Meta Quest 3 and Apple Vision Pro are two cutting-edge contenders in the world of mixed and augmented reality headsets that have recently captured the attention of technology enthusiasts. With the impending release of these devices, tech enthusiasts are eager to explore what sets them apart. One of the most noticeable differences is the price point.
Meta offers two options for the Quest 3, priced at €549.99 and €699.99 for 128 GB and 512 GB respectively.
In contrast, the Apple Vision Pro comes with a starting price of $3499 for the 256 GB version, which is equivalent to over €3000. In terms of design, both headsets have a ski mask-like appearance, but the similarities end there. The Quest 3 features a single display that is controlled by a handheld device, while the Vision Pro boasts a dual display that can be navigated through eye movements, thanks to Apple's advanced eye-tracking technology.
This innovative feature enhances the immersive experience for users. The Vision Pro stands out with two 1.41 micro-OLED 4K displays, offering exceptional brightness and pixel density at 4000 pixels per square inch.
On the other hand, the Quest 3 has a single 4128×2208 pixel LCD screen. Apple has equipped its headset with the M2 and R1 processors to handle a range of sensors, cameras, and microphones, while the Quest 3 relies on the Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2 processor. Additionally, the Vision Pro comes with 16 GB of RAM compared to the Quest 3's 12 GB.
In terms of software, Apple introduces VisionOS, a dedicated operating system tailored for its headset, while the Quest 3 operates on Android, providing access to the metaverse and a wide range of video games that can be controlled via an external controller that is also compatible with the Vision Pro. Overall, while both the Meta Quest 3 and Apple Vision Pro promise to redefine user experiences in mixed and augmented reality, their variations in pricing, design, hardware, and software demonstrate unique approaches to innovation in this rapidly evolving field. The choice between the two ultimately depends on individual preferences and priorities in terms of functionality and affordability.
English (US)