Between the Quest Pro and XR-4, the Quest Pro comes out ahead in standalone, while the XR-4 wins on field of view. Overall, the Quest Pro scores 58.1 and the XR-4 scores 68.3 on our Mars Score.
Which should you buy?
The XR-4 is the clear pick on raw spec strength, leading by 10.2 points on the Mars Score. The margin is wide enough that the underdog only makes sense if its individual strengths line up with what you specifically need.
Pick the Quest Pro if you care most about standalone. The biggest gaps in its favor are standalone.
Pick the XR-4 if you care most about field of view. Its strongest claims are field of view.
Both ship with comparable refresh rate, eye tracking, color passthrough, so those specs don't separate the two — focus on the differences below.
Bottom line: the XR-4 is the safer default. The other model is the right choice only when its specific advantages line up with your priorities.
Why Meta - Quest Pro wins
- ▲Standalone: true (vs false).
Why Varjo - XR-4 wins
- ▲Field of view — 13.21% more. 120 ° vs 106 °.
Spec comparison
Display
| Spec | Meta - Quest Pro | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Resolution per eye | 1800x1920 | 3840x3744 |
| Refresh rateⓘ | 90 Hz | 90 Hz |
| Field of view | 106 ° | 120 °lead |
| Panelⓘ | LCD | Micro-OLEDlead |
Tracking & Audio
| Spec | Meta - Quest Pro | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Inside-out tracking | true | true |
| Eye tracking | true | true |
| Face tracking | truelead | false |
| Color passthrough | true | true |
Compute
| Spec | Meta - Quest Pro | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Standalone | truelead | false |
| Battery | 2.0 hlead | 0 h |
Frequently asked
Spec-level deep dives
More from the same brands
vsMars is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you. Learn more.