The #1 XR Blog in the World
- English
- Sign In
👉 Discover business-oriented XR solutions at VR Expert:
With the Meta Quest 2 still in use since it was released in late 2020 and Meta’s most recent headset—the Quest 3s—entering the scene in October of 2024 as the budget alternative to the Quest 3, knowing which one of the three to get can be difficult.
On that note, this article will look at the primary differences between all three and show the benefits of each.
Being the most advanced headset of the three, the Meta Quest 3 is equipped with pancake lenses which offer a less distorted viewing experience when compared to the Quest 3s and 2’s Fresnel lenses. The Quest 3 also has greater resolution at 2064 x 2208 compared to the other two at 1832 x 1920—which will translate to a slightly higher image quality.
Additionally, the Quest 3 offers a slightly larger field of view (110 horizontal/96 vertical vs 96 horizontal/90 vertical) and pixel density (25 PPD to 20 PPD) giving it a more immersive experience than the other two.
Despite all three headsets having four integrated tracking cameras, the Quest 2 lacks the upper body tracking and leg position estimation tracking ability of the Quest 3 and 3s. As such, the Quest 3 and 3s provide greater and more accurate movement in VR and AR experiences. Because of the superior cameras and processing on the Quest 3 and 3s, both have MR (mixed reality) capabilities whereas the Quest 2 does not.
Additionally, the passthrough on the Quest 2—allowing you to see the real world with the headset still on—is limited to a distorted black-and-white video feed, whereas the Quest 3 and 3s offer high resolution and full-color passthrough.
The Quest 3 is around 40% slimmer than the Quest 2. While the Quest 3s is slimmer than the Quest 2, the two share similar dimensions. As for its weight, the Quest 3 and 3s weigh around 515 grams versus the Quest 2’s 503 grams. Additionally, the Quest 3 and 2 have a 3.5mm audio jack, whereas the Quest 3s does not.
When it comes to camera positioning, the Quest 3 and 3s have front-facing cameras allowing for its mixed reality capabilities. On the other hand, the Quest 2’s cameras are positioned along or near the corners of the device primarily for hand tracking.
Both the Quest 3 and 3s have the Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2 chip versus the Quest 2’s Gen 1. As a result, the Quest 3 and 3s have 250% more GPU power, 20% more CPU power, and improved AI sensors. Additionally, the Quest 2 has 6 GB of RAM versus the Quest 3 and 3s’ 8 GB of RAM.
Practically, the power difference means that the Quest 3 and 3s will be able to run demanding apps more smoothly and that a greater number of apps can be opened at once. On the negative side, greater performance results in greater power usage—leaving the Quest 3 at around 2.2 hours of run time, the Quest 3s at around 2.5 hours of run time, and the Quest 2 at around 3 hours of run time.
All three headsets are compatible with Quest for Business; however, the Quest 2 lacks the ability to use any MR apps. It should also be noted that the EOL (end of life) for the Quest 2, where it will stop receiving support/updates, will likely occur in 2027, whereas the Quest 3 and 3s will likely continue to receive updates for another 3 to 5 years past the Quest 2’s EOL.
As for pricing, the Quest 2 with 128 GB is priced at €288, the Quest 3s with 128 GB is priced at €365, and the Quest 3 with 512 GB is priced at around €583.
The Meta Quest 3 is the clear winner when it comes to its viewing and performance capabilities, but it comes at a heftier cost. The main difference between the Quest 3 and 3s is the viewing experience which is more immersive and clearer on the Quest 3.
Because the Quest 3s has the same performance capabilities as the Quest 3, it is a great budget option for those willing to sacrifice on the overall viewing experience. The Quest 2 is the least expensive of the three and still has access to enterprise-level apps. However, it is EOL and it lacks the ability to run MR apps.
👉 Discover business-oriented XR solutions at VR Expert:
Tyler Hilgeman is a writer for VR Expert who is fascinated with VR technology and what it can become. He got his start in the industry writing about the Apple Vision Pro before it had a name and has since written numerous reviews, comparison articles, and news pieces about emerging headsets.
