We recently got our hands on the Pico 4, and it’s safe to say that this headset has impressed us. Initially, we were prepared to consider the Meta Quest Pro despite its high price, until we noticed that it offered no substantial improvement in screen resolution over the Quest 2—a surprising choice for such an expensive product. Around the same time, we learned that Virtual Desktop had been made available for the Pico 4, which prompted us to give it a try. The result? The Pico 4 feels like a true next-gen upgrade to the Quest 2, offering sharper screens, a lightweight and balanced design, and premium features like motorized IPD adjustment and efficient airflow through the faceplate. Here are some insights that make the Pico 4 stand out as a strong option for PCVR.
Display Quality
As a standalone headset, the Pico 4 offers clarity comparable to the Quest 2, but it truly excels as a PCVR headset. The display quality is impressive, rivaling even the Reverb G2. Although the Reverb may have a slight edge in sharpness due to its lower field of view (FOV) and higher pixels per degree (PPD), the Pico 4 falls comfortably within the same “class” of clarity, with minimal screen door effect. Additionally, the Pico 4 surpasses the Reverb G2 in FOV and provides a broader area of clear vision, with approximately 80% of the viewable area remaining sharp—something the Quest 2 lacks.
Controller Tracking and Latency
Using Virtual Desktop, we achieved a latency of 35-40ms at 150mbps HEVC, thanks to a dedicated WiFi 6 router and “Godlike” resolution settings. This allowed us to play rhythm games with ease, much like with the Quest 2 over Airlink. The controller tracking was precise and responsive, putting it on par with the Quest 2 and surpassing the Reverb G2, which can sometimes struggle in this area. Additionally, the Pico 4 controllers felt comfortable in-hand, light, and solid, providing a comparable experience to the Quest controllers.
Oculus Game Compatibility
Launching Oculus Rift games via Revive worked seamlessly, with no issues in button mapping. The Pico 4’s controllers mirrored the layout of the Quest, unlike the early days of the Reverb G2, which faced compatibility issues for months. This smooth integration makes the Pico 4 a more versatile option right from the start.
GPU Requirements
With Virtual Desktop’s “Godlike” preset, the Pico 4 operates at a resolution of 3.1k x 3.1k per eye, nearly identical to the 3k x 3k per eye required for full SteamVR resolution on the Reverb G2. From our experience, if a game ran well on the G2 at full resolution, it also performed smoothly on the Pico 4 at this setting. For games where we lowered the resolution on the G2 to maintain 90Hz, we did the same for the Pico 4, indicating similar GPU demands as the G2, and slightly more than the Quest 2.
Audio Considerations
One primary issue we encountered with the Pico 4 is its lack of a headphone jack. While adding a DisplayPort may have been costly, a headphone jack would have been a simple, low-cost addition. We tested the Soundcore VR P10 wireless earbuds with the Pico 4, which worked well with no noticeable additional latency, although they are somewhat expensive and require separate charging.
Additional Observations
Some reviews have mentioned issues with dead pixels or mura, but we found no such defects on our unit. The strap was comfortable, though we did experience a bit of light leakage from the back, causing slight glare in dark scenes due to gaps near the facial interface. We’re hopeful that third-party solutions will address this soon, perhaps with an improved facial interface.
Final Thoughts
Overall, we’re highly impressed with the Pico 4. As a team that has used both the Quest 2 and Reverb G2 since their launches, we’ve long wanted a headset that combines the G2’s display quality with the wireless freedom and intuitive controls of the Quest 2. The Pico 4 comes remarkably close to this vision, making it a strong contender in the PCVR market and a true step forward in immersive virtual reality experiences.
