VR consumes more GPU power than pancake gaming. So, by average, people would put their 'Quest-like' Gaming PC in 2007 or 2008 into the trash or give it the younger brother. The magazine 'PC Games - hardware' claims gamers change their GPU every 1.6 years and the CPU every 2 years (averaged through the survey answeres). So PC with the performance of a Quest would have been 6 years old by then. It showed, if the quest is indeed comparable to these 2 consoles, it would be like a gaming PC from 2005 or 2006. When the performance of the quest came to speak in an interview, it was compared to 2 gaming consoles, wich I looked up how powerfull they are.

This could finally be enough to run Skyrim at 72hz at Switch-like settings. If Snapdragon continues to be the best option, and continues getting about 30% faster each year. So let's say another chip was released and they follow the same pattern of 20-40% improvement over the previous gen. If we extrapolate on these results (by comparing the 845 results), the 835 would've gotten around 3,135 in this benchmark, which means the 855 is a ~75% improvement over the 835. So maybe more current chips - Snapdragon 855 and its competitors - could get close? A separate 3dmark benchmark from early 2019 gives these results: So the Quest could probably run a Skyrim (at roughly Switch-equivalent settings) at, eh, maybe 25 fps average? But we need 72, 3x that performance - that part is kind of an issue! So in this one benchmark the 835 falls about 15% behind the Tegra X1. NVIDIA Tegra X1 (Nintendo Switch) - 4,132 Here's a benchmark from about a year ago comparing the Tegra X1 (Switch's chip), the 835 (Quest's chip), and its successor the 845.ģDMark Sling Shot Extreme Unlimited (OpenGL ES 3.1/Metal): What follows is complete speculation and armchair math based on a very small sample of 3D benchmarks, so don't take it seriously. I wanted to add onto this, because I was curious and looked it up anyway.

Oculus quest skyrim apk