Where they actually differ
The most decisive specs, ranked by how much they matter — before the full spec table.
| Spec | Apple - Vision Pro | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Field of view | 100 ° | 120 ° |
| Refresh rate | 100 Hz | 90 Hz |
| Standalone | true | false |
Between the Vision Pro and XR-4, the Vision Pro comes out ahead in refresh rate / standalone, while the XR-4 wins on field of view. Overall, the Vision Pro scores 70.8 and the XR-4 scores 69.7 on our Mars Score.
Which should you buy?
These two are nearly even on the Mars Score (70.8 vs 69.7). The decision is not about overall quality — both clear the bar — it is about which specific trade-offs fit your use.
Pick the Vision Pro if the display is what you stare at all day — refresh rate, brightness, or sharpness is where the difference will be most visible. The biggest gaps in its favor are refresh rate, standalone. The single most decisive one: Refresh rate — 11.11% more. 100 Hz vs 90 Hz.
Pick the XR-4 if you care most about field of view. Its strongest claims are field of view. The single most decisive one: Field of view — 20.00% more. 120 ° vs 100 °.
Both ship with comparable eye tracking, color passthrough, so those specs do not separate the two — focus on the differences below.
Bottom line: there is no wrong answer here — match the spec advantages to how you actually use the product. The Mars Score parity says both are well-rounded; the differences are about trade-offs, not quality.
Which should you buy: Apple - Vision Pro or Varjo - XR-4?
Apple - Vision Pro leads the current Mars Score by 1.1 points.The more useful decision is the trade-off behind that result: compare refresh rate, field of view, standalone against the way you will actually use the product.
Choose Apple - Vision Pro if…
Apple - Vision Pro has the measurable edge on refresh rate hz, is standalone.
Choose Varjo - XR-4 if…
Varjo - XR-4 has the measurable edge on fov deg.
This is a structured comparison of the published catalog values. It is not a claim of identical real-world performance across every workload; use the linked spec drill-downs and methodology page to inspect the inputs.
Why Apple - Vision Pro wins
- ▲Refresh rate — 11.11% more. 100 Hz vs 90 Hz.
- ▲Standalone: true (vs false).
Why Varjo - XR-4 wins
- ▲Field of view — 20.00% more. 120 ° vs 100 °.
Spec comparison
Display
| Spec | Apple - Vision Pro | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Resolution per eye | 3660x3200 | 3840x3744 |
| Refresh rateⓘ | 100 Hzlead | 90 Hz |
| Field of view | 100 ° | 120 °lead |
| Panelⓘ | Micro-OLED | Micro-OLED |
Tracking & Audio
| Spec | Apple - Vision Pro | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Inside-out tracking | true | true |
| Eye tracking | true | true |
| Face tracking | truelead | false |
| Color passthrough | true | true |
Compute
| Spec | Apple - Vision Pro | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Standalone | truelead | false |
| Battery | 2.5 hlead | 0 h |