Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Anyone here waiting for the M5 Apple Vision Pro?
- Thread starter 212rikanmofo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
We don't seem to be able to decide if it's getting an M4 or M5 at the moment.
A few months ago it was all M5, then just recently rumours that it will be the M4, but most recently a few more M5 comments.
As I've said a number of times, whatever they fit, it's going to have considerably more power than the current M2 version, so will be interesting to see if Apple takes full advantage of this, and gives the revamped Vision Pro abilities or visual quality improvements that the current model either can't do, or can't do very well.
Or locks down much of the potential gains (so as not to upset current users) and focusses on being able to do the same level or work, but using less battery power.
A few months ago it was all M5, then just recently rumours that it will be the M4, but most recently a few more M5 comments.
As I've said a number of times, whatever they fit, it's going to have considerably more power than the current M2 version, so will be interesting to see if Apple takes full advantage of this, and gives the revamped Vision Pro abilities or visual quality improvements that the current model either can't do, or can't do very well.
Or locks down much of the potential gains (so as not to upset current users) and focusses on being able to do the same level or work, but using less battery power.
the problem currently has never been power... hopefully they've also come up with more for it to be able to do... though I'd hope the current gen could do it too since we've been waiting since day 1 to get an actual true VR game or more experiences like the dinosaur tease.
For the sake of argument, let's say the AVP V2 with its newer processor will be capable of much more than the current version.
From a developer's POV, would that be sufficient to create software that takes advantage of this on V2 but runs less than optimally on V1? I doubt it. People aren't going to rush to buy the new version unless it's (a) considerably less expensive and/or (b) is much lighter/easier to wear. I suppose there could be other changes too, but I haven't seen any rumors of these improvements, at least not for the short/medium term.
From a developer's POV, would that be sufficient to create software that takes advantage of this on V2 but runs less than optimally on V1? I doubt it. People aren't going to rush to buy the new version unless it's (a) considerably less expensive and/or (b) is much lighter/easier to wear. I suppose there could be other changes too, but I haven't seen any rumors of these improvements, at least not for the short/medium term.
It would be odd not to address the elephants in the room to some degree, although this is Apple......... I doubt they will do anything drastic in terms of weight or price.
I'd like to 100% respectfully disagree.
The lack of processing power is VERY much a giant problem for any current stand-along headsets.
There is vastly more than can be done with a very high end PC, with say an RTX 5090 running on it.
Current VR headsets can only do right now, what the current hardware and cooling/battery life allows, and any software can only be written with this limited power availiable.
That would be like saying the Atari VCS 2600 has all the power it needs to play the games in it's collection.
Yeah, because the game that were written were only written like that, because that was the power that was available.
So there was not point programming "Crysis" for a VCS 2600 which would look bad and take 1 week to render 1 frame.
If the power was available we could see titles like Half Life Alex and even more advanced ones running on stand alone vision pro, but it just does not have the power to run them.
Hopefully, by the time we get to the 3rd, 4th, 5th generation of the Vision Pro (if Apple does not kill the whole idea and move totally into Smart Glasses) we may get there.
I am a little worried that VR headsets are going to get killed off by Smart Glasses.
Simply because I can imagine companies realising there is vastly more money to be made in smart glasses, and then VR headsets are never going to be a mass market and no a money maker
Im really curious to see what they’ll do with it. Worst case scenario is the yearly chip bump on the iPad with pre iOS 26 software. More and more power with no real world gains… I think they’ll offer a new headstrap that makes it more comfy for now (though you’ll be able to use that on the old avp too), and then some graphic enhancements and call it a day 
Just if only it would get a biiiiit lighter. Sigh.
Just if only it would get a biiiiit lighter. Sigh.
With almost all VR headsets we desperately need a lot more field of View FOV.
The problem is the lack of CPU and GPU power to drive all those extra pixels.
Even at Meta with their prototype lab headsets, they admit that even they don't think it's yet worth the trade off to be able to have all those pixels running powered by current stand alone chipsets.
Sadly we are held back by what a low power chipset, running off a battery can deliver.
Hence why PCVR is still a thing for the higher end.
I don't want to feel sad, but given the slower and slower rate of CPU/GPU progress in recent years I worry we're never going to get there.
In case people here are too young to remember
We used to see significant jumps in performance when new hardware came out. Now it's like 5% here, 10% there in certain situations.
The problem is the lack of CPU and GPU power to drive all those extra pixels.
Even at Meta with their prototype lab headsets, they admit that even they don't think it's yet worth the trade off to be able to have all those pixels running powered by current stand alone chipsets.
Sadly we are held back by what a low power chipset, running off a battery can deliver.
Hence why PCVR is still a thing for the higher end.
I don't want to feel sad, but given the slower and slower rate of CPU/GPU progress in recent years I worry we're never going to get there.
In case people here are too young to remember
We used to see significant jumps in performance when new hardware came out. Now it's like 5% here, 10% there in certain situations.
As a AVP owner, if the upgrade is just a processor, I wouldn’t upgrade for a few generations.
Since the current one can act like private cinema just fine, but the new sensors and cameras with reduced noise would be very tempting, but still not enough to upgrade though.
I’d only upgrade if it comes with new lighter form factor, new display with better HDR and new kind of battery technology that doesn’t require to be external one with cable.
And I’d probably never going to sell or trade in the current one at all, since the price of second hand devices are unbelievably low, I’d just keep it as a collection.
Since the current one can act like private cinema just fine, but the new sensors and cameras with reduced noise would be very tempting, but still not enough to upgrade though.
I’d only upgrade if it comes with new lighter form factor, new display with better HDR and new kind of battery technology that doesn’t require to be external one with cable.
And I’d probably never going to sell or trade in the current one at all, since the price of second hand devices are unbelievably low, I’d just keep it as a collection.
You are comparing an Atari VCS 2600 with a nowadays device?
There were these times, when the upgrade from a 386SX to a powerful 486 brought new worlds to you. Compare an Apple M1 MacBook with an m4 MacBook. The M4 ist faster - agreed, but the M1 is not an "old 386".
The planned upgrade is ok, but will not be a game changer. It will be more expensive - just wait for it...
Perhaps you misunderstood my reason for using the VCS as an analogy.
It was just meant to point out the silly comments that keep getting made, by I'm sure a tiny handful of people.
So we have the Vision Pro, and it has the apps and OS written that CAN run well on it.
I mean, there would be no point in writing an OS or apps that can't run, or really struggle to run on it.
We then talk about it getting an upgrade in performance.
Then we get a few people who come out with remarks such as it does not need more power and won't make much difference as it runs fine as it is.
Think about how silly that logic is for a moment.
It runs fine now, with the OS and apps that ARE written to run well on the current hardware.
Give it more power and different things can be written for it that then use the new power.
That's why I used the VCS analogy, as of course games that were written to run well on a VCS ran well because they were specifically written to run well on a VCS
The fact those games run well on the VCS does not mean the VCS would not benefit massively from more powerful hardware, which would then allow better games to be written, that could not run on the original device.
I hope my post is a little clearer now
You were clear the first time and now added even more; some people just don’t get it and not much we can do to help them. Move on and ignore.Perhaps you misunderstood my reason for using the VCS as an analogy.
It was just meant to point out the silly comments that keep getting made, by I'm sure a tiny handful of people.
So we have the Vision Pro, and it has the apps and OS written that CAN run well on it.
I mean, there would be no point in writing an OS or apps that can't run, or really struggle to run on it.
We then talk about it getting an upgrade in performance.
Then we get a few people who come out with remarks such as it does not need more power and won't make much difference as it runs fine as it is.
Think about how silly that logic is for a moment.
It runs fine now, with the OS and apps that ARE written to run well on the current hardware.
Give it more power and different things can be written for it that then use the new power.
That's why I used the VCS analogy, as of course games that were written to run well on a VCS ran well because they were specifically written to run well on a VCS
The fact those games run well on the VCS does not mean the VCS would not benefit massively from more powerful hardware, which would then allow better games to be written, that could not run on the original device.
I hope my post is a little clearer now
Totally agree. I have the AVP and enjoy it, as does my none techy spouse, but 6K for a chip? Yikes. And for me, Canadian Dollar ugh
I do not currently have one but I hope to jump in with the 2nd gen. I hope it has WiFi 7.
most of us would be happy with some basic quest 2 games at this point. we've had nothing to play at all for VR games for a year and a Half now. the M2 is far more powerful than the quests 2 processor so 'i'm sure we could get something decent. the problem will always be developers don't care to develop for a niche market they get no return on. apple needs to start incentivizing that... hopefully the Sony controller support will lead to at least a few game ports.
I feel like it was absolutely the game controller issue. So many of them wouldn’t work with just hand tracking at all. Wouldn’t be shocked if they parade out some ports they got developed in secret when they announce the M5 one, many of which also coming to the original model.
Now if they can keep the momentum going after that is another question…
I'm more excited to see what comes along with the controller support than I am about anything else with this keynote lol
Far easier to develop for meta than apple…. They provide much better tools for example. Apple shot themselves in the foot in my opinion.
Just my guess, but I would think the growing number of users who have either v1 or v2 will be the incentive for developers. They would be well aware if their apps only run on v2 and would probably want to avoid that if possible.
We've seen this split on the Quest headsets - it took a bit but there have been more Quest 3 capable games coming out, but there's not been orphaning of the Quest 2 hardware (yet, at least).
As for the OP, yeah, I'm waiting, and I'm hoping it comes with at least something of a price cut before I jump on.
As for the OP, yeah, I'm waiting, and I'm hoping it comes with at least something of a price cut before I jump on.
Regarding the trade-in question, Mark Gurman confirms what most of us already know.
Q: How do you think trade-in values for the original Vision Pro will look?
A: The idea that someone would trade in their original Vision Pro headset for the new model, which will mainly only get a faster processor, is absurd to me. I like the device for certain uses — like serving as an external monitor — but the lack of new content means that it’s frequently just sitting on my desk charging. I can’t fathom getting the new version. I also think that if Apple opens up a trade-in program for the Vision Pro, people will be shocked at how little value the $3,500 device has held. With that in mind, I wouldn’t be surprised if no such program launches. Third parties already do trade-ins, and I’ve seen prices quoted between $900 and $1,800.
Q: How do you think trade-in values for the original Vision Pro will look?
A: The idea that someone would trade in their original Vision Pro headset for the new model, which will mainly only get a faster processor, is absurd to me. I like the device for certain uses — like serving as an external monitor — but the lack of new content means that it’s frequently just sitting on my desk charging. I can’t fathom getting the new version. I also think that if Apple opens up a trade-in program for the Vision Pro, people will be shocked at how little value the $3,500 device has held. With that in mind, I wouldn’t be surprised if no such program launches. Third parties already do trade-ins, and I’ve seen prices quoted between $900 and $1,800.
For anyone who may or may not remember about all the discussions on the very first Apple Watch.
There was lots and lots of talk about Apple offering upgrades and trade-ins and talk about the watch not changing for a long time as watches generally last many years.
And we found out Apple pretty much dropped the 1st gen users like a stone.
Fair enough, Apple just moved on fast with upgrades, and any thought about having the internals upgraded or being "looked after" was instantly crushed.
I don't see Apple acting any different with the Vision Pro, and why would they?
they want to make the best product, and show is off and all it can do.
So I do expect Apple to move on from the current model, just like they did with the 1st Gen Apple Watch and 1st Gen iPad, and not worry about the early buyers too much, and focus on what benefits the new model has.
I don't mean they will drop support, of course not. but I think they will want to move on and give focus to what the new model can do better
There was lots and lots of talk about Apple offering upgrades and trade-ins and talk about the watch not changing for a long time as watches generally last many years.
And we found out Apple pretty much dropped the 1st gen users like a stone.
Fair enough, Apple just moved on fast with upgrades, and any thought about having the internals upgraded or being "looked after" was instantly crushed.
I don't see Apple acting any different with the Vision Pro, and why would they?
they want to make the best product, and show is off and all it can do.
So I do expect Apple to move on from the current model, just like they did with the 1st Gen Apple Watch and 1st Gen iPad, and not worry about the early buyers too much, and focus on what benefits the new model has.
I don't mean they will drop support, of course not. but I think they will want to move on and give focus to what the new model can do better
the S0 was uniquely compromised in a way that I don't feel the VP1 is, I think this will be closer to the iPad 1 vs 2. (The iPad 2 still smashed the 1, but it wasn't immediate abandonment...) I mean the S0 didn't even have built in GPS and it quickly became obvious the primary customer base for the AW was going to be fitness.