In recent yr , we ’ve seen the rise of all - in - one VR headset , which can run severally without the penury of an external PC or console .
TheMeta Quest 2is the good good example of this , becoming one of the most popular VR headset options in the worldly concern . But now it ’s facing a cutthroat competitor in the form of thePico 4 .
How do these two VR headsets compare , and which is the right choice for you ? We ’ll be answering all of those question and more in our comparison guide below .
Price and availability
That mean the Pico 4 is slightly cheaper , with the toll start at £ 379 . There are presently no plans for the Pico to set up in the USA .
Design
Both the Meta Quest 2 and Pico 4 are all - in - one headset , and so have no need for wires . At first glance , they calculate very similar , with a plastic ashen casing . The Pico has a mordant peak at the front , realize it look a footling morsel like a pair of ski goggles .
The Pico 4 offers better support for your head , with a fictile set that encircle your head . You ’re able to adjust the fit by twist around a dial at the fundament . Meanwhile , the Quest uses elastic strap instead , which are a little more fiddly to adjust and tend to slip out of place after extended habit .
The Pico 4 is noticeably small than the Quest . It ’s considerably lighter too , hitting the scales at just 295 g opposed to the Quest ’s 503 g heft .
Pico has been able to accomplish this blueprint by using a pancake lens of the eye . This technology allows the two lenses inside the headset to pose closer together , result in a more compact housing . deliver a lighter form has multiple benefit , applying less pressure on your top dog throughout a extended gambling school term .
Pico has also smartly work up the bombardment cell into the rear strap , resulting in a superior weight distribution than the Quest . When using Meta ’s headset , it can feel like it ’s pulling your forehead down which can ensue in an uncomfortable experience .
Bizarrely , the Pico 4 is missing a headphone laborer , so you ’ll have to go wireless if you want to practice a pair of headphones instead of the integrated verbaliser . The Quest 2 does not share this return , feature a headphone diddlysquat , integrated talker and Bluetooth support .
Controllers
The controllers for the Meta Quest 2 and Pico 4 are virtually identical . They both sport tracking technology , and have a similar choice of inputs : front - facing buttons up top , an analog stick on each launching pad and triggers on the rear .
Those triggers are used to simulate veridical - biography hand movements , whether you ’re pick up an object or curling in your fingers to plug an enemy .
The pads for the Pico 4 are slightly longer , allowing more room for you to grip . Although that does mean they ’re slenderly more difficult to stow aside in a bag .
Both VR controllers need AA battery , so you wo n’t be capable to saddle them up with a USB cable length . While that ’s a swell shame , it does at least mean you wo n’t need to worry about recharging them on a frequent fundament .
Specs and performance
Both the Meta Quest 2 and Pico 4 headsets are power by the same buffalo chip : the Qualcomm XR2 . This means you ’ll get a very similar performance .
The two headsets are able to scat a huge survival of VR game , with only the most demanding titles – such as one-half - LIfe Alyx and Skyrim VR – demand more power . Fortunately , both headsets can be connected up to your PC if you do fancy engaging with more high - remnant experience .
There ’s also no difference of opinion in term of repositing capacity , with 128 GB and 256 GB shape available for purchase .
The Pico does steal an sharpness over the Quest in term of screen result though – 2160 x 2160 per eye compare to the Quest ’s 1832 x 1920 . Our testing shows that the Pico is capable of producing shrill images , with individual pixels becoming less seeable to help root out the ill-famed screen door door impression .
Refresh pace top out at 90Hz for the Pico 4 , while the Quest is capable to reach 120Hz espouse a late update . Both headsets apply LCD screenland technology , soOLEDisn’t on offer on these range of a function just yet .
We also behave shelling testing for both VR headset during the review process . We found the Quest to last for around 2 hour when work games , while the Pico 4 could sometimes be pushed up to 3 hour with less intensive games . This is because Pico fitted its headset with a enceinte capacity electric battery . While that ’s a adult win for Pico , I personally would n’t need to keep act VR unendingly for over 2 hours .
Features
There are a couple of fancy features uncommitted on both VR headsets . Due to having photographic camera at the front , the Meta Quest 2 has a passthrough which allow you to reckon your surroundings in black and white with the headset still strapped to your face .
The Pico 4 goes one tone further with a colour passthrough , set aside you to see your real - world environment with more item . As of yet though , Pico has n’t used this feature for manipulation with sundry realness .
The Meta Quest 2 added hand trailing support in a post - launch update . This allows you to navigate menus without need of controller , simply pointing your fingers and then top to pick out . Using controllers is still the optimum way to play games though , so it ’s not a massive win for the Quest .
Both headset miss high-pitched - end VR features such as optic tracking and motley realism but that ’s not really a surprise at these price points . You ’ll need to buy a Meta Quest Pro for such functionality .
Games
As any console table fan will tell you , the plot library is just as important as the specs – sometimes even more so . While the Pico 4 has been impressive so far , it struggles to contend with the Meta Quest in this surface area .
The Pico 4 has a becoming selection of game , including VR classics such as Arizona Sunshine , Superhot VR and Rec Room . It even has a few advanced gemstone , such as Ragnarock and Walkabout Mini Golf .
The trouble is , the Meta Quest has approach to well-nigh all the same secret plan as the Pico 4 , while also featuring an impressive range of exclusives on top . These admit Beat Saber , Resident Evil 4 and Lone Echo .
There are raft of other grotesque game that the Quest 2 features that the Pico 4 does not have access to yet , including Among Us VR , Moss and Tetris Effect : connect .
It ’s possible that Pico will extend its secret plan subroutine library in the future , but there ’s no guarantee . And since Meta has learn multiple VR plot studio in late years , it ’s only going to be expanding its lineup of sole games in the future .
Verdict
The Meta Quest 2 and Pico 4 are very similar VR headset . They both have an all - in - one design , utilise the precise same processor and even share a similar secret plan subroutine library .
The Pico 4 gains the border in terms of ironware , with a lighter and more comfortable design , higher-ranking screen door resolution , and a larger battery for extended runtime .
But Pico ca n’t compete with Meta when it come to game . Meta has several exclusive games to its name , while about every single game in the Pico 4 shop is also available on the Quest 2 headset . For this cause alone , we ’d recommend opt for the Meta Quest 2 over the Pico 4 .
