Meta Quest 3

reaper12 said:
What kind of backup setting are you using for this to be a problem? It's only going to make a difference in time for one backup.

I can understand why people might not want to install things on their C: drive because of Space issues. But for easy and fast backup? Wut??
Click to expand...

I copy the raw filesystem device to a file on my server, compressed. Adding 3-4 GB would add up over time as I don't delete the previous versions.

In any case, right now the C: filesystem is too small to accept one or two more 3-4 GB applications so it would force me into extensive restructuring.

Anyway, I don't quite understand why things other than the raw drivers and startup script have to live on C:. For NVidia drivers that is not the case, the bulk of them goes to a drive you specify. Meta's quest package is the only large thing I have this problem with,
 
Liver said:
What is this talk about installing on “c?” What does it accomplish?

What can I read to learn more?
Click to expand...

As I just said, I doubt that all of those 3-4 GB actually *have* to live on C:, but Meta does not offer a choice.
 
uOpt said:
As I just said, I doubt that all of those 3-4 GB actually *have* to live on C:, but Meta does not offer a choice.
Click to expand...

open a command prompt.

run this

[drive]:\Users\[Username]\Downloads\OculusSetup.exe /drive=[new system drive]

Fill in the values accordingly. So if you the setup file is the downloads folder on your C: drive and you want to install it to the F: drive use this.

C:\Users\uOpt\Downloads\OculusSetup.exe /drive=F
 
reaper12 said:
open a command prompt.

run this

[drive]:\Users\[Username]\Downloads\OculusSetup.exe /drive=[new system drive]

Fill in the values accordingly. So if you the setup file is the downloads folder on your C: drive and you want to install it to the F: drive use this.

C:\Users\uOpt\Downloads\OculusSetup.exe /drive=F
Click to expand...

Thank you!
 
I really didn't think i would go from Q2 to the Q3. It seems the lense/image improvement and wide fov may be worth it. Hmmmmm!
 
TMCM said:
Are the lenses similar to the Q2? I got some of those custom Rx lenses (I wear glasses) that clip on to my Q2 and wonder if I can swap them over to the Q3 or will I have to get a new set meant for the Q3
Click to expand...

l88bastard said:
No, I also wear prescription glasses. I ordered some lens inserts from Zenni but they still have not shipped yet. I use dork glasses from VR lab as a stop gap to get me thruView attachment 605408
Click to expand...

As already stated. Previous iterations of lens correction will not work.
 
Sort of a general question on how does this thing work...

I have an HP Reverb that I got for running Flight Sim and it is totally wired. It plugs into the back of my 3090. Flight sim gives the 3090 the job to render and it renders and sends the image off down the DP cable.

How the heck does that process work on a Quest with it being wireless?
 
Well I mean you could just Google how to use the quest for PCVR. You essentially have three different options which are you could use the link cable and connect it directly to the PC. Second options if you got a good router then you can use air link or use virtual desktop. The third option is you can get the D-Link air bridge which is essentially just using air link to connect to a device just made for Oculus instead of going through your router.
 
The wireless solutions work depending on how noisy your environment is and how far away you are from the access point. All the real processing is being done on the PC, so you're essentially just streaming human input and video data. Turns out it doesn't add up to alot.

The Link cable is pretty much overkill. It's basically an optical USB-C cable. Realistic speeds I've seen are something like 3GB/s. The Quest 2 barely uses half a gigabit. That said the Link cable is considered a zero compromise solution. My suggestion is skip the Link cable and get something cheaper. Optical USB-C cables don't cost $70. Link cable is not worth the premium as there's nothing special about it.
 
applegrcoug said:
Sort of a general question on how does this thing work...

I have an HP Reverb that I got for running Flight Sim and it is totally wired. It plugs into the back of my 3090. Flight sim gives the 3090 the job to render and it renders and sends the image off down the DP cable.

How the heck does that process work on a Quest with it being wireless?
Click to expand...

Your Reverb is essentially just working as a monitor, displaying the raw video signal directly from the PC, the Quest uses a data signal.

Your PC encodes a video signal and sends it as data to the Quest. The Quest then decodes the video stream from the data and displays it. It does this for both wired and wireless.

The downside of this is your video signal is compressed so you may get artifacts, but if you can increase the bitrate enough it's not really an issue. The upside is your headset can handle things like scaling and spacewarp, and you can transmit the signal wirelessly.
 
Absalom said:
Optical USB-C cables don't cost $70
Click to expand...
I thought anything optical outside the classic audio was always quite expensive (hdmi-usb, etc...)

https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=38579

$70 sound like a standard price if it is a good length.
applegrcoug said:
How the heck does that process work on a Quest with it being wireless?
Click to expand...
When I was young I only had wireless TV, not that dissimilar than watching a game stream via wifi, high bitrate h.264 or h.265
 
LukeTbk said:
I thought anything optical outside the classic audio was always quite expensive (hdmi-usb, etc...)

https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=38579

$70 sound like a standard price if it is a good length.
Click to expand...
I guess what I was implying is you don't need a fancy cable at all unless you plan to stand 16 feet away. Most half-way decent USB-C cables can pull off 500mbps no problem.

It was more or less an answer to the question asking why the wireless solutions work at all.
 
Absalom said:
I guess what I was implying is you don't need a fancy cable at all unless you plan to stand 16 feet away. Most half-way decent USB-C cables can pull off 500mbps no problem.
Click to expand...
Could be more for cable weight-flexibility than bandwidth if they are short and aiming for that reasonable amount yes, or at least for the people considering to pay the extra.
 
sharknice said:
Your Reverb is essentially just working as a monitor, displaying the raw video signal directly from the PC, the Quest uses a data signal.

Your PC encodes a video signal and sends it as data to the Quest. The Quest then decodes the video stream from the data and displays it. It does this for both wired and wireless.

The downside of this is your video signal is compressed so you may get artifacts, but if you can increase the bitrate enough it's not really an issue. The upside is your headset can handle things like scaling and spacewarp, and you can transmit the signal wirelessly.
Click to expand...

The HP solution just works. Wires are that way, right? However, the problem with wires is they tend to get wound around things....every time my son does anything that has wires he gets wires wound around chairs, legs on things....EVERYTHING. The crazy thing is, the Reverb, it is great for flight sim, where you sit in the chair and do the controls and he still finds a way to get it tangled up. Kids......

So this wireless solution, where it has to encode stuff...it doesn't seem to have any latency problems or any other issues besides some artifacts?
 
The official link cable is great though, it's incredibly lightweight and flexible, despite the 5m length. I literally can't tell that I'm wired for sitting games like flight sims (it's way better than the displayport/hdmi cable of previous headsets I've tried as well). Did not feel that way with any other cable, but I can't say that I tried them all of course.

I guess that's why it's expensive. Much as I love wireless VR, wired still has a place for sitting games and is way more reliable too. Would be cool to get displayport over USB-C though... we could cut latency by like 15-20ms.
 
applegrcoug said:
So this wireless solution, where it has to encode stuff...it doesn't seem to have any latency problems or any other issues besides some artifacts?
Click to expand...
The message you quoted seem to be clear that it does it if you wired or not, the encoding-decoding step will induce some latency-artifact in both case, if we follow historical precent that does it (like using local network steam streaming), around 5-6ms for both step can be expected.

kalston said:
we could cut latency by like 15-20ms.
Click to expand...
NVENC of h.264 is more around 4-5 ms no ? and I imagine the quest decode to be quite fast (1-2 or 3 ms)
 
applegrcoug said:
The HP solution just works. Wires are that way, right? However, the problem with wires is they tend to get wound around things....every time my son does anything that has wires he gets wires wound around chairs, legs on things....EVERYTHING. The crazy thing is, the Reverb, it is great for flight sim, where you sit in the chair and do the controls and he still finds a way to get it tangled up. Kids......

So this wireless solution, where it has to encode stuff...it doesn't seem to have any latency problems or any other issues besides some artifacts?
Click to expand...
The faster the WiFi the better it works, higher bandwidth means less transmission latency. If you have lower speeds there will be noticable latency. You can lower the bit rate to get lower latency, so there is a balance there.
Also if your WiFi is flakey you'll get frame drops. The space warping on the headset can help smooth that out, but can only do so much.

People really into wireless VR sometimes spend more on the WiFi equipment than the headset.

I had a $70 WiFi 6 router that worked pretty well as long as I was pretty close to it and didn't set the birate too high, now I have an $800 wifi 6e kit that works extremely well from multiple rooms bit rate cranked to the max.
 
LukeTbk said:
The message you quoted seem to be clear that it does it if you wired or not, the encoding-decoding step will induce some latency-artifact in both case, if we follow historical precent that does it (like using local network steam streaming), around 5-6ms for both step can be expected.


NVENC of h.264 is more around 4-5 ms no ? and I imagine the quest decode to be quite fast (1-2 or 3 ms)
Click to expand...
I'm talking total latency created by the link pipeline. Encoding, transmission, decoding. You can see it with Oculus Debug Tool easily and the numbers seem accurate as can be. VD gives numbers too, but I do not trust VD as much and it never felt as good as Oculus stuff to me, even when showing similar or better numbers.

NVENC for H264 is very fast to encode, 2-3ms on a 4090 (half what it took a Pascal card!), but decoding on the Q3 is still around 7ms at max resolution it seems (I was running 72hz, might be even worse when you push it to 120). Not really any faster than Q2. Q3 does not seem faster with H265 either, but I know it received AV-1 support which may be good. I did not test that.

You need to look at motion to photon latency to see the real impact of Link pipeline. Even wired Link is almost 15ms slower than let's say Rift S or Index under the best circumstances. You can also see that with the Oculus Debug tool easily. Wireless Link is easily 20-30ms MTP. Rift S MTP is as low as 30ish ms, Q2 or Q3 is 45ish with a cable and a 4090.

Now that does not mean Link is terrible and no one should use it, Oculus have a great software pipeline and a lot of tricks up their sleeves (Carmack contributed a lot I believe) to make it work and not feel terrible to the end user. I'm a Link user even if I care a lot about latency.
 
Last edited:
Pre-ordering if you were having it shipped made no sense unless you didn't have a Best buy or Target near you. I did a pre-order for in store pickup and they had stacks of them sitting there so anybody could have just walked in and gotten one without a pre-order anyway. In fact, I exchanged mine today and there were still stacks of them.
 
jobert said:
Pre-ordering if you were having it shipped made no sense unless you didn't have a Best buy or Target near you. I did a pre-order for in store pickup and they had stacks of them sitting there so anybody could have just walked in and gotten one without a pre-order anyway. In fact, I exchanged mine today and there were still stacks of them.
Click to expand...

Yes you said that already. Can you not think of anything else to write?

Besides, it doesn't apply here. They are discussing Zenni Lenses for the Quest 3, not the Quest 3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Liver
like this
reaper12 said:
Yes you said that already. Can you not think of anything else to write?

Besides, it doesn't apply here. They are discussing Zenni Lenses for the Quest 3, not the Quest 3.
Click to expand...
Okay my bad but no need to be an asshole about it...
 
jobert said:
Okay my bad but no need to be an asshole about it...
Click to expand...
Maybe look at yourself before being very impolite yourself?

This thing is GREAT, the clarity is so much better. When sim racing, I can read the distance signs before a turn very well and the whole display is essentially the sweet spot now. This is by far the best thing about the change between the Q2 and Q3, it really is as if you went from a big screen SD TV to FHD Blu-ray quality. Not a perfect analogy, but close.
Head strap sucks indeed, already had a BoboVR M2 and retrofitted it to an M3 one, which takes that annoyance away and gives me virtually limitless battery life.

Mixed Reality is fun to check out, but far from mature, though it is usable this time around.

I played Red Matter 2 standalone and all I can say: this is insanely great quality for a standalone game! I read the reviews, they were praising it, which I was skeptical about, but it really is on another level. If they keep updating and releasing games like this for the Quest 3, it really can make standalone games very feasable.
 
Koldur said:
Maybe look at yourself before being very impolite yourself?
Click to expand...
Look at myself? Okay, I'm looking at my original post and I don't see where I had said anything rude but you're more than welcome to point it out.
 
jobert said:
Look at myself? Okay, I'm looking at my original post and I don't see where I had said anything rude but you're more than welcome to point it out.
Click to expand...
For one, there is only one person here that seems to think he needs to call someone names, for no reason. Second, you have nothing meaningful to contribute other then regurgitated statements that have little to no addition to the discussion on how the Quest 3 performs and what your experiences were and why you decided to return it.

I might be wrong, but the way you are coming off, you are here just to bash because you want to.
 
Koldur said:
Maybe look at yourself before being very impolite yourself?

This thing is GREAT, the clarity is so much better. When sim racing, I can read the distance signs before a turn very well and the whole display is essentially the sweet spot now. This is by far the best thing about the change between the Q2 and Q3, it really is as if you went from a big screen SD TV to FHD Blu-ray quality. Not a perfect analogy, but close.
Head strap sucks indeed, already had a BoboVR M2 and retrofitted it to an M3 one, which takes that annoyance away and gives me virtually limitless battery life.

Mixed Reality is fun to check out, but far from mature, though it is usable this time around.

I played Red Matter 2 standalone and all I can say: this is insanely great quality for a standalone game! I read the reviews, they were praising it, which I was skeptical about, but it really is on another level. If they keep updating and releasing games like this for the Quest 3, it really can make standalone games very feasable.
Click to expand...

I’ve been on this forum for a long time. I would advise you to use the ignore feature and move on.

I do agree the clarity is significantly improved. I’m still holding out on the head strap. I know I have to get something different since the standard one is quite bad. The elite strap is $70, and I remember buying an excellent strap for the Quest 2 for around $40. So I’ll wait.

I also would like a soft face mask, but nothing that’ll move around. I have something like that on my DJI Googles 2.

I’ll check out Red Matter 2. Thanks for for the recommendation.

What do you mean by “stand alone” game? Im not following.
 
I'm really happy with the quest 3...it's great value for the money and best all around headset on the market IMHO....and I have barely scratched its potential use (have not viewed 3d pron yet)

An after market head strap with second battery is an absolute must as well as prescription inserts if you wear glasses... the official wireless earbuds are pretty sweet too but not a have to have.

Only thing I would wish for is oled but I understand pancakes eat up a lot of light and the tech isn't quite there yet for the nits required. The pass thru could be better but at this price point it's impressive and is eons improved over the pro and q2.

The only headset on the market with better visuals is the crystal but that's wired and weighs 2x more and costs 3x more.

Anybody who says they are not impressed with Q3 and goes back to their reverb, quest 2, pico 4 or index is either trolling or on crack or blind or all three!
 
Last edited:
Liver
With stand alone, I mean on the headset itself. Red Matter 2 can also be played with PCVR, when I play RM2 on the headset itself, it is the first time I am not wanting to play it through PCVR because of the graphics quality.
I am sure this will not be the same for all games, but it is getting there. Maybe one or two more generations and stand alone gaming might become the preferred way to play.

At this moment, 90% of the time I play through Virtual Desktop.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Liver
like this
Koldur said:
Liver
With stand alone, I mean on the headset itself. Red Matter 2 can also be played with PCVR, when I play RM2 on the headset itself, it is the first time I am not wanting to play it through PCVR because of the graphics quality.
I am sure this will not be the same for all games, but it is getting there. Maybe one or two more generations and stand alone gaming might become the preferred way to play.

At this moment, 90% of the time I play through Virtual Desktop.
Click to expand...

understood. I used to have a windows based gaming pc years ago. A much different time in my life. So the option of pcvr is not an option for me, and it didn’t cross my mind. I didn’t even consider connecting the quest to a pc as an option. Thanks.
 
Picked up a quest 3 last night and lawd have mercy…. The pancake lenses are glorious. No lens flare or god rays. No looking straight ahead and turning your head to keep your eyes in the sweet spot.

At my ipd and eye sight they seem uniform for my field of view. My son says for him there is still a sweet spot for him but that it’s big as hell and once he sets his ipd he basically can’t get out of the sweet spot.

I have always had eye strain with HMDs and would get a headache after playing, not with this one though. I think the fresnel lenses were to blame.

Resolution bump and AR cameras are pretty cool. Red matter after update reminds me of a 970 era pc vr game. I imagine I will use it standalone more often once more quest 3 updated games release.
 
Gut check. I've been tasked with giving in and getting a vr headset for the 12-year old this holiday season. I'm a cheap bastard, but money doesn't really matter. Sounds like I really should get the quest 3, even if there's some like super discount on the 2?

My cheap-o-meter isn't really going to consider anything more $ than the 3, especially since my 'gaming pc' is a 3600x with a 1650 super, so a tethered headset is destined to be a disappointment.

I don't think I'll use it much, but the IPD adjustments and more eyeglasses compatability seem like a much better product, and then there's all the things y'all are saying about how much better it looks.
 
The quest 1 and 2 were meant to be replaced by upgrades. Easy. The quest 4 will really have to offer a significant improvement to upgrade the 3.

It’s an analogy, the new iPhone has to be a big improvement for me to get the new one. Otherwise I’m upgrading on the evens (every other) on the iPhones. I think the quest is at that point now.
 
I have had two Quest 3 units now and one of them had good passthrough quality and the other was just terrible. The first one I could read the text on my phone and PC monitor and on the second one it was just a blurry mess. This is in the exact same room and lighting conditions. I also got some random flickering on the second unit. Also the spacer on the second unit would not budge at all for some reason.

Both units had a strange angled line towards the outside of the lenses sort of like light being reflected. In dark games it was really noticeable and very distracting. I could minimize it greatly by getting the lenses as close to my face as possible but at that point it was way too much pressure. IPD adjustment did not help enough to matter either.

I am just going to stick with my Quest 2 for now and try again later...
 
Last edited:
That sucks. The passthrough on mine is not nearly good enough to read my phone 11, that sounds like some insane manufacturing variance?! it's ok with my monitor since that's a big OLED 48 screen I can for sure read that.

Not sure what you mean about the lenses as mines seem totally flawless, my first pancake lenses. One defect I do have is the facial interface popping out at the bottom (the nose bit) when I apply pressure to the sides. It's not super annoying and I could fix it I guess but I'm kinda leaning towards a return since I feel like I may not even have that much time for VR right now. And I feel like they could do a better job with the fan. If I don't have IEMs it's kinda iffy with its revving up and down behaviour.
 
I have almost no doubt that if I get a 3rd unit the lens issue will be there too. It was literally the first thing I noticed when putting on the headset. It is very visible before powering it on and looked exactly the same on both units. When its powered on it will not really be noticeable unless in dark scenes. I will try and see if I can get it to show up in a picture next time I try another one out.
 
Last edited:
I just bought a Quest 3. The passthrough lets me read my phone, but only if I hold it away. Up close and it is a blurry mess.

VR is very good.
MR is moderately good to good.
 
jobert
The Quest 3 lenses aren't completely perfect yet, no lens is yet in VR headsets. The effect you see on the Q3 is so much less than with the fresnel lenses are so much worse with the god rays and very small sweet spot. Would never go back to that.
But to each their own of course, my Quest to went to someone else after I experienced my Q3 for fifteen minutes. So experiences are different it seems ;) On a Dutch forum I read that there was someone that couldn't see the difference of the sweetspot between the Q2 and Q3 because of his IPD and vision. So it is also depending on how one person's eyes differ from another. He still kept it, because he liked the extra horsepower of the new SoC, not sure if I would have done that in his case to be honest. I like being able to use AV1 and HEVC at 200Mbps, but not sure if that would be worth it.

The "strange angled lines towards the outside" are the limits of the pancake lenses and enlarging the displays to a point where you see the borders between the pixels pretty well, add to that, that the displays are tilted 20 degrees, you see angled lines. The Q2 doesn't let you see that, because the lenses are so blurry at that part of the lens and if you would, the would be straight since the Q2's display is one big display put in straight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top