{"id":444,"date":"2026-04-04T14:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-04-04T14:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/teknologi.news.eraenterprise.id\/?p=444"},"modified":"2026-04-04T14:00:00","modified_gmt":"2026-04-04T14:00:00","slug":"my-dream-pair-of-ar-gaming-glasses-needs-to-have-these-nine-features","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/teknologi.news.eraenterprise.id\/?p=444","title":{"rendered":"My dream pair of AR gaming glasses needs to have these nine features"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\"An

\n\t\t<\/figcaption><\/p><\/figure>\n

I\u2019ve spent months in the lab testing the latest AR glasses from Xreal and Viture. By \u201clab,\u201d I mean cozied up on my couch each night, playing my Steam Deck or Nintendo Switch 2 on a huge, virtual screen that only I can see through these glasses.<\/p>\n

Using AR glasses as a portable display for your handhelds (and other USB-C devices, like phones, tablets, and laptops) is nothing new. However, the latest versions have one must-have feature in common: three degrees of freedom, or 3DoF, which lets you anchor the screen anywhere you\u2019d like, as opposed to having it nauseatingly wiggle with every head movement. This won\u2019t make AR glasses worth their $400-plus costs for most gamers. But this makes them more useful if you travel a lot, or if you want a more ergonomic handheld setup.<\/p>\n

I tested three popular models \u2014 Xreal\u2019s $449 1S<\/a>, its $649 One Pro<\/a>, and Viture\u2019s $549 Beast<\/a> \u2014 and there is no best pair that everyone should buy. Each does a few things well and a few things not so well, which leaves me no other choice than to list out the ingredients that would make for one perfect pair of AR glasses for gaming.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The comfort, sound quality, and ease of use of Xreal\u2019s glasses<\/h2>\n

All of these AR glasses are heavier and thicker than regular glasses, but Xreal\u2019s 1S glasses are the lightest model of the bunch. On my kitchen scale, they weigh 85 grams (for comparison, the One Pro glasses weigh 91 grams, while the Viture Beast glasses are 96 grams). A small thing that\u2019s actually a big deal is that they (as well as the One Pro) have great weight distribution and thinner temple arms than Viture\u2019s Beast, which helps me feel less strain on my ears. It\u2019s great that Xreal\u2019s most affordable AR glasses are just as comfortable as its most expensive pair.<\/p>\n

\"\"\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p><\/figure>\n

The 1S and One Pro glasses deliver better-sounding audio through their temple arms than Viture\u2019s latest glasses. Xreal\u2019s audio is tuned by Bose, and the glasses have balanced audio with surprisingly good low-end performance. Viture\u2019s is tuned by Harman, and the Beast glasses pack considerably less oomph, with more emphasis on the mids and highs. Music, movies, and games are all more fun to listen to through Xreal\u2019s glasses, even at low volumes.<\/p>\n

The 1S and One Pro glasses have fewer buttons than Viture\u2019s glasses, which lowers the learning curve. Xreal\u2019s glasses have four buttons in total, all of which are along their right temple arm. To be fair, all AR glasses\u2019 button layouts take a while to learn. But the Beast has six in total spread across both temple arms, two of which are a button rocker dedicated solely to adjusting the opacity of its electrochromic lenses \u2014 it\u2019s overkill.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The superior contrast and clarity of Viture\u2019s Beast glasses<\/h2>\n

The three pairs of AR glasses that I tested use similar Sony micro-OLED screens, but Viture\u2019s glasses are my favorite when it comes to displaying games with the same rich contrast, inky blacks, and bright highlights as would appear on the OLED TV in my living room. Just as important, picture quality looks great regardless of where you use these glasses because their optics cut down on reflections (however, they\u2019re not \u201c4K-like,\u201d as Viture misleadingly advertises). The Xreal One Pro glasses are also fantastic in terms of picture quality and exhibit next to no reflections due to having high-end optics, but they\u2019re typically $100 more \u2014 though sometimes just $50 \u2014 than Viture\u2019s Beast.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p><\/figure>\n

Unfortunately, the Xreal 1S\u2019s biggest weakness is reflections. Bright rooms make their OLEDs exhibit crushed blacks, looking more like LCDs in these scenarios. They can produce a good image in low-light scenarios, though content appears blurrier through them than with the other glasses.<\/p>\n

The great fit and finish of Xreal\u2019s glasses<\/h2>\n

Xreal is peerless when it comes to build quality, and its $449 1S feels just as high-end as its pricier One Pro. Both pairs have snappy metal hinge mechanisms that prevent their temple arms from opening unintentionally (the ones on Viture\u2019s Beast quickly swing open and feel cheap). Moreover, Xreal\u2019s glasses look more like real sunglasses than the Beast glasses do (Viture can\u2019t resist going with a slightly gamer-y look that you\u2019ll love or hate, though the Beast glasses look much more sophisticated than its Luma series). Yes, these traits are indistinguishable once they\u2019re on my face, but they\u2019re worth considering given their high cost.<\/p>\n

The user experience is more polished across the board with Xreal\u2019s glasses. My Steam Deck and phone are a few seconds faster to connect to the Xreal 1S and One Pro, and as mentioned before, the learning curve is lower. Xreal also currently has the better 3DoF implementation simply because the screen stays put when it\u2019s anchored. With the Viture Beast glasses, the \u201canchored\u201d screen moves, slowly sliding out of view. That\u2019s a deal-breaker.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

Xreal\u2019s Real3D feature, which is better than I expected (in small amounts)<\/h2>\n

Xreal glasses that have the X1 chip (ones that launched in the past two or so years) now have the Real 3D feature. The mode can turn 2D content into 3D, and there\u2019s a multi-step software slider to increase its effect. I enjoy using its mildest conversion setting more than I expected to.<\/p>\n

The 3D effect is not as pronounced as the Nintendo 3DS\u2019s 3D effect, but the subtle improvements are easy to notice. It works especially well in games that don\u2019t require a ton of fast movement.<\/p>\n

Viture\u2019s Switch 2 compatibility<\/h2>\n

Unfortunately, no AR glasses can connect with a single USB-C cable to the Switch 2 (blame Nintendo<\/a>). You need a compatible dock, one of which doesn\u2019t exist just for Xreal glasses owners. The company canceled its Neo charging dock it announced at CES 2026<\/a> due to reliability concerns (the unit it sent me for testing still works great with my console). So, folks with Xreal glasses and a Switch 2 will need a different accessory to play.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"\n

\"\"<\/p><\/figure>\n

It\u2019s easier if you have Viture\u2019s glasses, but not exactly affordable. Viture makes a $130 Pro Mobile Dock<\/a> that works perfectly with the Switch 2 for the Beast. This dock doubles as a 13,000mAh battery so you can charge up while you game. If the Switch 2 isn\u2019t your thing, the dock features a full HDMI port, letting you view a console\u2019s video feed within your glasses. Video passthrough works for Xreal glasses, too, but audio didn\u2019t work well enough for me to recommend it.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n

Xreal 1S<\/h3>\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n
\n

Score: 7<\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n\n
Pros<\/th>\nCons<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
\n
    \n
  • Comfortable<\/li>\n
  • Great build quality<\/li>\n
  • Best-in-class sound<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n
\n