HP's newest VR headset, Reverb G2, is finally here. Promising to bring some of the features of Valve's Index to the Windows VR scene, along with class-leading resolution, new controllers and better tracking. Read on to find out if it delivers. Before we break into the review, here's a recap of Reverb G2 specs: Resolution 2,160 × 2,160 (4.7MP) per-eye (LCD) Refresh Rate 90Hz Lenses Single element Fresnel Field of View 114° diagonal Optical Adjustments IPD IPD Range 60–68mm Connectors USB-C, DisplayPort, Power Cable Length 6m Tracking Quad on-board camera (no external beacons) Controllers Reverb G2 controllers Audio Off-ear headphones Microphone Yes Pass-through Cameras Yes HP Reverb G2 Summary As is tradition, our full review goes into significant depth, so we'll start with a summary. HP's Reverb G2 really delivers on visual fidelity thanks to its 2,160 × 2,160 per-eye displays. Visible screen door is virtually non-existent on the headset, offering easily the greatest clarity of any headset in its class. While the display isn't 'retina resolution', it still offers a ton of resolving power and will let you see details not visible with other headsets. While the display and lenses aren't perfect and don't offer as wide a field of view as Valve's Index, the headset manages to provide an exceptional level of fidelity. [caption id="attachment_99139" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] As HP worked with Valve on the headset, it got to lift the very same off-ear headphones from Index and put them right onto the G2. It's great to have powerful built-in audio in a form-factor that doesn't touch your ears or get in your way when you put the headset on. I hope to see more and more companies adopt the same. While HP says the drivers in the headphones are identical to those in Index, I noticed some distortion in certain higher pitched frequencies which didn't sound great. I'm hoping HP can clear that up with some post-launch EQ adjustments. The new Reverb G2 controllers are a welcomed change from the old WMR controllers. They mostly mimic Oculus Touch in design, with the same general handle shape and same set of buttons, sticks, and triggers. While they don't feel quite as premium, they work more seamlessly with modern VR content which has largely coalesced around these inputs. [caption id="attachment_99133" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] In terms of tracking, G2 is the first WMR headset to move from two to four cameras for its inside-out tracking. With the two extra cameras on the side of the headset, this gives controller tracking much more coverage and helps reduce the number of 'stuck' controller moments which happen when they spend too much time without line of sight to the cameras. Although coverage is increased, there's still some tracking deadzones above and below the headset which can sometimes be annoying but never significantly impacted gameplay. Head-tracking continues to be as solid as other WMR headsets and has little issue except for occasional software-induced stutter when transitioning between apps or loading screens. Overall precision and latency for controller-tracking is acceptable but not exceptional, showing more latency and jitter than we see with Oculus or SteamVR tracking. G2 is comfortable enough, and better than G1, but doesn't really move the bar overall for VR comfort. The rear strap does a fine job of gripping the back of your head while the top strap helps relieve pressure. The side straps for tightening the headset are elastic which is a little funky in practice because the straps and struts don't slide as easily as they should. Because of that elasticity though, there's enough flex to easily pull the headset on and off without adjusting the tightness every time. Beyond the straps, a physical IPD adjustment ranging from 60–68mm lets you best align the lenses with your eyes for clarity and comfort. [caption id="attachment_99137" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] While many users will likely gloss over the Windows Mixed Reality environment and jump straight into SteamVR, the WMR environment is actually quite richly featured, allowing users to customize a persistent space and bring their desktop applications into VR in floating virtual windows. The WMR environment can also be fully controlled by VR controllers or a keyboard and mouse, which makes it a flexible way to do more than just play VR games. While Reverb G2's class-leading resolution would seem to make it a great candidate as a 'virtual desktop' for typical desktop productivity in VR, a realistically sized virtual monitor only sees around a 720p resolution (since it doesn't stretch across the headset's entire field of view). While this resolution is perfectly legible, truly working this way still feels like a novelty because of the reduction to your natural field of view and the even more limited 'sweet spot' of the headset; both factors mean you'll need to move your head around much more while using a virtual monitor than you would on an equivalent real-life monitor, which feels like a compromise in practice, especially considering the ergonomic sacrifices of wearing a headset for long periods. For a $600 headset, Reverb G2 delivers a strong value thanks to its excellent visuals and acceptable tracking. It feels like an especially good fit for simulator-focused use-cases where resolving power is a significant contributor to the experience. HP Reverb G2 In-depth Review [caption id="attachment_99145" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] Display and Lenses Let's go right to Reverb G2's most appealing feature, its display. With a 2,160 × 2,160 LCD display per-eye, the headset delivers class-leading resolution that blows most other headsets out of the water. While the below chart is an imperfect comparison because it doesn't consider field of view, it does give a good look at where Reverb G2's resolution stands in comparison to similar headsets (and the first-generation Rift CV1 for reference): Megapixels per-eye Rift CV1 1.3 Vive Pro 2.3 Rift S 1.8 Quest 2.3 Index 2.3 Quest 2 3.5 Reverb G2 4.7 Screen Door No More Reverb G2 is the first headset in its class where the screen door effect (the unlit spaces between pixels) is virtually gone. Try as you might, the black grid between pixels that's visible on most other headsets just isn't discernable. That's a critical threshold to cross as pretty much every headset in this class to date has had some level of visible screen door effect. The lack of screen door and impressive sharpness makes everything in the headset look more solid and real, in a way that's difficult to articulate. The extra sharpness also makes the sense of stereoscopic depth clearer in a way that seems more convincing to the brain. [caption id="attachment_99138" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] The resolving power is so impressive that you might find yourself gawking. I definitely did. In Half-Life: Alyx I couldn't stop looking at the absurd level of detail revealed in the medal of the shotgun. When I jumped into Robo Recall, I was blown away to see the level of detail the headset could reveal in the cloth on the legs of the robots. If you've ever had the experience of getting new headphones and hearing previously unheard details in songs you've listened to a hundred times before—at times Reverb G2 feels a lot like that, but with your eyes instead of your ears. Granted, the screen door being gone does not mean the headset is 'retina resolution', nor does it mean it offers perfect clarity. Because it isn't retina resolution, aliasing is still visible, but it's really only visible in niche circumstances, like when looking at tiny high contrast details. Mura & Chromatic Aberration Overall clarity of the headset is held back slightly by a bit of mura (inconsistency in pixel color and brightness across the display). In the headset the mura manifests in faint horizontal stretches, but it's faint enough that it isn't really noticeable except against certain colors. HP's prior headset, Reverb G1, makes a good point of comparison to show how much better G2 is—even though both headsets share the same resolution. G1 had pretty noticeable mura along with red-smearing and chromatic aberration, all of which hurt its clarity despite its high resolution. G2 on the other hand has quite minimal mura, no red-smearing (or ghosting of any kind), and no chromatic aberration, giving it easily the best clarity of any headset in its class. And while Quest 2 isn't far behind in resolving power with its 1,832 × 1,920 (3.5MP) per-eye displays, the PC power behind G2 means the graphical fidelity of what you're likely to see through the headset takes far better advantage of all those pixels. And yes, Quest 2 can connect to a PC as well, but this comes with an additional quality hit due to encoding compared to pixels natively rendered on the headset. God Rays & Field of View As for the lenses, Reverb G2 is using Fresnels like pretty much every other headset out there. And if you know anything about VR... you know what that means: god rays. Yes, Reverb G2 shows god rays emanating from high contrast elements just like every other headset with Fresnel lenses. It doesn't seem any better or worse than other Fresnel headsets of this generation like Quest 2 or Rift S. Luckily Reverb G2 doesn't show any of the outer glare that's plainly visible in Valve's Index headset when looking at high contrast elements, though this seems to come at the cost of field of view, which isn't as large as Index. While HP advertises the G2 field of view at 114°, to me it feels on par with Quest 2 (which has been unofficially deemed to be around 90° or 95°). Lens Shape There's one quirk to the G2 lenses that makes them a little less comfortable on the eyes than similar headsets. The symmetrical shape of the lenses (which look like teardrops turned on their side) do not extent outward over the nose to provide more stereo field of view in the area just between your eyes. While this normally happens below the eyes (because your nose blocks that portion of your view), the effect created by the lenses creates a 'nose-like' blind spot higher up between your eyes. [gallery td_select_gallery_slide="slide" ids="99139,88615"] Every headset has some blind spot in this area, but most shape their lenses to minimize it, whereas on G2 it's a bit more noticeable. Update (November 18th, 2020): I had originally speculated above that the reason for the shape of the G2 lenses could be to make them symmetrical for manufacturing simplicity, and said that similar headsets usually have unique left and right lenses. The latter was incorrect; most contemporary headsets also have symmetrical lenses. The offending sentence was removed and the author offers their eternal soul in atonement. Overall Long story short, this is the headset with the clearest looking image and the most resolving power in its class. Continue on Page 2: Audio, Controllers, Tracking » Audio [caption id="attachment_99135" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] Reverb G2 has adopted the 'off-ear' audio approach of Valve Index—and not just the concept, but the exact same drivers. The off-ear headphones are great because they don't put any pressure on your ears while you play, nor do they get in the way when you put the headset on. While G2's speakers feel like they pack the same big punch and wide range as the Index speakers, I did find that certain high frequencies would sound distorted. HP said it expected the G2 headphones to have the very same performance as the Index headphones, so hopefully the distortion can be cleared up by post-launch EQ tweaks from HP. Controllers [caption id="attachment_99133" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] Reverb G2 is the first WMR headset among the bunch to bring new controllers to the table. While not the best feeling VR controllers out there, it's a welcomed improvement that's long overdue. Though they share the same tracking ring as the originals, they are otherwise mostly mimic the Oculus Touch controllers with a thumbstick, two large face buttons, two small menu buttons, an index trigger and a grab trigger. Compared to the original WMR controllers, they're not only more ergonomic, they're also easier in modern VR apps which are often designed around thumbsticks and a 'continuous hold' approach for grabbing objects, both of which work better on the new controllers than the old. [caption id="attachment_99132" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] While they don't fit into my hand quite as nicely as the Touch controllers and don't feel quite as well built, they're comfortable enough that I have no explicit ergonomic complaints. And just as a side-note, the G2 controllers don't feature any capacitive sensing like what's available on Index or Touch controllers. Tracking [caption id="attachment_99142" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] Just like its new controllers, Reverb G2 also brings upgraded tracking to WMR for the first time since the group of headsets launched. While HP says they're using the same camera sensors as all the other WMR headsets, they've now added an additional camera to each side of the headset to provide extra tracking coverage. Controller Coverage The extra cameras definitely expand the tracking coverage area and reduce instances of lost controller tracking when you've got your arms out to the sides, or when you turn your head to the side with your arms in front of you. Unfortunately there's still some dead spots which are noticeable from time to time. In particular, with my arms at my sides and using the controllers to point a virtual laser pointer at a menu (as one does with many VR interactions these days), I found that the controller would occasionally lose tracking while I was doing little more than browsing menus. Normally you might not notice this loss of tracking since the controller is out of your field of view, but if you're holding anything that extends into your field of view (like a gun, spear, or laser pointer), it becomes apparent. Granted, since most VR gameplay interactions don't expect you to hold your hands down at your sides, it's more of an occasional annoyance than a dealbreaker. [caption id="attachment_99140" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] The same kind of deadzone exists above the headset, but since it's rare to do any interactions where you'd raise your hands above your head without also looking up toward them, I barely noticed the upper deadzone across a dozen or so games I tried with the headset. In cases where you need to bring your hands close to your face (like using a bow or a two-handed weapon) it will be hit or miss depending upon the particular way you hold your hands. I didn't have much issue with two-handed weapons in Onward, but I found some bow games (where I had to pull my hand further back) would occasionally lose the rear hand while aiming. Precision & Latency From a precision and latency standpoint, Reverb G2's tracking feels just like what's typically expected from WMR tracking which is, in a few words, acceptable but not great. While positional headtracking is consistently solid and responsive, there's a bit of noticeable rotational latency in the headtracking, though not enough to present any comfort issues. Similarly, positional controller tracking definitely has a bit of extra latency compared to contemporary headsets. Again, not a dealbreaker, but noticeable in fast paced games. As for precision, the G2's controllers get the job done, but if you look at them closely you'll see they twitch and jitter a fair bit more than what we see from Oculus' Insight tracking or Valve's SteamVR Tracking. If you're someone who needs high precision—say, for virtual painting or modeling—you might be bothered by the jitter. One thing to remember though is that the jitter is largely positional, whereas rotation usually remains on-point. That means that the jitter isn't likely to throw your aim off too much when using virtual guns. Even when testing a two-handed weapon in Onward with a 12x scope, I didn't see an appreciable difference in my ability to aim at distant targets with G2's controllers compared to Index's controllers. Continue on Page 3: Fit & Ergonomics, WMR Software Experience, As a Virtual Monitor » Fit & Ergonomics [caption id="attachment_99137" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] Although G2 shares roughly the same rear strap shape as Index, it uses velcro straps on the sides to tighten rather than a dial on the back. The fit and finish of the velcro leaves a bit to be desired; the velcro straps are elastic, but often when you pull them to tighten the headset they simply stretch in place rather than feed through the strut as they should. This usually works itself out eventually (as the headset shifts around, the pull from the velcro will inevitably help the strap into a tighter position), but in practice it feels difficult to dial in the tightness you want on the spot. At least the elastic straps mean that G2's headstrap can flex a bit when you put the headset on, which makes it easy to pull onto your head without adjusting the tightness of the straps every single time. Granted, headsets like the Rift and Index offer the same, but still manage to make sure the struts and straps move freely as the user adjusts them. [caption id="attachment_99144" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] Once the headset is actually on, it's a pretty comfortable experience. While the original G1 felt annoying tight around my nose, the G2 has a more spacious nose cavity while managing to prevent any outside light leak thanks to some soft flaps in the area. G2 also has a hardware IPD adjustment which ranges from 60–68mm, allowing users to align the lenses with their eyes for optimal clarity and comfort. This was unfortunately difficult to set because of a long lag time between moving the slider and when the software would show the IPD measurement. This led to much trial and error of gently nudging the dial and waiting a few seconds to see if I got closer to my ideal setting. [caption id="attachment_99143" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Photo by Road to VR[/caption] While the off-ear headphones are great since they don't even come in contact with your ear, I kept wishing they would extend down further so that I could correctly center them perfectly with my ear. Even at their furthest extension, it felt like they were just a bit short of the optimal position. Though this may not have had any major impact on the audio experience, I could see some users with lower ears being bugged by it more than I was. Although they can rotate about their point of connection, I found that the headphones were tight enough that they didn't move out of position during gameplay sessions (as Index's headphones sometimes do during intense gameplay). Windows Mixed Reality Software Experience [caption id="attachment_69806" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Captured by Road to VR[/caption] Because this is a Windows VR headset, it's invariably tied into the Windows Mixed Reality environment. Since there's almost no content of note available on the Microsoft Store, most users will likely be installing the official SteamVR plugin and jump right into its environment for most of their VR use. But despite some occasional jank with the cursor, Windows Mixed Reality is actually an impressive fully featured VR dashboard, and the only one which allows seamless use with controllers or a keyboard and mouse. Lets ignore SteamVR for the time being and just look at Windows Mixed Reality. The WMR Environment When you first put on G2, you'll appear in the WMR environment. More than just a dashboard, this is a navigable and persistent space which can be customized to your liking. https://youtu.be/97mqPUn-4x0 The video above is an older version of the WMR environment (captured on an original WMR headset) but demonstrates the essential features which are still the same By pressing the Windows button on the G2 controllers you can open the WMR Start menu which lists apps both specially designed for WMR and all of your regular desktop apps. You can launch any existing desktop app into its own virtual window inside of the WMR environment. You can move the windows anywhere around the environment and even pin them to walls like hanging a painting or a TV. A neat detail: audio from each app is spatialized within the environment. So if you have a YouTube video or music player open in your space, you'll actually be able to hear it directionally (enable sound in the player below for a demo): https://gfycat.com/welloffembellishedaustralianshelduck Since the space is persistent, you can arrange your space in a meaningful way. You could place a series of apps in one room that are all dedicated to web browsing, while another room could be dedicated to media viewing, and another for music listening. This 'spatial organization' feels like a natural extension of how we arrange parts of our own real-life homes into dedicated spaces. Keyboard & Mouse Input What's especially cool about all of this is that you can do it with your VR controllers or while sitting in front of your keyboard and mouse. Essentially all of the same functionality, like opening apps into virtual windows and moving them around the 3D environment can be done intuitively with the mouse (quite a feat considering it's a 3DOF input device operating in a 6DOF environment). That makes the Windows Mixed Reality environment quite flexible. You could have your headset sitting on your desk and, without picking up your controllers, put on the headset and navigate to your 'media room' to watch a movie on your virtual big screen TV or browse the web and use any other desktop application with full keyboard and mouse input rather than fumbly laser pointer mouse emulation and floating VR keyboards. This of course opens the door to potentially use Reverb G2—especially with its high resolution—as a 'virtual desktop' for regular desktop productivity... Reverb G2 As a Virtual Monitor [caption id="attachment_69810" align="aligncenter" width="640"] Captured by Road to VR[/caption] With such high resolution displays, you might think that Reverb G2 would work great for a a 'virtual desktop'. But don't forget that while you're looking at a 2,160 × 2,160 display, that's the resolution across the entire field of view. So actually, if you place a virtual monitor in front of you at an appropriate size and distance of a real monitor, the virtual monitor has a roughly equivalent resolution of around 1280 × 720. Even so, a virtual monitor of that size is pretty easy to read, if a bit of a downgrade compared to the 1080p or above monitors that most of us use in 2020. You can, of course, make the virtual monitor much larger than in real life to compensate, but this means the monitor takes up a larger portion of your field of view, which ultimately means you need to move your head around much more (so that what you're looking at falls into the sweet spot of the lenses) than you would with a real monitor, which winds up feeling like a significant compromise. While I'd say that G2 has the resolution to allow for practical desktop productivity in a virtual desktop scenario, it's actually the limited field of view (compared to your natural field of view) and the further reduction in text-readable screen real-estate due to the sweet spot that makes it still a novelty; not to mention the ergonomics of wearing a headset for extended periods. Even with a hypothetical infinitely high resolution display, this will likely remain true until there's a major revolution in the optical pipeline which allows for the image to be truly sharp all the way across the field of view.