Oculus Quest 2 Review: Lighter, Faster, Better

The most accessible VR headset gets better.

Reviews
By
Published
Oculus Quest 2
Editor's Choice
(Image credit: © Tom's Hardware)

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

We compared the Quest 2 against the outgoing Quest in a small number of games. These tests aimed to determine if the increased resolution has a discernible impact on frame rate and frame time performance.

Oculus Quest 2 Benchmarks and Performance: Test Setup 

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Kevin Carbotte
Contributor

Kevin Carbotte is a contributing writer for Tom's Hardware who primarily covers VR and AR hardware. He has been writing for us for more than four years.

19 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Just Curious
    These specs look like current generation smartphones, except 1/2 to 1/3 the price. Seems like it should be the other way around.
    Reply
  • jakjawagon
    Needs information on subpixel layout and FOV.
    A quick google suggests it's proper RGB. The Pentile RGBG layout and the upcoming mandatory Facebook integration are my biggest problems with my original Quest, though neither is a dealbreaker.
    Reply
  • Talwyn Wize
    One incorrect part in your review - the Quest 2 has, unfortunately, the non-5G version of the XR2 chip. I suspect there'll either be a future accessory later, or "Pro" version coming along.

    It really would've been awesome to play Rift-style games (AAA-titles) without a cable, though, but there are no doubt still some issues to work out.
    Reply
  • Shadowclash10
    See, the funny thing is that if you look at the Pros and Cons, there are just as many Cons as Pros. And TH gave a 4.5 star review, and an Editor's Choice Award (PS. I am not criticizing TH here). I'm pretty sure that if this were any other product category, that many cons, and major ones too, wouldn't fly. But there are such few VR headsets, especially affordable ones, that basically as long as it isn't trash that's unusable , it's fine. Do you see what I mean?
    Reply
  • cryoburner
    IPD Setting: 3 mechanical pre-sets (58mm, 633mm, 68mm)
    That middle setting should prove useful if you are a hammerhead shark!

    Having a mechanical IPD adjustment is good, but there are some rather large gaps between those settings, that will be less than ideal for many. Overall, aside from the improvements to performance and resolution, they made a lot of cuts compared to the original.

    Facebook phasing out standalone models is also far from ideal. For someone wanting a PC-connected headset, they will be paying for standalone hardware they might not want, in addition to an expensive $80 link cable.

    Plus, Facebook is moving to require users to login to a Facebook account to use any Oculus headset soon. As was expected back when Facebook bought the company, their main goal seems be tracking users in VR, and probably using that data for targeted advertising and selling to third parties down the line.
    Reply
  • Myrmidonas
    Question from someone who has no experience with VR headsets at all : Suppose I want to play a random non VR first person view game i.e. Conan Exiles, ARK, Elite:Dangerous etc and I want to view the world though the player's eyes with a VR headset, sitting on my desk and still using keyboard and mouse to move and interact. Does this VR headset is enough or is there something else missing?

    Any answer is much appreciated. Please point me to the right direction. Thank you.
    Reply
  • gdmaclew
    Plus, Facebook is moving to require users to login to a Facebook account to use any Oculus headset soon
    When that happens you can kiss the new headset goodbye. Forcing a customer to create a Facebook account just to use the headset is a non-starter. Facebook better rethink that strategy.
    Reply
  • Playable
    cryoburner said:
    That middle setting should prove useful if you are a hammerhead shark!

    Having a mechanical IPD adjustment is good, but there are some rather large gaps between those settings, that will be less than ideal for many. Overall, aside from the improvements to performance and resolution, they made a lot of cuts compared to the original.

    Facebook phasing out standalone models is also far from ideal. For someone wanting a PC-connected headset, they will be paying for standalone hardware they might not want, in addition to an expensive $80 link cable.

    Plus, Facebook is moving to require users to login to a Facebook account to use any Oculus headset soon. As was expected back when Facebook bought the company, their main goal seems be tracking users in VR, and probably using that data for targeted advertising and selling to third parties down the line.

    I feel like the IPD, controller downgrade, and the forced FB login are deal breakers. I could probably forgive the controllers as I haven't tested them myself but IPD and FB are no go.
    Reply
  • Makaveli
    gdmaclew said:
    Plus, Facebook is moving to require users to login to a Facebook account to use any Oculus headset soon
    When that happens you can kiss the new headset goodbye. Forcing a customer to create a Facebook account just to use the headset is a non-starter. Facebook better rethink that strategy.

    They won't this integration was always coming, its why Oculus was purchased.
    Reply
  • husker
    If Facebook (Oculus) is telling the world that this is their idea of the future of VR, and they are foregoing a VR headset that requires a PC, then it is fair game to compare this headset to any tethered headset. Yes, it is in a different price category, but gamers deserve to get a sense of what they are missing out on if they go with Facebook's vision and become invested into their VR ecosystem.
    Reply