I've spent two hours today with the quest 3 and iracing. Image is better and big maybe 15 to 20% better image over the quest 2. The battery drained to 25% in two hours with the link cable plugged into the pc. I have a GTX 4080 and it wouldn't let me run 120fps and 90fps was unplayable. 80fps was good.
So far I've used immersed to get some work done and when plugged in it did charge up so battery drain will be a fun long term test with different use cases. Thanks for the Info!
i sidegraded from a 2080ti to a 1080ti and weirdly the vr experiance was better, maybe i had a dud turing? pascal xp seems smoother somehow, had a 69xt it was horrid on q2 and wmr
You need to enable the 120Hz setting in the Quest's "Experimental Settings" menu on the device itself to use 120Hz with Link (or Quest games w/ 120Hz support). Also, why the link cable? Join the 21st Century and get a WiFi 6/6E (later ideally) router to ditch that massively immersion killing last-gen shit. 🤷 And plug your PC directly into said router over Ethernet for even more bonus points (better wireless PCVR latency vs when wireless on both ends). Also, while Quest 3 is indeed about ≈+25% sharper in terms of the raw pixels per degree increase (Quest 3 ≈ 25 PPD, Quest 2 ≈ 20 PPD) you are massively, MASSIVELY underselling the absolutely FUCKING GARGANTUAN clarity difference that the new crystal clear edge-to-edge pancake lenses make!!! It's absolutely a NIGHT AND FUCKING DAY difference, and a WAAAAAAAAY bigger visual upgrade than the raw resolution bump! Not to even mention the Q3's ≈+10-15° FOV bump over Q2 (≈110° vs ≈96° horizontal), which is HUGELY appreciated for sim-racing! That's just enough extra FOV to be able to see both of my mirrors in an F1 car w/o having to turn my head.
knowing enough about computers to think you need a 4080 and then not knowing enough about them to call it a GTX 4080 is crazy work. what the actual fuck
I’m struggling to find the value in burning 14 minutes on the old headset and offering zero minutes regarding the new one….if you’re going to release impressions you probably shouldn’t wait a week.
This was part one of the comparison, I have a live show on Friday where we'll do the same tests and probably more. Hopping to take suggestions on what to test beyond what I did in this video. Hope that clears it up a little 😅
@@ronmraz all good but you have an opportunity here to have basically the first searchable sim racing related review. I’d think about getting it up sooner
And why the Link cable? O_o If you REALLY want to improve your PCVR experience get a WiFi 6 or ideally 6E capable router and use AirLink or Virtual Desktop for wireless PCVR streaming. Even for cockpit games like sim-racing that cable is still a MASSIVE immersion killer. 🤷 And a WiFi 6E router can basically handle all the same kinds of bitrates a physical USB 3 cavle can. You'll be limited by either the Quest or your desktop GPU's video encode/deocders, NOT the actual link connection be it wired OR wireless.
Can you link the headset you have for your Oculus 1? Mine is so uncomfortable with the pressure on my face, I'm looking to buy a new headset for it. Do you like the one you have for it? (Oculus 1)
I also had the quest 1 and not 2, and switching to the quest 3 was the best choice I've made vr-wise. The leap between the Quest 1 and 3 is actually crazy to me, and when I first put it on it was as if it was my first time putting on a vr headset. Highly recommend doing switching !
@st.paddymad7085 i have a quest 1 also, but i still dont know if i buy the quest 3 or wait until a better headset is realeased, like the valve deckard, here in brazil the quest 3 is very expensive comparing to the usa price
The framerate would have been much better, if the vr implementation was done much better... AMS2, ACC, PC2 and AC have a much better VR implementation than the recent EA F1 titles.
@@ronmraz AMS2 and Project Cars 2 have the best VR implementation and are good optimised, but be sure to try different refresh rates... sometimes a bit lower refresh rate makes the game run much smoother and less stutter.
Acc is one of the worst optimized games for vr. You'd be much better off playing some of the other games he listed. The first ac is night and day for optimization. They messed acc vr up. There's people who had to turn settings way down and lower fps while using 3090, 4080 and 4090s. Idk what they changed but its made vr almost unplayable in ACC
Then you definitely have you priorities wrong. The LCD resolution, refresh rates and especially the pancake lenses and overall FOV of my Quest 3 are MILES better than my quest 1 its not even on the same level.
@@warlockboyburns I'm a little confused, you prefer the Quest 1 resolution? The Q1 is 1440 × 1600 per eye, the Quest 3 is 2064 x 2208, On q3 this almost removes the screen door effect between pixels that is really distracting. Volumetric lighting, bloom and DOF have nothing to do with the screens being OLED unless your referring to some kind of glare but that wouldnt make sense cause the fresnel lenses of the Q1 are horrible compared the the clear pancake lenses of the Q3 with the ammount of glare they produce caused by the concentric rings in the lens. This causes 'God-rays' When your in a dark enviroment with a patches of bright light sources on the Q1, which IMO ruins the darker blacks you get with the OLED. Also, i dunno if your referring to PCVR link cable or native quest games, but the graphics quality of the Q3 is obviously much better. Volumetric lighting, shadow quality draw distance being disabled or reduced on Q1 due to the processor being so old and weak now, with the Q1 soon to be unsupported. Q1's 72hz is also not smooth enough and makes alot of people i know feel sick, the 120hz (minimum of 90hz) is much better. Of course id prefer an updated OLED in the next meta headset due to the better blacks, but currently q3 is definetely a better trade-off.
Another thing people fail to mention, is no matter if the fps is only 72hz, the OLEDs response time make it looks like 120hz if LCD and the colors are amazing
I've spent two hours today with the quest 3 and iracing. Image is better and big maybe 15 to 20% better image over the quest 2. The battery drained to 25% in two hours with the link cable plugged into the pc. I have a GTX 4080 and it wouldn't let me run 120fps and 90fps was unplayable. 80fps was good.
So far I've used immersed to get some work done and when plugged in it did charge up so battery drain will be a fun long term test with different use cases. Thanks for the Info!
i sidegraded from a 2080ti to a 1080ti and weirdly the vr experiance was better, maybe i had a dud turing? pascal xp seems smoother somehow, had a 69xt it was horrid on q2 and wmr
You need to enable the 120Hz setting in the Quest's "Experimental Settings" menu on the device itself to use 120Hz with Link (or Quest games w/ 120Hz support).
Also, why the link cable? Join the 21st Century and get a WiFi 6/6E (later ideally) router to ditch that massively immersion killing last-gen shit. 🤷 And plug your PC directly into said router over Ethernet for even more bonus points (better wireless PCVR latency vs when wireless on both ends).
Also, while Quest 3 is indeed about ≈+25% sharper in terms of the raw pixels per degree increase (Quest 3 ≈ 25 PPD, Quest 2 ≈ 20 PPD) you are massively, MASSIVELY underselling the absolutely FUCKING GARGANTUAN clarity difference that the new crystal clear edge-to-edge pancake lenses make!!! It's absolutely a NIGHT AND FUCKING DAY difference, and a WAAAAAAAAY bigger visual upgrade than the raw resolution bump!
Not to even mention the Q3's ≈+10-15° FOV bump over Q2 (≈110° vs ≈96° horizontal), which is HUGELY appreciated for sim-racing! That's just enough extra FOV to be able to see both of my mirrors in an F1 car w/o having to turn my head.
did you complain for having more than 60fps? isn't 60 fps perfect
knowing enough about computers to think you need a 4080 and then not knowing enough about them to call it a GTX 4080 is crazy work. what the actual fuck
I’m struggling to find the value in burning 14 minutes on the old headset and offering zero minutes regarding the new one….if you’re going to release impressions you probably shouldn’t wait a week.
This was part one of the comparison, I have a live show on Friday where we'll do the same tests and probably more. Hopping to take suggestions on what to test beyond what I did in this video. Hope that clears it up a little 😅
@@ronmraz all good but you have an opportunity here to have basically the first searchable sim racing related review. I’d think about getting it up sooner
@@ronmraz why not just make a full review in one video most people will not watch part 2 especially if it’s not properly advertised
Is there a helmet VR mod, feel like i'd add to the immersion
That's a camera option in Assetto Corsa Competizione, I'd say it adds another layer of immersion so that would be cool in F1 23.
The quest 1 is still my daily headset. Definitely looking to finally upgrade
i sidegraded to a q1 after getting sick of t he q2's lcd
why? whats bad abt q2?
@@floorfungus4209 quest 1 uses oled and quest 2 uses lcd. Quest 3 now also uses oled, has pancake lenses too and just overall better
And why the Link cable? O_o If you REALLY want to improve your PCVR experience get a WiFi 6 or ideally 6E capable router and use AirLink or Virtual Desktop for wireless PCVR streaming. Even for cockpit games like sim-racing that cable is still a MASSIVE immersion killer. 🤷
And a WiFi 6E router can basically handle all the same kinds of bitrates a physical USB 3 cavle can. You'll be limited by either the Quest or your desktop GPU's video encode/deocders, NOT the actual link connection be it wired OR wireless.
Can you link the headset you have for your Oculus 1? Mine is so uncomfortable with the pressure on my face, I'm looking to buy a new headset for it. Do you like the one you have for it? (Oculus 1)
the quest one is a headset? wtf do you think a headset is
@@tomlaf1882vr headset... That's what a lot of people including VR content creators call it
... Wait a minute... You don't normally sim-race in VR do you? O_o
I just have the Oculus Quest 1 and I was thinking of upgrading to the “Meta” Quest 3.
What do you lads think? Is it worth the upgrade?
I also had the quest 1 and not 2, and switching to the quest 3 was the best choice I've made vr-wise. The leap between the Quest 1 and 3 is actually crazy to me, and when I first put it on it was as if it was my first time putting on a vr headset. Highly recommend doing switching !
@@jinkred I was thinking of upgrading to the Quest 3 this Christmas. I'll go for it.
i have quest 2 im honostly still gonna get it for chrismas because of the quality@@st.paddymad7085
@st.paddymad7085 i have a quest 1 also, but i still dont know if i buy the quest 3 or wait until a better headset is realeased, like the valve deckard, here in brazil the quest 3 is very expensive comparing to the usa price
The framerate would have been much better, if the vr implementation was done much better... AMS2, ACC, PC2 and AC have a much better VR implementation than the recent EA F1 titles.
That makes a lot of sense! I did try out ACC after last friday and I can confirm it was smoother. I'll keep this in mind for friday, TY
@@ronmraz And the latency of the tracking in F1.. is very annoying...
@@ronmraz AMS2 and Project Cars 2 have the best VR implementation and are good optimised, but be sure to try different refresh rates... sometimes a bit lower refresh rate makes the game run much smoother and less stutter.
Acc is one of the worst optimized games for vr. You'd be much better off playing some of the other games he listed. The first ac is night and day for optimization. They messed acc vr up. There's people who had to turn settings way down and lower fps while using 3090, 4080 and 4090s. Idk what they changed but its made vr almost unplayable in ACC
I would rather have a 72hz oled screen than a 120hz lcd screen
Then you definitely have you priorities wrong. The LCD resolution, refresh rates and especially the pancake lenses and overall FOV of my Quest 3 are MILES better than my quest 1 its not even on the same level.
@@misaroorasim I can't take a game seriously without black. Black is better on quest 3 than quest 2 though.
@@misaroorasim I'd rather have quest 1 resolution, blacks and volumetric lighting, shadows, bloom and dof in games than the higher resolution
@@warlockboyburns I'm a little confused, you prefer the Quest 1 resolution? The Q1 is 1440 × 1600 per eye, the Quest 3 is 2064 x 2208, On q3 this almost removes the screen door effect between pixels that is really distracting.
Volumetric lighting, bloom and DOF have nothing to do with the screens being OLED unless your referring to some kind of glare but that wouldnt make sense cause the fresnel lenses of the Q1 are horrible compared the the clear pancake lenses of the Q3 with the ammount of glare they produce caused by the concentric rings in the lens. This causes 'God-rays' When your in a dark enviroment with a patches of bright light sources on the Q1, which IMO ruins the darker blacks you get with the OLED.
Also, i dunno if your referring to PCVR link cable or native quest games, but the graphics quality of the Q3 is obviously much better. Volumetric lighting, shadow quality draw distance being disabled or reduced on Q1 due to the processor being so old and weak now, with the Q1 soon to be unsupported.
Q1's 72hz is also not smooth enough and makes alot of people i know feel sick, the 120hz (minimum of 90hz) is much better. Of course id prefer an updated OLED in the next meta headset due to the better blacks, but currently q3 is definetely a better trade-off.
Another thing people fail to mention, is no matter if the fps is only 72hz, the OLEDs response time make it looks like 120hz if LCD and the colors are amazing