HP just announced an improved version of G2, fixing controller tracking and other issues. If only it could fix the small sweet spot, then I won’t need a $2000 Varjo anymore.
They are Nvidia only probably just because of Nvidia’s superior compression/streaming solution - they push a lot of pixels trough that one cable. So it would be more difficult for them to make it other way.
Well from that 3 improvements:
- Tracking- better vertically - so basically they improved the volume, what is good, but it is not huge improvement.
- Cable - simply cable in rev.2. which you can get from HP for regular G2 for free (assuming warranty)
-
Face Gasket - you can take out spacer and move from eye relief 15mm (as in classic G2) to 9mm, so what a lot of people got with aftermarket gaskets
and probably it will be possible to order that from HP.
So small improvements, kind of G2+ noting major.
Do you find the Vive pro 2 better than G2? I have a G2 and am always wondering what’s better to upgrade to…
I have a G2 and my opinion is at the moment that headset is more advanced than current computer hardware and software permits so why spend so much on an even more advanced headset.
What I mean is that I have a 5950x, 3090 and 64gb system and I cannot get the g2 to a stage where I am completely happy, it’s just too jerky or I need to lower the resolution. For me to be completely happy I would need 100/100 and at least a consistent 45fps, ideally 90. Either the hardware or the software or maybe a combination of both are not advanced enough to provide this, so what’s the point of adding more advancement to the headset?
5 Likes
He did but he’s an influencer and not a reviewer. Much as I like his Youtube channel and its certainly interesting I’ll wait until technical reviews start appearing to get a balanced idea of what the headset is like.
I think thats exactly why I wouldn’t rush out and spend the better part of £2K on a headset right now. Sim optimisations and PC hardware are probably a couple of years behind headset capabilities.
3 Likes
I’ll preface this with the fact I use a G2 and will not be buying the Varjo, but the idea around not being able to push the G2 fully anyway misses a few key points.
-
The lenses that the aero uses will have a significant clarity bump over what is in the G2 even if everything else is kept constant. The main downsides are expense (and potentially distortion, although this seems well handled in software with further improvements planned).
-
The brightness of the Aero is a substantial upgrade, and especially when combined with the potential for local dimming with mini led would again provide a substantial visual upgrade over the G2 even if all else is kept equal.
-
The assumption of equivalent performance is slightly flawed, as I don’t believe we know the “optimum” pre-distortion render resolution yet. Especially given the difference in lenses and display size, it is entirely realistic that the amount of super sampling required is different, and could favour the Aero. Furthermore, If MSFS is able to be made compatible with the foveated rendering made possible with the eye tracking then it could well turn out that the Varjo is significantly more performant than the G2 thus allowing higher settings despite the higher headline resolution.
For the latter point I believe they are currently using Nvidias VRSS 2.0, which requires games to be DX11, forward rendered and use MSAA so it is unlikely to be compatible out of the box… but I’m sure we will relatively soon see Dynamic foveated tech that works with DX12, deferred rendering and temporal anti aliasing solutions as eye tracking becomes more mainstream over the next year or so.
For me personally, I’m sure the Aero is a significant improvement over the G2 even with current GPU limitations. Is it 2k of improvement though… probably not for me personally. If it had a wigig2 wireless implementation and built in audio solution then I may have been more tempted to splurge the cash.
I also however think that next year is going to see some really rapid improvements in VR tech and the Varjo could be left looking dated and over priced fairly rapidly given it isn’t even arriving for another 3-4 months. I would wager that within the next year or so we will be seeing the announcement of headsets with 4k uOLED displays, varifocal lenses, wireless options and smaller form factors.
5 Likes
That’s quite nice reasoning 
I would discuss a bit on some of your points:
- Clarity - it seems that it is better, how much we will see when final versions arrive and will be tested, but I wouldn’t say that G2 is significantly worse, at least for me - maybe I have lucky head shape and eyesight What is more worrying is distortion of Aero - MRTV mentioned visible barrel distortion (can be overcome with software) and chromatic aberration closer to edges (that is something very hard to overcome in software or even impossible). That two matters are deal breakers in that price for Aero.
- Local dimming - for night flying would be amazing More brightness - I don’t feel it is needed, G2 is so bright that flying into sun hurts my eyes very quickly.
- As for performance - MRTV mentioned numbers very close to G2, for msfs got even 2 fps better (28 G2, 30 Aero), but he mentioned distortions visible (see my pt.1), so it means to fix it - resolution need to go higher. So the performance will drop. As for fovated rendering - I’m skeptical in case of MSFS.
So for me it is not as significant improvement over the G2 and it will be exotic headset also, like Pimax, so issues related to exotic headrests will have lower priority than mainstream (G2 and Quest2).
Cost wise, for me it is too expensive compared to what difference it seem to make. I’m happy with sharpness of G2, if software will be improved a bit (WMR, OpenXR and MSFS) and I will get bit more performance - I will be even more happy. Spending that much money to get bit more sharpness seem to overkill. Even tough I could easily afford it
I look forward for Index successor, hoping that (supposed) Valve Deckard, won’t be just Valves answer to Quest, but hmd which improves on all fields
Yet another headset that doesn’t account for those of us with huge heads.
I ordered a Samsung Odyssey + all the way from the USA. The sodding thing wouldn’t even go below the top of my head, let alone fit badly, so I had to sell it.
I can sort of understand why they skimp on IPD, but that still means I can’t use their headset either.
It cannot cost trillions of dollars to add a couple more cm to the straps.
Largely agreed, it will be a niche product for consumers… I’m not sure it will have any real issues though as it doesn’t need any specific support like pimax does in some cases. For one it has full openXR support and that really solves a lot of the issues of supporting a specific headset going forwards.
Like you however, despite being able to afford it they haven’t given me enough to make me really want to buy it over sticking with the G2. Perhaps that would change if I ever tried one in person but from a paper specs perspective it misses a couple of boxes that I would want ticked at that price point, especially since I would have to buy into the lighthouse ecosystem too which would bump me up to near £3k. I’m not someone that baulks at spending money where I think it will bring me suitable enjoyment (my full motion rig would render that argument moot lol), but it just doesn’t hit my own personal price/value point at such a level… especially given my own beliefs as to where VR will be in the next 1-2 years.
That said, I look forward to seeing wider impressions of this thing when it starts arriving with customers next year. I’m sure it’ll make a lot of people very happy!
1 Like
There is no GPU to proper drive the Reverb G2 with its 4,67k per eye, so wich GPU should drive the 7.83k of the Varjo? You will need 3090 sli (not supportet by msfs) at least or wait for the next generetion in a year or so. A 3070 will cry miserably. And the last thing we need in VR is more brightness.
In any case, the specifications are impressive and give us a glimpse into the future. Go, Reverb G3, go!
How about for those of us that need prescription glasses? Do they offer lens insets?
Glasses fit fine in the Varjo, both developers mentioned it in the launch video.
1 Like
Its not 1500-2000 usd its $1990 PLUS tax. I see lots of people post about its price being “2k” but that is without tax which could be as much as 10 or 20%, unless you don’t pay tax in america?
You may be surprised. It’s render resolution that ultimately matters for performance, not panel resolution. I don’t know the values for Varjo, but in MRTV’s review, he got slightly better benchmark score for Varjo (30 fps) than G2 (28 fps).
In their launch stream they talked about the “variable resolution” lens design. On top of that, the dynamic foveated rendering, once supported by developers, is going to make a big difference.
Edit: Also to quote a recent post from VR Flight Sim Guy: “the Aero performs pretty much as good as the G2 with about 4 times better clarity.” He attributes this mostly to software optimization.
1 Like
Can someone please clarify for me. If I want to use the Varjo msfs 2020 only, will I need a base station
you wont “need” it, but without it you wont have full head tracking (6 DOF)
Are you sure? I don’t have the Varjo, but my Valve Index, which uses the same tracking, won’t even turn on until at least one base station is turned on.
Reducing render resolution is pointless. Of course you can lower it until you reach 30fps but that can you do with every device. For an comparison you need to run both devices at their default specs → 100% render resolution, the same oxr settings and the same ingame gfx settings. I am also a little bit reserved with MRTV since he kicked off the hype about the still imaginary decagear last year, chip shortage or not, we haven’t even seen a production sample yet. This channel lacks of seriousness imho.
For the math of flight sim guy: 4,67 to 7,83 is roughly a ratio of 1,67.
And of course a headset 4 times the price of the G2 have to have some advantage.
Anyway, I welcome this development and look forward to every progress in VR and I am shure we will see similar specs in the next Valve, HP and many other headsets. Our future is shiny 
Yes slightly. Not enough to justify the cost if one has to buy the headset and base stations/controllers. Another advantage the Reverb has is ability to use it with Open XR with MSFS 2020. I already had the base stations and controllers that came with my Index so that is why I gave the Vive Pro 2 a try. I am glad I did however I also play several other games as well that make good use of the controllers and the great tracking of the Lighthouse 2.0 system.
1 Like