It's been out for five months but I still haven't seen anything about it with MSFS running on a PC.

Does anyone have one or know of a review?

I'm interested in how it compares in MSFS to the Quest 3.

Unfortunately you won't find much feedback about the Pico in general, because it's from a somewhat "unknown" brand compared to Meta, so most people prefer investing in a Quest than a Pico.

I preferred investing in a Pico 4 though, but the "Ultra" wasn't yet existing at that time, so I won't be able to give you any useful feedback either, other than my general happiness about that headset 🙂

Compared to my Pico4, the Pico4 Ultra has a better pass-through camera for mixed reality usage. Both have pancake lenses which give a very nice image, and both are 2160x2160 pixels per eye. These headsets have two main drawbacks:

1- LCD screens: the color range won't be as deep as QLED/OLED stuff, which I believe are in the Quest 3

2- No hand-tracking: the Pico devs didn't implement a native OpenXR hand tracking system, so you basically cannot use hand tracking for anything on your computer. It's only supported within the little games from their internal store (i.e: useless). I recon this as the main drawback of my headset, but I'm so happy about the price that I won't complain too loudly 🙂

3-(bonus) These headsets are "streamed" headsets, not real "PCVR" ones. So the image you get from our simulators is compressed and streamed from your PC to the headset, which means that sometimes you might get some quality decrease, depending on your settings. That being said, it's the same with the Quest 3 🙂

 

 

Edited February 11, 20251 yr by Daube

9 minutes ago, Daube said:

QLED/OLED stuff, which I believe are in the Quest 3

LCD

1 minute ago, turbomax said:

LCD

Ah, I thought they had better screens but fresnel lenses, but I had misunderstood. So the Quest 3 has LCD screens and pancake lenses as well, according to the wiki page. Thanks for rectifying 🙂

 

https://vr-compare.com/compare?h1=PvfCDzaDK&h2=W8bStYZ3H

------------------------------------------------------

Quest 3  2.064 × 2.208   @ 90, 120 Hz , 515 g

The Meta Quest 3 employs 4K upscaling, a process that enhances a lower input resolution of 2064×2208 (~4.5 million pixels) to 4K

----------------------------------------------------

https://www.picoxr.com/global/products/pico4-ultra/specs

https://vrx.vr-expert.com/pico-4-ultra-review/

Pico 4 Ultra  90 Hz  , 580 g

Resolution: 2160 × 2160 (× 2, same as HP Reverb G2), 1200 PPI (pixels per inch), LCD
Rendering resolution: 1920 × 1920 (× 2)
Refresh rate: 90 Hz
Pancake lenses
105° FoV

-------------------------------------------

Pimax Crystal Light,  true native 4K resolution 2880X2880 (~8.3 million pixels)

----------------------------------

Varjo XR-4 Secure Edition  3840x3744,  21.990,00 €

https://varjo.com/products/xr-4-secure-edition/

 

 

Edited February 11, 20251 yr by turbomax

On 2/12/2025 at 2:25 AM, Daube said:

 

3-(bonus) These headsets are "streamed" headsets, not real "PCVR" ones. So the image you get from our simulators is compressed and streamed from your PC to the headset, which means that sometimes you might get some quality decrease, depending on your settings. That being said, it's the same with the Quest 3 🙂

Thanks everyone for your responses.

My previous VR headset was a G2 which went belly up about eighteen months back.  I don't want to have streaming if I can avoid it due to the additional overheads and compromises.

I'm now interested in the Pico 3 Neo, which has Displayport.  Yes, it has Fresnal lenses and no pass through but they're lower priorities.  

This poster was happy with his - he was also replacing a G2.  The only other new DP headset that doesn't cost the earth I know of is the Crystal light, which is double the price and only has primitive pass-through.
 

Any thoughts?

1 hour ago, Malcolm Street said:

Any thoughts?

That was my thread 🙂

2 hours ago, Malcolm Street said:

Thanks everyone for your responses.

My previous VR headset was a G2 which went belly up about eighteen months back.  I don't want to have streaming if I can avoid it due to the additional overheads and compromises.

I'm now interested in the Pico 3 Neo, which has Displayport.  Yes, it has Fresnal lenses and no pass through but they're lower priorities.  

This poster was happy with his - he was also replacing a G2.  The only other new DP headset that doesn't cost the earth I know of is the Crystal light, which is double the price and only has primitive pass-through.
 

Any thoughts?

I had a headset with Fresnel lenses in the past and I'm never going back to that. Pancakes for the win.

When it comes to the streaming vs display port, you do have a point indeed. That being said, I'm not having issues with the Streaming via Virtual Desktop. It's a difficult choice.

9 hours ago, Daube said:

It's a difficult choice.

true. that's why I ultimately decided to go with the the Pimax Crystal "Lite" 😁 with  DisplayPort AND Pancakes.

7 hours ago, turbomax said:

true. that's why I ultimately decided to go with the the Pimax Crystal "Lite" 😁 with  DisplayPort AND Pancakes.

Which is more than double the price...  I'm looking at VR now as an occasional thing and can't justify that sort of money.  And I'm a bit freaked by Pimax' quality and support problems.

7 hours ago, Malcolm Street said:

And I'm a bit freaked by Pimax' quality and support problems.

yes, me too. lets hope for the best, but that doesn't exist yet 🤣:

Pico4 / Quest 3 form factor + build quality

Pancake + Displayport + WiFI + Pimax resolution 2.800x2.800

price around Pimax Lite

p.s. what I like about the Pico 4: motion trackers - for non flight simulation games like Kayak etc.