Unveiling the Hand-tracking Battle: Vision Pro vs. Quest 3 - AITechTrend
Hand-tracking Battle Vision Pro vs. Quest 3

Unveiling the Hand-tracking Battle: Vision Pro vs. Quest 3

Vision Pro distinguishes itself by its exclusive reliance on hand-tracking, while Quest 3 prioritizes controllers but also integrates hand-tracking for select content. The question arises: which headset boasts superior hand-tracking capabilities? The answer might catch you off guard.

Unveiling Vision Pro’s Hand-tracking Latency

Vision Pro operates without motion controllers, relying solely on hand-tracking as the primary mode of input. The core interface seamlessly integrates hand and eye movements.

Meta Quest 3 Vs Apple Vision Pro!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHW1tnxIjgw

Prior to the headset’s release, preliminary footage allowed for an estimation of hand-tracking latency ranging between 100 to 200 milliseconds—a wide margin indeed. However, our independent testing reveals a more precise figure: approximately 128 milliseconds on visionOS beta v1.1.1.

Our methodology involved scrutinizing screen captures from the headset, observing the frames elapsed between the motion of the passthrough hand and the corresponding virtual hand movement. Leveraging Apple’s Persona system for hand rendering ensured minimal latency introduced by Unity.

Upon conducting several trials, averaging approximately 3.5 frames, we calculated the latency to be around 116.7 milliseconds at a capture rate of 30 FPS. Adding Vision Pro’s known passthrough latency of about 11 milliseconds yielded a final photon-to-hand-tracking latency of 127.7 milliseconds.

Further tests evaluating the latency between a passthrough tap and a virtual input revealed no significant discrepancy, nor did variations in lighting conditions affect the results.

Comparing Quest 3’s Hand-tracking Latency

How does Quest 3, a headset incorporating hand-tracking alongside controller support, fare in comparison? Our examination revealed a hand-tracking latency of approximately 70 milliseconds on Quest OS v63—markedly lower than Vision Pro’s latency. However, user experience may suggest even lower latency due to certain factors masking perceived latency.

Employing a similar test approach, utilizing a 240Hz through-the-lens capture, we observed a 31.3-millisecond interval between passthrough hand motion and virtual hand movement. Combining this with Quest 3’s known passthrough latency of about 39 milliseconds results in a photon-to-hand-tracking latency of approximately 70.3 milliseconds.

Interestingly, despite the higher passthrough latency on Quest 3 compared to Vision Pro, the perceived latency between hand motion and virtual hand movement appears shorter, standing at just 31.3 milliseconds, owing to the differential in passthrough latency between the two headsets.

A Crucial Distinction: Latency vs. Accuracy

It’s essential to differentiate between hand-tracking latency and accuracy, as they represent distinct facets of performance. Often, there exists an inverse relationship between the two—optimizing for speed may compromise accuracy and vice versa. Presently, a comprehensive measure of hand-tracking accuracy for either headset remains elusive, aside from subjective impressions.

In the realm of virtual reality, the battle for superior hand-tracking capabilities between Vision Pro and Quest 3 persists, with each boasting its unique strengths and nuances. As technology continues to evolve, further advancements are poised to redefine the landscape, offering users unparalleled immersion and interaction possibilities.