Where they actually differ
The most decisive specs, ranked by how much they matter — before the full spec table.
| Spec | Meta - Quest 2 (128GB) | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 90 Hz |
| Field of view | 97 ° | 120 ° |
| Eye tracking | false | true |
| Color passthrough | false | true |
| Standalone | true | false |
Between the Quest 2 (128GB) and XR-4, the Quest 2 (128GB) comes out ahead in refresh rate / standalone, while the XR-4 wins on field of view / eye tracking. Overall, the Quest 2 (128GB) scores 73.3 and the XR-4 scores 69.7 on our Mars Score.
Which should you buy?
The Quest 2 (128GB) edges ahead on the Mars Score (73.3 vs 69.7), but the 3.6-point gap is small enough that the right pick comes down to which spec advantages matter to you.
Pick the Quest 2 (128GB) 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 — 33.33% more. 120 Hz vs 90 Hz.
Pick the XR-4 if you care most about field of view / eye tracking. Its strongest claims are field of view, eye tracking, color passthrough. The single most decisive one: Field of view — 23.71% more. 120 ° vs 97 °.
There are no meaningful ties on the headline specs — every popular-comparison metric has a winner.
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: Meta - Quest 2 (128GB) or Varjo - XR-4?
Meta - Quest 2 (128GB) leads the current Mars Score by 3.6 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 Meta - Quest 2 (128GB) if…
Meta - Quest 2 (128GB) 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, has eye tracking, has passthrough color.
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 Meta - Quest 2 (128GB) wins
- ▲Refresh rate — 33.33% more. 120 Hz vs 90 Hz.
- ▲Standalone: true (vs false).
Why Varjo - XR-4 wins
- ▲Field of view — 23.71% more. 120 ° vs 97 °.
- ▲Has Eye tracking.
- ▲Has Color passthrough.
Spec comparison
Display
| Spec | Meta - Quest 2 (128GB) | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Resolution per eye | 1832x1920 | 3840x3744 |
| Refresh rateⓘ | 120 Hzlead | 90 Hz |
| Field of view | 97 ° | 120 °lead |
| Panelⓘ | LCD | Micro-OLEDlead |
Tracking & Audio
| Spec | Meta - Quest 2 (128GB) | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Inside-out tracking | true | true |
| Eye tracking | false | truelead |
| Face tracking | false | false |
| Color passthrough | false | truelead |
Compute
| Spec | Meta - Quest 2 (128GB) | Varjo - XR-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Standalone | truelead | false |
| Battery | 2.5 hlead | 0 h |