Rift CV1 to Quest 2?

[ssmacc]

Hello,

I have a couple of Rift CV1's, I can get £174 from CEX, would you trade that in and purchase a Quest 2? If I do will all my content on the Oculus Store and Steam run on the Quest 2 (via the link cable).

It looks like at £125ish it's a decent little upgrade, just want to ensure all my PCVR purchases will run on the Quest 2?

Like others I can't understand why the Quest 2 doesn't have a DP so it could simply stream PCVR content, but from what I read it's still looks a little better that the Rift CV1?

Advice appreciated as never looked at the Quest until very recently and the mobile aspect would be useful.

Cheers,

 

[Ravenger]

I had a CV1, and Quest Link image quality was noticably more detailed than a CV1 image, despite the image compression.

The Link picture quality is compressed though, so you can get compression blocking in dark scenes and the image is quite soft (wireless Virtual Desktop is sharper, but not eveyone can get it working smoothly).

Also the refresh rate is only 72hz, though 90hz is promised on Quest 2, along with resolution and compression improvements, so eventually it should be far better than CV1 overall image quality.

Of course the downside is a bit of latency (which I've not noticed in normal gameplay - Beat Saber expert+ players may disagree), and the controller tracking though very good is nowhere near as good as the three sensor setup I had on the Rift. It is better than Rift two sensor tracking though.

Audio on the Quest/Quest 2 is perfactly acceptable, but nowhere near as good as Rift CV1 audio, but that can be fixed with external headphones.

Of course the big advantage is no external sensors, and the ability to go totally wireless with native apps or Virtual Desktop.

Comfort on Quest 1 was lousy compared to CV1, due to the front-heaviness and strap design. I spent quite a bit of money on accessories to get it comfortable. Quest 2 has an Elite strap which is far better and Quest 2 with that strap looks to be pretty comfortable. (The default strap is apparently awful).

Edit: I forgot the lenses, which are far better on the Quest 1 or 2 than the CV1. Far less god rays, and a wider sweet spot, with greater edge-to-edge clarity. A massive improvement.

 

[Toekiller]

Yes, yes and yes . It will be a massive step up in quality over the CV1.

 

[ssmacc]

Thanks both...looks like a no brainer...

 

[ssmacc]

Yes, yes and yes . It will be a massive step up in quality over the CV1.

I had a CV1, and Quest Link image quality was noticably more detailed than a CV1 image, despite the image compression.

The Link picture quality is compressed though, so you can get compression blocking in dark scenes and the image is quite soft (wireless Virtual Desktop is sharper, but not eveyone can get it working smoothly).

Also the refresh rate is only 72hz, though 90hz is promised on Quest 2, along with resolution and compression improvements, so eventually it should be far better than CV1 overall image quality.

Of course the downside is a bit of latency (which I've not noticed in normal gameplay - Beat Saber expert+ players may disagree), and the controller tracking though very good is nowhere near as good as the three sensor setup I had on the Rift. It is better than Rift two sensor tracking though.

Audio on the Quest/Quest 2 is perfactly acceptable, but nowhere near as good as Rift CV1 audio, but that can be fixed with external headphones.

Of course the big advantage is no external sensors, and the ability to go totally wireless with native apps or Virtual Desktop.

Comfort on Quest 1 was lousy compared to CV1, due to the front-heaviness and strap design. I spent quite a bit of money on accessories to get it comfortable. Quest 2 has an Elite strap which is far better and Quest 2 with that strap looks to be pretty comfortable. (The default strap is apparently awful).

Edit: I forgot the lenses, which are far better on the Quest 1 or 2 than the CV1. Far less god rays, and a wider sweet spot, with greater edge-to-edge clarity. A massive improvement.

Lastly (I think!), just had a look and only one of my PC's has a USB-C interphase, the other has:

2 x USB 3.1 Gen 2 up to 10Gbps port(s) (2 at back panel, teal blue, Type-A)

I assume this will be ok for PCVR on the Quest 2?

Cheers

 

[Ravenger]

Lastly (I think!), just had a look and only one of my PC's has a USB-C interphase, the other has:

2 x USB 3.1 Gen 2 up to 10Gbps port(s) (2 at back panel, teal blue, Type-A)

I assume this will be ok for PCVR on the Quest 2?

Cheers

It should be ok, though some USB chipsets are better than others. But if you did have problems then a cheap add-in card would fix that. I had to use an add-in card for my CV1 on my old PC as it overloaded the built in ports due to power and bandwidth demands.

 

[ssmacc]

It should be ok, though some USB chipsets are better than others. But if you did have problems then a cheap add-in card would fix that. I had to use an add-in card for my CV1 on my old PC as it overloaded the built in ports due to power and bandwidth demands.

Cheers,

The PC in question currently runs a CV1 with three sensors without issue, fingers crossed it'll be ok...(would have thought a USB 3.1 Gen 2 will be OK)

 

[Ravenger]

Cheers,

The PC in question currently runs a CV1 with three sensors without issue, fingers crossed it'll be ok...(would have thought a USB 3.1 Gen 2 will be OK)

If you can run a 3 sensor CV1 without issue then you should be fine.

 

[Nasher]

I was thinking of waiting for the HP reverb 2 instead. I don't like the fact Facebook is going to force everyone to make facebook accounts to use the Oculus headsets in future :/

 

[ssmacc]

I was thinking of waiting for the HP reverb 2 instead. I don't like the fact Facebook is going to force everyone to make facebook accounts to use the Oculus headsets in future :/

I've got two Rifts (CV1), I'd attached the first one to my Facebook account ages ago...When I was "forced" to attach the second one, I just set up a 2nd (you could say fake!) Facebook account without any issues...I'd therefore not let that put you off...

 

[Ravenger]

I was thinking of waiting for the HP reverb 2 instead. I don't like the fact Facebook is going to force everyone to make facebook accounts to use the Oculus headsets in future :/

G2 is great, potentially the only downside is the controllers which eat batteries, and have no capacitive touch.

 

[ssmacc]

G2 is great, potentially the only downside is the controllers which eat batteries, and have no capacitive touch.

no capacitive touch - seems a massive omission!

 

[Zeeflyboy]

I agree with pretty much everything @Ravenger has said here!

As an original CV1 user and then Quest almost exclusively over WiFi link I wouldn’t hesitate to shop the old CV1 in against the Quest 2.

Based on my use of the Quest I think comfort is very likely to still be a downgrade on the Quest 2 compared to the CV1, but can likely be mitigated in much the same way as Quest 1 could be to make it more acceptable (nicer facial interfaces, better head straps, counter weights).

As for the facebook bit, well only you can really answer if that changes your mind and pushes you towards another headset... it’s a personal and subjective choice.

 

[Zeeflyboy]

no capacitive touch - seems a massive omission!

a bizarre one

it does at least add analogue buttons and a thumbstick over the old WMR controllers, but it is a bit baffling as to why when they were overhauling it they didn’t add capacitive touch.

given the analogue grip/trigger though even slight pressure will register much the same as capacitive touch would, where it is arguably lacking is in the thumb area where you will probably have a permanently extended thumb. I did like tyriel’s suggestion that HP should use the dead zone of the thumbstick to register closed thumb... who knows if they will do it.

Regardless, hand presence is likely to take a hit when comparing Touch controllers to G2 controllers. Also more finicky about rechargeable battery choice and significantly shorter battery life so overall I think you have to just concede that the G2 controllers, while a significant improvement in the WMR world, are no match for Touch.

 

[Ravenger]

a bizarre one
Regardless, hand presence is likely to take a hit when comparing Touch controllers to G2 controllers. Also more finicky about rechargeable battery choice and significantly shorter battery life so overall I think you have to just concede that the G2 controllers, while a significant improvement in the WMR world, are no match for Touch.

It's annoying because otherwise the G2 is an amazing headset. Amazing how a £299 headset has much better controllers and tracking than a £600 headset.