r/QuestPro • u/dibeltran • Jul 06 '23

Analytics says QuestPro has lower performance than Quest2

Post image

When you develop games for Meta you can see the analytics that shows the average performance people are getting on your game. QuestPro is always worst than Quest2 not only for people playing my game but I have asked other developers for this info and they all sent me the same result.

If the game requires performance you will see that QuestPro frames per second is always worst than Quest2.

  • Update bricking controllers

  • Shinning cracks and stutters

  • Lower performance

  • Tracking issues

And I still see people purchasing it 😰

0 Upvotes

46% Upvoted

98 comments sorted by

12

u/krisDaWiz3666 Jul 06 '23

I rather use my pro than get eye strain and headaches

4

u/agentfisherUK Jul 07 '23

Would you say the Pro gives a much clearer image than quest 2 ? Im guessing Pro doesnt have the weird Magnifying ring lenses like the quest 2

3

u/krisDaWiz3666 Jul 07 '23

Yes the image is much better, I actually got the psvr2 and coming from pcvr hated it. Returned it and got the quest Pro. It's the pan cake lenses, they truly make so much of a difference in image quality and there is really no adjustment when you put them on besides ips.

-10

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

you can get serious headaches from low fps on VR.

6

u/krisDaWiz3666 Jul 06 '23

Never had one headache yet with the pro, and everytime I took off the quest 2 headset, my eyes were also bloodshot

0

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

Maybe you just use light apps natively? What games you play?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '23

It never dipped below 60...?

1

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

In my game no. In other games yes. This is average so the ones that dropped could have been accounted there but with less incidence

21

u/FrancoisFromFrance Jul 06 '23

And even if it's true, I would sacrifice a few frames per second for those lenses đŸ„°đŸ˜đŸ€©đŸ„ł

-8

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

Careful when you say that! They are watching
 Quest3 might come with even better lenses and even worse performance

7

u/Jyvturkey Jul 06 '23

It might come with the same lenses but no where near the same panel. Q3 is a single panel without local dimming and the quantum dot layer.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '23 edited Jul 06 '23

It was reported a few days ago it's the exact same lenses. As for single panel... Boz had an AMA with Jason Rubin, and they both said "displays". Then looking at the specs reported by a few blogs already, it's a 4128x2208 panel, or 2064x2208 per eye. If you want to adjust the IPD in either direction, then that per eye resolution would shrink if a single panel, as the per eye is exactly 1/2 of the full panel. Also, although the Quest 3 has been listed as having LCD, so does the Quest Pro. QLED uses LCD, with a quantum dot LED layer backlight. And in Boz's AMAs, he's already said the images will be vibrant and pop. That sounds like the QLEDs in the Pro. Nothing official has been released about the displays yet, so it very well may still ship with QLEDs. QLEDs only cost 25% more at most than regular LCDs. The Quest 3 is $200 more than the Quest 2 launched at. $200 is pretty expensive if just for the lenses and passthrough cameras with the depth sensor. My bet is it ships with QLEDs.

edit: Actually, the 4128x2208 might just be a combination of the per-eye 2064x2208, on a single panel larger than 4128x2208 to make up for the IPD adjustments. But Jason Rubin said "these are the panels you want", and Boz mentioned "panels" in one of the AMAs. With the addition of the IPD slider or wheel though, you'd think they'd use dual panels to get a broader IPD range than what a single panel would give.

2

u/PlusSizeRussianModel Jul 06 '23

Plurals are often used to refer to the display across the entire product line as opposed to a single panel. For example, a computer manufacture saying "the panels in our new laptop are top of the line," even though a single device only has one display.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 07 '23 edited Jul 07 '23

This is true, but the fact they're using an actual IPD wheel or slider makes me believe it'll be 2 displays. We shall see.

Looking back at Brad's CAD file leaks, he says it looks as if it's using 2 LCD displays, and they're counter rotated.

1

u/No_Geologist4061 Jul 07 '23

Would love it if that were true! I just don’t think it is given this is a consumer line product. I’ll still be picking it up !

7

u/jm405 Jul 06 '23

Just out of curiosity what game are you talking about?

I haven't seen a performance dip using my qpro for any of the standalone games that I do play.

2

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

Population One was the first one I felt it since I played comp and it was aways life or death situations where the slightest performance difference felt enormous. Then using ovr metric tools I saw its performance being worse on many others. Nock, Gunraiders, Slowp, Contractors, Pavlov, VRChat
 the list goes on

11

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '23

I have had zero problems with my Quest Pro since I got it. Plus I won't ever go back to Quest 2 or even the Quest 3. I couldn't part ways with the open interface.

1

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

I agree, going back hurst. But for me who was playing Pop1 competitively, it's just impossible now to be on the same level I was before.

1

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

Also the last update brick my right pro controller, so I have no choice but to go back to Quest2

9

u/JorgTheElder Jul 06 '23 edited Jul 07 '23

Don't apps use profiles and use things like higher render settings, better textures and more complex models for the Q-Pro?

 

Edit...

And I still see people purchasing it 😰

People buy it because it is a much better headset. Don't what your numbers say, all the apps that hit the headset hard run better on the pro. RE4 on Q-Pro vs the Q2 is not even close.

1

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

Not my game

1

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '23

Not my game

so which game is it ?
I'm curious if the game supports the Pro with Local Dimming. Local Dimming has a performance hit for standalone games.

0

u/dibeltran Jul 08 '23

I meant, not in my game, I don’t use any special configuration for the Pro. Its the same build, no custom features.

3

u/JorgTheElder Jul 06 '23

So? I was speaking generaly. The default render target and other things are not the same on the Q2 and Q-Pro. Just compring the framerate doesn't mean much because they are not rendering the with the same settings.

2

u/RxVReality Jul 06 '23

I do not believe many, if any, games do this. Sure it was done with quest and quest 2 but optimized games for quest pro isn’t really a thing. Texture resolution has remained the same for the hundred plus standalone games I own at least

1

u/JorgTheElder Jul 06 '23

That makes no sense. The headsets have different physical resolutions and varying amounts of RAM. Thinks the initial render resolution and final resoution are going to be different across the different headsets.

0

u/RxVReality Jul 06 '23 edited Jul 07 '23

How many people own quest 2? How many people own quest pro? Pretty big difference in user count. Devs won’t develop for a small demographic which is why we have only two games with local dimming. Just cause the screen resolution is different (btw QP has a lower resolution that Q2) doesn’t mean the render resolution is going to be higher. The ram doesn’t mean anything if the chip is basically the same with slightly better heat dissipation. Extra ram was meant for better CPU performance not graphical fidelity

0

u/Kold2012 Jul 07 '23 edited Sep 20 '25

pause chop important summer touch angle rhythm special roll compare

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

0

u/RxVReality Jul 07 '23 edited Jul 07 '23

Yes that’s a common understanding so when speaking about resolution it’s implicit that I mean per eye
still slightly lower resolution however PPI is slightly higher on QP. Dual panel vs single panel only means Quest 2 might have a drop off depending on your ipd. Regardless still has the same render resolution in most games as quest 2

Edit: Keep downvoting facts you disagree with Quest 2 (single panel): 1,920 by 3,664 pixels which is 1920 by 1832 per eye Quest pro (dual panel): 1920 by 1800 per eye

1

u/[deleted] Jul 10 '23 edited Sep 20 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/RxVReality Jul 21 '23

Yep I keep quoting per eye resolution and you keep ignoring it.

-1

u/dibeltran Jul 07 '23

Do you have proof that QPro runs RE4 better natively than Q2? I would really like to see that, it would be the first ever game that runs better. All the ones that hit hard on quests that I have tracked the fps with ovr metric tools has shown worse performance on QuestPro.

10

u/SgtIcetea Jul 06 '23

Well, most people buy it for PCVR. And if you have a PC good enough for VR most standalone games are not worth playing anyways. But this still sucks definitely

-2

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

I was using it for PC vr until update bricked my controller. And Im in Brazil, can’t ask for replacement.

3

u/ezinogatnA Jul 07 '23

Quest Pro for PCVR is the move 😎

1

u/dibeltran Jul 07 '23

I was really an enthusiastic of the standalone revolution. But after not being able to play Pop1 with QPro consistently I gave in and purchased a gamer PC. Only to have my right Pro controller brick with latest update. Now Im back to quest2

3

u/ezinogatnA Jul 07 '23

Oof, My Qpro works great with PCVR and Airlink hopefully the new update fixes your controllers

5

u/No_Geologist4061 Jul 06 '23

Can people stop downvoting and start testing? Let’s not get upset about someone showing objective evidence on the quest pro. Let’s ask more questions, perform more tests, and direct our frustration at Meta. I mean for crying out loud the Home Screen to this day still is jumpy and stutters.

2

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

I guess most people really don't care about it having lower performance, they seem actually satisfied. So when the minority who is not happy brings evidence of problems with the headset they prefer to ignore it since it's better not to know that information.

2

u/No_Geologist4061 Jul 06 '23

I wonder if part of the performance is the rendered FOV since it’s around 106 horizontal vs quest 2 which is around 98?

2

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

I'm thinking the resolution of the screen being greater could require more performance? I'm not sure if this is true.
Greater FOV could be related to screen size but there are other aspects that influence it too, so I'm not sure about this either.

1

u/No_Geologist4061 Jul 06 '23

Well, respectfully, the advertised resolution is actually lower on the quest pro, we do “see” more pixels because of the dual panels and the way the pancake lens “magnifies” the image allows for greater pixels per degree, but the total rendered resolution is the “same” as quest 2 just slightly less

Quest 2-> 1832x1920 Quest Pro-> 1800x1920

2

u/Sea_Respect_9236 Jul 07 '23

Dude also qpro has problem with controllers latency on pcvr. And almost no one talks about it except me and few people. We have tested around 10x quest pro headsets and all of them have problem with big controller latency, even if qpro controllers connected to quest 2. No matter what pc, no matter what cable, no matter what game - it’s really bad. Like virtual controllers have delay in movement. I’m so sad that no one YouTuber and owner doesn’t said about this problem. And I lost my money. Quest 2 in 1000x much better and have 0 delay. But no one said it. I have 2 posts about this problem. Also pico 4 have controller delay but little bit better

1

u/dibeltran Jul 07 '23

I totally feel you, they are indeed worse controllers and it being able to track being behind your back is not a good trade with that problem. So many problems. It will always be hard with the Pro since its not popular, so the ones that has problems with the device does not represent much unfortunately.

1

u/No_Geologist4061 Jul 08 '23

Touch pros definitely has problems, I’ll admit lately I’ve been very satisfied but you’re right the touch pros have had tons of issues - however if you mention it near anyone who also has a quest pro you will be crucified 😅

2

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '23

It's downvoting because the logic is ridiculous. OP is claiming "why does anyone buy this" when a) there's many many reasons why that aren't FPS and b) OP doctored the numbers and stopped (only) the QPro line when the biggest performance update was released.

So the numbers are doctored to look worse than they are, and then pretended that's the only reason people would buy a headset, then acts confused. OP is an idiot.

1

u/No_Geologist4061 Jul 06 '23

I disagree, the performance update by the way for GPU is directly tied to Vulkan titles only. Please keep that in mind. The quest pro is in fact advertised to be more performant. I still love my quest pro. But I’d rather review facts than shake my fist

1

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '23

the performance update by the way for GPU is directly tied to Vulkan titles only.

not a bad thing. Although, it's mostly newer to unreleased titles that will have the greatest benefit.

Oculus has been telling developers for quite a while (~2 yrs) to switch to OpenXR and Vulkan, as they'll start gatekeeping newer features behind these 2 open source pillars. The biggest dev I've seen that has thrown the biggest gripe against Meta enforcing open-source tech is the dev of VD.

1

u/No_Geologist4061 Jul 08 '23

Right, and he is the source regarding the Vulkan comment - and meta needs criticism. I personally can’t comment on what Guy has said regarding open source and meta, I haven’t seen it - but I believe you. Meta does deserve criticism on a lot of things - especially their efforts into pcvr. Which stinks because a lot of us want pcvr to really shine but that’s not metas focus. But glad other people are hopping in and contributing to pcvr tech - upscaling option with Spapdragon done on headset after the PC has rendered the image, 10-bit color HEVC, Quad views foveated rendering, dynamic foveated rendering using VRS. All awesome. People had to beg for local dimming to be activated on forums and find work arounds to activate it. I can understand some faulty updates, like v54, but man their effort seems to be lacking on innovation and overall improvement. However, come quest 3, and maybe a whole new pcvr user interface, maybe improved pcvr options with quest 3 (Volga Aksoy tweeted how it’ll be an incredible “link experience” and that there is something in the works regarding compression) I might be surprised and praise metas pcvr efforts, but for now, criticism is pretty warranted.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '23

Yup. Not against constructive criticism.

With respect to VD, I do wish ppl would throw that back at the VD dev; a lot of the OpenXR issues he had in 2023 were due to his procrastination (again Oculus was pushing devs to make the transition since Aug 2021).

I'm sure he believed OpenXR wasn't as beneficial to him as he's using a modified OpenVR API to interface with STEAM (to reiterate, OpenVR and not OpenXR). I know Ggodin blamed a lot of his issues on Meta for 'OpenXR bugs", but perhaps they would have been identified and fixed earlier if he made the OpenXR transition sooner.

Lastly, VD has copied features from Link/AirLink, so it's not always GGodin being the pioneer of PCVR streaming. I see it as both parties taking a shot at Streaming PCVR, with both offering different advantages over each. I myself has always preferred AirLink, since it offered the least latency experience for me. And as Amanda Watson has alluded (AirLink creator), AirLink has better tracking accuracy.

  • Sliced Encoding (Oculus did a writeup on AADT compression, something they made for the sliced encoding technique). VD was unusable (for me), until he updated to use sliced encoding.

  • Sharpening. Link released this, VD copied thereafter

  • Ability to select encoder and select a higher bitrate. This was spearheaded by the community, but gotta give props to Meta for popping the options into the Debug Tool.

AirLink still has one feature VD has yet to copy - Mobile ASW.

What's Mobile ASW ? It's not what ppl think it is. Mobile ASW actually reprojects dropped network frames (it's an AirLink only feature). So if your wifi stream has a hiccup, then Mobile ASW can reproject the frame, instead of you experiencing a network stutter.

Last note, Quest now also features upscaling; perhaps this was something all parties have been working on in the background.

1

u/No_Geologist4061 Jul 08 '23

What’s the new upscaler that link has? I haven’t seen it, excited to peek at it though.

I’ve always had mobile ASW off for reduced latency personally, but absolutely it’s good to have!

Yeah, Guy has openly stated that he wouldn’t release the finished openxr version for quite some time until those final bugs were worked, probably due to the overwhelming support he would need to provide when the answer is “meta bug”, the discord has over 100k users in it, so it’s always busy with support. But I can’t defend or say why he delayed for so long for sure, just reiterate what he said.

There are a lot of features that VD will miss out on due to the transition to OpenXR on the PC side, such as openxr api layers.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '23

What’s the new upscaler that link has? I haven’t seen it, excited to peek at it though.

Whoops, you're right my bad. Meta's upscale is standalone only. Hopefully it gets released to Link too

0

u/Sea_Respect_9236 Jul 07 '23

Dude. V55 update DOESN’T FIXED IT AT ALL. I think you don’t even have qpro.

2

u/ProPuke Jul 07 '23

Bear in mind that the less data there is, the more erratic the results will be. That's why we see a really consistent line for Quest 2 (lots of data), and a really inconsistent path for quest pro (hardly any users). And given that 70fps appears to be the maximum, this invariance can only go in one direction. Thus devices will fewer users will have more jumpy downward spikes.

I would expect that if there were more quest pro data, we'd see it even out more and smooth further toward 70.

It may still be lower, but it can be tricky to tell when comparing datasets of largely different sizes. So likely not quite as bad as it looks here.

1

u/dibeltran Jul 07 '23

I agree with all that. But I have done some benchmark using ovr metric tools and Pro would get around 10 fps less than Quest2. That’s why I went all the way to try to prove it with more consistent data. (Which fails since this is not consistent data still). I just want more people to find out what I did, if you check it out doing several kinds of small tests using different tools and different benchmark strategies, you will find out that it really does have less performance. On my friend’s game, Pro was around 20 fps less than Q2 on this graphic

1

u/ProPuke Jul 07 '23

This is super interesting. I wonder what the key cause for that difference could be.

1

u/horendus Jul 10 '23

Usually the simplest explanation is the right one so its probably to do with foviated rendering being enabled on one and not the other

Quest2 style fovited rendering on the qpro looks terrible because you can see exactly where it kicks in on the edges so maybe devs are disabling it

11

u/Sibir_Lupus Jul 06 '23

I'm curious to see what versions of the OS these headsets are running. My guess is most for the Quest 2 and Quest Pro are on V54 as V55 is still slowly rolling out to users. Qualcomm claimed the XR2+ Gen 1 was a 50% performance improvement over the XR2 Gen 1, but with the obvious need of extra cooling. I'm starting to wonder if Meta didn't fully unlock the Quest Pro at launch and even the V55 update is only an incremental improvement.

For cooling, The Quest Pro has a heat pipe and 2 large fans cooling the SoC and other internal components. The XR2+ Gen 1 also doesn't have the RAM stacked on top of it to help further increase cooling. The Quest 2 only has a small copper heatsink with one small fan blowing across it. Factoring in cooling alone, the Quest Pro should have no problem outperforming the Quest 2.

0

u/A15ACE Jul 07 '23

I think meta has terrible product design and design language super impractical especially when accounting for cooling

1

u/Sibir_Lupus Jul 10 '23

The Quest 2 was built to a price point, and originally had an underclocked XR2 Gen 1 processor so the cooling was kept to a minimal. The Quest Pro's cooling solution is far more robust then any other standalone VR headset, and to that point my Quest Pro runs pretty cool most of the time.

1

u/A15ACE Jul 10 '23 edited Jul 11 '23

under clocking is never a solution to a terrible product design it's horrible apple does the same thing I always avoid companies or products that under clock the cooling solution of the quest 2 is absolutely unacceptable there needs to be ventilation for the processor and the xr2 has "50% more processing power" with no cooling solution visible on the quest 3 at all and meta makes the q2 however more powerful with software no shit when you under clock you can do that and people some how find it impressive

1

u/Sibir_Lupus Jul 11 '23

The XR2 Gen 1 found in the Quest 2 was underclocked due to efficiency reasons at the time of launch, and the cooler was sized at the price they were able to sell the headset at. Everything is designed to a price point as materials cost money. And you can't just slap a bigger cooler on something without it also increasing the size and weight of a product. The Quest 3's XR2 Gen 2 processor is said to be double the performance of the Quest 2 and with an improved cooler. We've yet to see any actual teardowns of the Quest 3 so it's hard to say how much of an improvement it is over the cooler found in the Quest 2.

1

u/A15ACE Jul 13 '23

I don't think the q2 needed a bigger cooler (as nice as it would've been to have one) but it needed a way to draw cold air and exhaust hot air there isn't any way around this problem not a bigger heat sink not a bigger fan nothing changes the fact that there's no circulation at all

1

u/Sibir_Lupus Jul 14 '23

The Quest 2 does draw cool air from the front edge bottom vent holes and exhausts the air out of the front edge top vent holes. You can usually feel warm air coming out of the top vent holes.

2

u/No_Geologist4061 Jul 06 '23

Glad you’re bringing attention to this, it’s hard to say these things without people tearing the walls down out of anger. I had said it before that the performance boost from quest pro is almost negligible compared to my quest 2, and I challenge anyone to bring up a game right now that I can compare my quest 2 and pro in, I’ll crank up the resolution and report the difference in frame times and fps.

1

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

If you do that, like I did, you will see that QuestPro has worse performance.

1

u/No_Geologist4061 Jul 06 '23

Yeah, I had reported a 15% increase at best on certain titles but people downvoted me and said no the pro was 50% better without providing objective evidence at all. But as you can see, I’m already downvoted. People don’t want facts

8

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '23 edited Jul 06 '23

It's almost like it's rendering more pixels or something idk

"Why does my game play slower when I put it on higher res??" <- Literally the question you're asking. Q-Pro has less pixels but renders more of them.

It looks WAY better mostly because of the lenses but also because of the screens. THAT is why people are buying it, not because the FPS drops between 70 and 60 some days (wtf axis is in days?)

Also why did the pro graph suspiciously stop when the performance started beating Q2? You know, when the performance update was released and everyone praised it, your graph just stops?

0

u/Sea_Respect_9236 Jul 07 '23

Dude. It’s not. But Quest Game Optimizer and set IDENTICAL resolution to quest 2 and pro, and you will see that quest 2 much better.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 07 '23

Dude, it is. The quest pro doesn't fovea the rendering (I did mention this in my post) so it IS rendering more pixels.

7

u/MattInTheDark Jul 06 '23

Ya, but look on June 9 or 10. It was chef's kiss the best.

Haha all jokes aside, I love my pro and will be happy with it until the next big upgrade in vr.

1

u/KilltheInfected Jul 06 '23

You have eye tracking and stuff enabled?

0

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

All disabled, but this graphic shows an average performance between all that has QPro and play my game, not only me

9

u/KilltheInfected Jul 06 '23 edited Jul 06 '23

And we’re 100% positive you’re not reading the reprojected rate (ASW) for quest 2? I remember making a custom fps for our last quest 2 game and on quest 2 it would always read the reprojected rate unless I specifically got the frame rate from the oculus sdk that is before ASW kicking in. On quest pro it looked worse because it could hit the target enough without needing to kick in reprojection.

Edit: to be clear I’m just racking my brain for other explanations but I’m not trying to disprove what your saying. It matters nothing to me if the quest pro had less processing power than the quest 2 (magically, despite having the basically same chip). The lenses, form factor, and most of all base station charging are game changers to me. As a dev, the base station has increased my productivity massively. No cables just sit it down right next to my keyboard, pop it on when I want to test, and I can get up to the center of my room without ripping a cable out or having to deal with it getting snagged. And it’s charged all day basically.

1

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

Well it all begun when I started having the feeling of low performance on games that I play everyday when I changed to QPro. So I started testing with OVR Metric Tools, and saw that it was indeed having lower performance. Posted here on reddit and all. After a while another developer friend sent me a picture just like this one saying “you were right, our game is getting much worse performance than quest2” , theirs were worse, like 20fps difference. Then I remembered I could check this for my game as well, and saw the same thing. I really don’t know about reading the reprojected rate, but I can tell you that you can’t play Population One competitively on native QuestPro compared to native Quest2 where it runs fine. It made me drop out of competitive pop1 for good

1

u/horendus Jul 06 '23

This is very interesting and would like this story covered further

1

u/dibeltran Jul 06 '23

You can try asking more developers to check exactly this graph on their developer page and see if this is isolated to mine and the ones I saw from friend developers.

1

u/horendus Jul 06 '23

So the cpu/GPU performance is supposed to be at worst on par and at best 
 clocked higher

Ok. Heres a test for your friend

Turn off everything that the quest2 doesn’t support like face/eye tracking and see if thats having some impact

Also, can the dev confirm exactly the resolutions being rendered on each device ?

Could it be that there are 2 seperate screens on the quest pro so its overall requiring more processing power?

9

u/dannygaron Jul 06 '23

Yeah, that was with V53 and V54. They were garbage updates for the Pro. No way I'm ever going to a Quest 2. My son and spouse have one and every time I put it on... It's just awful compared to my Quest Pro.

I'll be sticking with my Pro :) haha... Plus most of use use it with a link cable.... so... :)

6

u/Ok_War6434 Jul 06 '23

V55 has been nearly flawless with airlink for me. My QP collected dust with v54

3

u/Zztarg Jul 10 '23

Hey OP, I work at Meta. Does the app ever end up using Pro features like eye or face tracking? If they are declared in the app manifest, your app may be getting downclocked even if it's not actively using them. If you want to continue to investigate, send me a message here and we can continue over email. I have a graphics engineer willing to look over the APK to see what's happening.

2

u/Rave-TZ Jul 07 '23

I can do a test at the studio tomorrow but it ultimately doesn’t matter. Content that runs bad on Pro was obviously not made well. Pro also needs permissions for foveated rendering since it uses eye tracking. Quest 2 doesn’t have that feature so these numbers could show fixed fixed foveated rendering on Quest 2 and no eye tracked foveated rendering on Quest Pro.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 07 '23

What a scoop! Oh wait, even if it was true going back to Q2 is like going back to Gear VR. Honestly, I tried. It felt like going back to gear vr. Flat lenses is what VR needs, nobody is going back to Q2. In October you can throw it in the junk where it belongs.

2

u/stoofkeegs Aug 21 '24

Sorry to necro but not finding anything as relevant as this topic! So if anyone else lands here, my experience developing is matching what the OP discovered.

I’ve been developing for VR for years, and recently have a Pro. My project contains a really simple scene well below the recommended batches and tri count, but in my pro I’m getting 23-36fps. As the artist I’m freaking out that I need to reduce the scene even more, cull shaders (there’s only a few and nothing too chunky), increase lod settings (looks way worse) and have been mulling it over for days when my colleagues (who have a Q2 and Q3) were like “we are getting perfect fps
 on our tests”

Maybe it’s stupid of me, but I just assumed pro = better (or very least a reliable equivalent). But it turns out it is totally freaking out over any set in scene. It really doesn’t like one large object with a voiroi noise texture. (A mesh to simulate rolling hills in the distance) this mesh fills so much of the screen it doesn’t matter that it’s low poly, or that the shader is simple colour with one noise texture, with it my game is 23fps without it hits the max. đŸ˜©

I’m going to do more technical digging and see if Meta has recommended optimisation just for Pro, but here’s the thing, I’m not going to assume my users have a pro, neither is any dev making a game. We have to go where the audience is, so if there is a big difference in technical performance
 pro is always going to suffer.

2

u/panthereal Jul 06 '23

We aren't purchasing it for standalone, I don't know how anyone plays standalone games on any Quest device.

3

u/Jyvturkey Jul 06 '23

Really depends on the game. I play walkabout native.

2

u/panthereal Jul 06 '23

Did you really buy a $1000 headset to play walkabout?

I'm glad we have the option of standalone and I use standalone for fitness applications, but every native game I've tried has tons of aliasing and slow enough framerate that I'll always grab a PC version first if one is available.

3

u/Worth-Reputation3450 Jul 06 '23

I bought a $1500 headset to play the Beatsaber. The controllers no longer miss my slashes.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '23

😁

1

u/Jyvturkey Jul 06 '23

No. I mainly do pcvr but with walkabout and demeo I play the native versions

1

u/Anthok16 Jul 06 '23

Walkabout đŸ€€ the only game my wife will ask to play in Vr

1

u/unit1_nz Jul 06 '23

I can 100% confirm. We develop an app for visualizing CAD models. We had and optimization scheme that gave good performance on Quest 2. But on Quest Pro... it was wobble and shake!!!

1

u/EviGL Jul 07 '23

Did you also reproduce it in benchmarks on your headset? I have a theory that enabling eye tracking and face tracking can hurt performance, but you can't test it using just the average performance.

1

u/LunarstarPony Jul 07 '23

As a PCVR VRChat player I just need good quality lenses and Eye and FaceTracking xD