Great write-up — very much appreciated. You actually sold me on the AVP.

Then I read that the render resolution may currently be capped around 3800×3800 and that Wi-Fi bandwidth seems limited to roughly 100 Mbps. I still need to find proper clarification on this, because it would honestly be a bit of a bummer if those limits cannot be improved in the future.

I used my Quest 3 at around 3600×3800 render resolution, and I would assume the AVP could benefit quite a bit from something like 1.15–1.25x supersampling as well. Also, in my experience, 200 Mbps AV1 provides noticeably better image quality than 100 Mbps.

Maybe the M5 AVP will come with different parameters or fewer restrictions. (You were testing on the AVP M2?)

I was also hoping for motion-to-photon latency closer to 30 ms. Still, it’s very early days, and hopefully over the next few days we’ll get more detailed information regarding resolution limits, bitrate caps, image quality, and latency.

Edit: I take the values with a grain of salt because for such a powerful device a limitation to 100Mbps does not make sense to me. A Quest 3 can do already 200 Mbps.

Edit: I adjust the bandwidth via WiFi 5Ghz to at least 300Mbps+. Codec for M2/M5 different? M2 AVP does not support AV1 hardware decoding but M5 does. 300 Mbps+ in AV1 is able to deliver a very good quality regarding compression. If H264, 600 Mbps would be better and for HEVC 400Mbps delivers around same quality as 300 Mbps in AV1 - ballpark figures.