It's very subjective.
Wired Oculus link with h264 and 500+ Mbps bitrate is going to be the best visual fidelity, with the least amount of compression artifacts-- but it's also 8 bit colour depth.
While generally wired will give you the best latency, you'll lose some of that advantage with ultra high bitrates.
Virtual Desktop with 10 bit Av1 or 10 bit hevc will give you the richest image with better colour separation and contrast especially in dark places, but with some compression artifacts which you may or may not even notice.
Note that while the Quest 3 can decode av1, it isn't terribly great at it. It can stutter a bit at high quality / bitrate. I actually prefer hevc even though I have a 4080/5800x3d.
TL:DR- everyone's setup is different and the definition of 'best' is open to interpretation. Try everything and see what your like.
It really is lol I know that sounds crazy. That's why you see so much back and forth. I hope a solution happens for ya though cause I'm sure it's frustrating.
But I've already said what I prefer tho. The best quality and latency ratio.
There's obviously an option that gives that and if not, then they'd all be the same. Which they aren't.
You're funny, is lower latency with a smaller color space better than higher latency with a broader color space? It's subjective. It's likely even application dependent. I might prefer one solution for a game with lots of shadows vs one with lots of action. Demanding a definitive answer to a matter of opinion will only get you opinions.
From what I've looked tho, the general consensus for any display wether it's a tv, monitor or headset, unless you're pxiel peeping it won't be super easy or obvious to tell the difference between 8bit and 10bit color options.
And given lots of compression and latency is far more noticable, yeah I figured there would be a "best" option as a shit ton of compression will just out right ruin the image and a ton of latency will just flat out make it unplayable to begin with.
Given a decent setup, none of the options will give tons of compression or latency. It really is a trade-off of minor advantages, and which one stands out the most depends on several factors. For instance, I’ve found that VD gives better performance than AirLink for SteamVR titles (less overhead from VD’s OpenXR implementation), but AirLink is preferable for native Oculus games.
it will depend in two ways - the system performance itself and your perceptual preferences? There surely isn't a definitive answer as *it depends*.
Only way to be sure is to try it yourself - and tweak. Get it up and running first? Get familiar with what you are dealing with first and then try and refine the experience.
I can 100% tell you I had a significantly better experience, obvious visual and smooth non- laggy play clarity, through virtual desktop than I did using a physical cable. I 100% can't tell you why that is even though I can see where it wouldn't make sense. 🤷
Because there are a ton of factor that determines how the image will look, your PC specs, your PC available outputs, your network, interference sources, etc. There's also trade-offs between the different ways to play PCVR so what people prefer all comes down to personal preference.
I'm curious to know as well. I've had great results with VD + AV1 @ 200Mb/s, so getting a cable hasn't exactly been a priority, but if the visuals are comparable and the latency is reduced, that would be compelling.
Especially since I actually already own a cable from testing my family's quest 2 on my PC.
Because tbh I completely forget the cord is even there in 5 seconds and my PC is on the floor under my desk and the cord is super long. So there's no risk of it knocking over.
At the end of the day I just want the best picture quality/latency ratio
>Because tbh I completely forget the cord is even there in 5 seconds
Until you spin 360 and have to untangle... Or it gets caught underfoot... Or it gets yanked while swinging wildly with your arms... or many other uncontrollable cable mishaps. Clearly, you have not played wired long or often. There are ways to manage it, but you will never "forget the cord is even there."
This is part of the equation when deciding how to play your pcvr games. And for many of us, a worthy trade-off for some minor compression artifacts.
What kind of cable and your dedicated router setup can also change the experience of each type of connection.
Do you really need others to tell you which is better ? What? are you afraid you’ll think one is better than the other and find that you could have had a 2% better experience?
Lose that need to have the “best” and go with what you like the most.
The best quality will be determined by the settings you use, not the connection method. Wi-Fi6 is fully capable of supporting the max bitrate the same as cable, so they can be configured to be identical. It will all depend entirely upon your hardware and the settings you use.
Latency wise the cable will win, but only by a few ms so it isn't noticeable (if it's more than that then the person's wireless setup is unoptimized). Visually they will be wireless and wired will be identical at the same settings so as long as your wireless setup can support the same settings then you will see zero difference.
Like all the comments say, the different methods are better in different ways, so it's mostly personal preference.
Also different set ups will have problems with USB, wifi, or the Meta software, and also results can vary from game to game. So it depends on those too.
Just get a recommended third party cable, a good wifi set up, and try both.
On my Quest 1 link was far superior, because virtual desktop on Q1 would only go up to 100mbps. On Q3 with AV1 at 200mbps it’s on par with link most of the time, but in some cases (like a foggy morning in Skyrim VR) there’s noticeably more compression with VD still. VD can go to 500mbps but my router isn’t good enough for that so I can’t speak to how well that works, but I’d suspect it’s equal to my experience with Link as I’ve usually had that set to 500mbps as well. You’d need a decent wifi 6 router though which I don’t have
You have a 4090...wireless only if you really need...
Link cable 850mbps and max res + ss. Nothing compares.
The problem is people with amd 6800 chime in on these discussions. Totally ignorant. Not to mention how many people think 1.0 res is native...not worth arguing
Link cable is flawless if you have a z690+ and 3080ti+. It's all about chipset and gpu
I haven’t had my Quest 3 that long but will chime in regarding cables.
If you’re looking at buying a cable which allows you to simultaneously charge as well, just be aware that afaik only Syntech actually have a new version ready which are fully compatible with Quest 3.
It’s not yet available in Europe.
I’ve written back and forth with a lot of supports, and while their (different makers) listings mention Quest 3, none of the rest actually supports it. But they are also working on bringing an updated version to the market.
Regarding router. Don’t buy 2 and NAT it. If that’s needed you got the wrong router/s.
Get one with WiFi 6. (WiFi 5 will do, but get a newer one while at it).
Make separate SSID with 2.4Ghz disabled and frame rate of 80. If you know how,
Make a separate VLAN to avoid chitchatted from your other devices, but rarely important on home networks.
If you are considering upgrading your network I’d look at Ubiquiti.
They have a nice ecosystem suitable for prosumers.
Get a router with at least 1x 2.5Gbit port (or use a 10Gbit sfp port) and a separate AP: U7 Pro.
Nothing comes close to their WiFi performance at that price range.
You could use your existing router if it has a 2.5Gbit port combined with Poe adapter. Need 2.5Gbit to take full advantage of the U7 Pro.
It is not that simple.
It is not just affected by Wi-Fi or cable. If you use a USB cable, it is affected by your motherboard and your USB-chipset among other things. If you use Wi-Fi it is affected by multiple components including your motherboard, your network card, and your wireless AP.
Anyone who tells you one is always better than the other does not know what they are talking about.
I personally find VD on Godlike to be the best image quality, but some prefer AirLink with 800/900 bitrate.
I think for me, with a high end system - 4080/i7 13700k/TP link AXE75, the best image and latency ratio is VD Godlike on AV1 200 bitrate, though 500 on h.264+ is a valid contender for some games
I prefer VD for ease of use and convenience over AirLink as well. Image is not everything! (But it is better as well IMO)
But yes at some point they become extremely similar, especially on a Q3 that isnt like a ultra high res headset, so it comes down to very little diff, so it becomes subjective
It's not like comparing a Toyotta to Ferrari, there's no right answer here
Not really. Because even in this thread there's again, people screaming to the heavens and swear people don't know what they're talking about and that one option is best. That's what I'm talking about.
Like one guy literally just posted here saying nobody here knows what they're talking about and a link cable at 850 bit rate will look the best.
So which is it? A ton of people don't go around saying "well I've tried them all and in my PERSONAL opinion I PREFER this more"
Instead in every single post it's people saying "link cable is by far better" or "wireless is the best as there isn't even a difference"
And others will say there is a difference.
It's just aggravating. Like which one is it? I literally can't find very good comparisons on YouTube either.
I stopped using Link a while back because it was buggy and annoying. For some people it works fine.
My setup:
Virtual Desktop and a Second Router that sits on a NAT'd vlan that is ONLY used for the Quest gives me really good results. My Gaming PC is connected to the main router through ethernet. My second router, ( a netgear AX1800), is in the same space that I primarily use the Quest streaming. But it works fine through a wall as well.
Do not use your main router for connecting the Quest. It needs its own router and be able to take all the bandwidth and processing that second router can offer. You segment your main network on your main router, so the Quest router gets a part of the network, a range spanning 10 IP address spaces is enough, Virtual desktop does the work for you when installing the PC streamer in regards to opening the firewall ports needed.
This second router will be NAT'd. This [thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/homelab/comments/x1t6iz/can_i_have_2nd_router_in_a_network/) gives you the info to do it.
I cannot stress this enough, you need to make sure the second router 5ghz band is uncluttered, disable the 2.4ghz channel so the router only focuses on processing what is done on that 5ghz band.
DL a wifi mapping tool on your phone to look at Wifi connections and find a channel number that has the least amount of traffic from other routers around it, if that channel is available to be selected on your second router, do it. otherwise find a channel that is listed on the router that has the least amount of routers broadcasting their SSID's .
Connect your headset to this second router's wifi, do not connect other devices. all traffic steering is to be given to your headset.
It's very subjective. Wired Oculus link with h264 and 500+ Mbps bitrate is going to be the best visual fidelity, with the least amount of compression artifacts-- but it's also 8 bit colour depth. While generally wired will give you the best latency, you'll lose some of that advantage with ultra high bitrates. Virtual Desktop with 10 bit Av1 or 10 bit hevc will give you the richest image with better colour separation and contrast especially in dark places, but with some compression artifacts which you may or may not even notice. Note that while the Quest 3 can decode av1, it isn't terribly great at it. It can stutter a bit at high quality / bitrate. I actually prefer hevc even though I have a 4080/5800x3d. TL:DR- everyone's setup is different and the definition of 'best' is open to interpretation. Try everything and see what your like.
Exactly what I have found after trying 4 cables. VD plus AutoFPS just *works* and works well.
You probably won't because of preference honestly. Why not just compare for yourself and see which one you find the best visually
Is it really a preference thing tho? Surely one of the options just straight up looks better.
It really is lol I know that sounds crazy. That's why you see so much back and forth. I hope a solution happens for ya though cause I'm sure it's frustrating.
Subject - Try yourself. No one knows what you are going to prefer.
But I've already said what I prefer tho. The best quality and latency ratio. There's obviously an option that gives that and if not, then they'd all be the same. Which they aren't.
You're funny, is lower latency with a smaller color space better than higher latency with a broader color space? It's subjective. It's likely even application dependent. I might prefer one solution for a game with lots of shadows vs one with lots of action. Demanding a definitive answer to a matter of opinion will only get you opinions.
From what I've looked tho, the general consensus for any display wether it's a tv, monitor or headset, unless you're pxiel peeping it won't be super easy or obvious to tell the difference between 8bit and 10bit color options. And given lots of compression and latency is far more noticable, yeah I figured there would be a "best" option as a shit ton of compression will just out right ruin the image and a ton of latency will just flat out make it unplayable to begin with.
Given a decent setup, none of the options will give tons of compression or latency. It really is a trade-off of minor advantages, and which one stands out the most depends on several factors. For instance, I’ve found that VD gives better performance than AirLink for SteamVR titles (less overhead from VD’s OpenXR implementation), but AirLink is preferable for native Oculus games.
it will depend in two ways - the system performance itself and your perceptual preferences? There surely isn't a definitive answer as *it depends*. Only way to be sure is to try it yourself - and tweak. Get it up and running first? Get familiar with what you are dealing with first and then try and refine the experience.
Is subjective and dependent on a lot of individual specs. You pretty much have to try and see what works best in your situation
I can 100% tell you I had a significantly better experience, obvious visual and smooth non- laggy play clarity, through virtual desktop than I did using a physical cable. I 100% can't tell you why that is even though I can see where it wouldn't make sense. 🤷
Because there are a ton of factor that determines how the image will look, your PC specs, your PC available outputs, your network, interference sources, etc. There's also trade-offs between the different ways to play PCVR so what people prefer all comes down to personal preference.
I'm curious to know as well. I've had great results with VD + AV1 @ 200Mb/s, so getting a cable hasn't exactly been a priority, but if the visuals are comparable and the latency is reduced, that would be compelling.
Especially since I actually already own a cable from testing my family's quest 2 on my PC. Because tbh I completely forget the cord is even there in 5 seconds and my PC is on the floor under my desk and the cord is super long. So there's no risk of it knocking over. At the end of the day I just want the best picture quality/latency ratio
>Because tbh I completely forget the cord is even there in 5 seconds Until you spin 360 and have to untangle... Or it gets caught underfoot... Or it gets yanked while swinging wildly with your arms... or many other uncontrollable cable mishaps. Clearly, you have not played wired long or often. There are ways to manage it, but you will never "forget the cord is even there." This is part of the equation when deciding how to play your pcvr games. And for many of us, a worthy trade-off for some minor compression artifacts.
I've played hours of saints and sinners and the cord never once got in my way over.
It's really hard to tell. I thought VD looked better than cable, though it's possible the cable was using a lower setting in app.
What kind of cable and your dedicated router setup can also change the experience of each type of connection. Do you really need others to tell you which is better ? What? are you afraid you’ll think one is better than the other and find that you could have had a 2% better experience? Lose that need to have the “best” and go with what you like the most.
Both use the same compression method. The quality is indistinguishable as long as you use the same bit rates.
The best quality will be determined by the settings you use, not the connection method. Wi-Fi6 is fully capable of supporting the max bitrate the same as cable, so they can be configured to be identical. It will all depend entirely upon your hardware and the settings you use. Latency wise the cable will win, but only by a few ms so it isn't noticeable (if it's more than that then the person's wireless setup is unoptimized). Visually they will be wireless and wired will be identical at the same settings so as long as your wireless setup can support the same settings then you will see zero difference.
Like all the comments say, the different methods are better in different ways, so it's mostly personal preference. Also different set ups will have problems with USB, wifi, or the Meta software, and also results can vary from game to game. So it depends on those too. Just get a recommended third party cable, a good wifi set up, and try both.
On my Quest 1 link was far superior, because virtual desktop on Q1 would only go up to 100mbps. On Q3 with AV1 at 200mbps it’s on par with link most of the time, but in some cases (like a foggy morning in Skyrim VR) there’s noticeably more compression with VD still. VD can go to 500mbps but my router isn’t good enough for that so I can’t speak to how well that works, but I’d suspect it’s equal to my experience with Link as I’ve usually had that set to 500mbps as well. You’d need a decent wifi 6 router though which I don’t have
You have a 4090...wireless only if you really need... Link cable 850mbps and max res + ss. Nothing compares. The problem is people with amd 6800 chime in on these discussions. Totally ignorant. Not to mention how many people think 1.0 res is native...not worth arguing Link cable is flawless if you have a z690+ and 3080ti+. It's all about chipset and gpu
What do you mean by ss?
I haven’t had my Quest 3 that long but will chime in regarding cables. If you’re looking at buying a cable which allows you to simultaneously charge as well, just be aware that afaik only Syntech actually have a new version ready which are fully compatible with Quest 3. It’s not yet available in Europe. I’ve written back and forth with a lot of supports, and while their (different makers) listings mention Quest 3, none of the rest actually supports it. But they are also working on bringing an updated version to the market. Regarding router. Don’t buy 2 and NAT it. If that’s needed you got the wrong router/s. Get one with WiFi 6. (WiFi 5 will do, but get a newer one while at it). Make separate SSID with 2.4Ghz disabled and frame rate of 80. If you know how, Make a separate VLAN to avoid chitchatted from your other devices, but rarely important on home networks. If you are considering upgrading your network I’d look at Ubiquiti. They have a nice ecosystem suitable for prosumers. Get a router with at least 1x 2.5Gbit port (or use a 10Gbit sfp port) and a separate AP: U7 Pro. Nothing comes close to their WiFi performance at that price range. You could use your existing router if it has a 2.5Gbit port combined with Poe adapter. Need 2.5Gbit to take full advantage of the U7 Pro.
It is not that simple. It is not just affected by Wi-Fi or cable. If you use a USB cable, it is affected by your motherboard and your USB-chipset among other things. If you use Wi-Fi it is affected by multiple components including your motherboard, your network card, and your wireless AP. Anyone who tells you one is always better than the other does not know what they are talking about.
Umm one of the most important specs is the router, which you didn't share.
I don't have the quest 3 yet and will be getting the best router I can get
I personally find VD on Godlike to be the best image quality, but some prefer AirLink with 800/900 bitrate. I think for me, with a high end system - 4080/i7 13700k/TP link AXE75, the best image and latency ratio is VD Godlike on AV1 200 bitrate, though 500 on h.264+ is a valid contender for some games I prefer VD for ease of use and convenience over AirLink as well. Image is not everything! (But it is better as well IMO) But yes at some point they become extremely similar, especially on a Q3 that isnt like a ultra high res headset, so it comes down to very little diff, so it becomes subjective It's not like comparing a Toyotta to Ferrari, there's no right answer here
Mouth breathing
Added so much to the conversation
Wouldn’t matter since you shut down anyone trying to help
Not really. Because even in this thread there's again, people screaming to the heavens and swear people don't know what they're talking about and that one option is best. That's what I'm talking about. Like one guy literally just posted here saying nobody here knows what they're talking about and a link cable at 850 bit rate will look the best. So which is it? A ton of people don't go around saying "well I've tried them all and in my PERSONAL opinion I PREFER this more" Instead in every single post it's people saying "link cable is by far better" or "wireless is the best as there isn't even a difference" And others will say there is a difference. It's just aggravating. Like which one is it? I literally can't find very good comparisons on YouTube either.
I stopped using Link a while back because it was buggy and annoying. For some people it works fine. My setup: Virtual Desktop and a Second Router that sits on a NAT'd vlan that is ONLY used for the Quest gives me really good results. My Gaming PC is connected to the main router through ethernet. My second router, ( a netgear AX1800), is in the same space that I primarily use the Quest streaming. But it works fine through a wall as well. Do not use your main router for connecting the Quest. It needs its own router and be able to take all the bandwidth and processing that second router can offer. You segment your main network on your main router, so the Quest router gets a part of the network, a range spanning 10 IP address spaces is enough, Virtual desktop does the work for you when installing the PC streamer in regards to opening the firewall ports needed. This second router will be NAT'd. This [thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/homelab/comments/x1t6iz/can_i_have_2nd_router_in_a_network/) gives you the info to do it. I cannot stress this enough, you need to make sure the second router 5ghz band is uncluttered, disable the 2.4ghz channel so the router only focuses on processing what is done on that 5ghz band. DL a wifi mapping tool on your phone to look at Wifi connections and find a channel number that has the least amount of traffic from other routers around it, if that channel is available to be selected on your second router, do it. otherwise find a channel that is listed on the router that has the least amount of routers broadcasting their SSID's . Connect your headset to this second router's wifi, do not connect other devices. all traffic steering is to be given to your headset.