontal | 97° horizontal | 98° horizontal |
The Meta Quest 2 features inside-out tracking with 4 integrated cameras, just like its predecessor. The positioning works very well and smoothly and is the best in the standalone VR market. The play areas can be set up to 8 x 8 meters.
A major advantage that the Quest 2 has is that it has built in hand tracking, unlike the Pico Neo 3 Pro or Link, where an Ultraleap Module is needed. While the HTC Vive Focus 3 standalone VR headset also comes with built in hand tracking, it must be said that the Quest 2 hand tracking is far superior. Once hand tracking is turned on, controllers are no longer needed and you can control the headset with your bare hands. Hand tracking isn’t exactly as accurate and smooth as controller tracking, but it works surprisingly well and feels very impressive.
While the first Oculus Quest version was available as either a 64 or 128 GB variant, Meta sells the Quest 2 with either 128 or 256 GB of internal storage. Originally, there was also a 64 GB version of the Quest 2, which was later discontinued.
Especially people who plan to download a lot of content to the VR headset should get the 256 GB version to avoid having to struggle with a full memory at some point.
The Meta Quest 2 has two built-in speakers, which are located on the left and right at ear level. However, the sound quality does leave a lot to be desired and cannot be compared with wearing headphones. For those who still want to hear something from their surroundings, the integrated speakers will have to suffice. However, those who like high-quality sound and do not want to miss out on it when using the Quest 2 can connect a pair of headphones via the 3.5 mm jack.
Another option is to connect Bluetooth headphones to the headset. The same options are also offered by the Pico Neo 3 Pro, whose integrated speakers make a slightly better impression than those of the Oculus Quest 2.
The touch controllers of the Meta Quest 2 look very similar to those of the predecessor. They fit very well in the hand and are detected very reliably by the headset’s tracking cameras.
The weight of the controllers is 150 grams each including batteries. The controllers are powered by AA batteries, which gives them an excellent lifespan. In the latest generation of touch controllers, the haptic elements have also been revised and improved, and the vibration feedback is now even smoother and more sensitive.
The big advantage of the Quest 2 over the Pico Neo 3: if you want, you can use the headset without a controller at all. This is made possible by the built-in hand tracking.
If you want to stream PC VR games from your computer to the Oculus Quest 2, you can easily do so via Oculus Link. The Quest 2 can be turned into a PC VR headset in no time via USB-C cable. This technology allows playing more graphically complex games on the headset, e.g. from the SteamVR app store.
This proved to be very easy and reliable in the test. Playing feels like having a regular PC VR headset on, the image is smooth and the tracking is flawless. An additional advantage is that the Quest 2 charges simultaneously while you play.
If the cable is too inconvenient, you can also stream PC VR content to the headset without a cable thanks to the “Air Link” feature. However, this requires a very stable Internet connection and even then a slight latency always remains. However, this is only noticeable in very fast and competitive games.
The Pico Neo 3 Pro also has the function to turn the device into a PC-VR headset via cable or wirelessly, which works similarly well as with the Quest 2.
The Meta Quest 2 is available for purchase in two different variants. As a 128 GB variant, the VR headset costs €349, while it costs €449 with 256 GB of internal storage. Since sales of the Quest 2 have been stopped in Germany, they can only be imported from abroad. However, it is possible to use the Meta headset normally afterwards.
In comparison, the Pico Neo 3 Pro costs €599. Cheaper is the consumer version Pico Neo 3 Link, which is available for €449.
The Meta Quest 2 is undisputedly the headset with the best price-performance ratio on the market. The top specifications, such as the 4K display with up to 120 Hz or the integrated hand tracking, make the Quest 2 an outstanding VR headset, which can also be converted to a PC VR headset in no time.
However, disadvantages of the headset are, for example, the poor weight distribution and that you can only use the Quest 2 with a Facebook account. Especially the latter is usually a reason for enterprise customers to opt for the competition from Pico.
VR users who do not have a problem with Facebook collecting and using the data will find the Quest 2 to be a technically mature product at a very reasonable price.
However, the release of the Pico Neo 3 Link has given the Quest 2 new competition in the consumer market and it will be interesting to see how it fares in the near future.
As far as enterprise use goes, the Pico Neo 3 Pro has the edge due to its open system and ease of use. If you want to know which VR headset best fits your use case, don’t hesitate to contact us!
| Oculus Quest 2 | Pico Neo 3 | HTC Vive Focus 3 | |
| Price | 349/449 € | 599 € | 1249 € |
| Display | LCD | LCD | LCD |
| Resolution | 1832×1920 per eye | 1832×1920 per eye | 2448×2448 per eye |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 90 Hz | 90 Hz |
| Field of view | 97 degrees horizontal | 98 degrees horizontal | 120 degrees horizontal |
| Processor | Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2 | Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2 | Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2 |
| Tracking | Inside-out tracking with 4 integrated cameras + hand tracking | Inside-out tracking with 4 integrated cameras | Inside-out tracking with 4 integrated cameras + hand tracking |
| Weight | 503 grams | 620 grams | 785 grams |
