Can Meta Make OLED Affordable While Samsung and Apple Compete in Premium VR?

At a Glance

Meta is forgoing OLED technology to prioritize affordable VR headsets at $500 price points while competitors target premium markets.
Samsung and LG Display’s increased OLED production could eventually help bring OLED costs down for all manufacturers.
Meta’s strategy of using LCD displays in Quest headsets has proven successful with higher sales figures than premium competitors.
Samsung’s acquisition of eMagin signals industry efforts to make microOLED technology more accessible in future VR devices.
Meta’s focus on affordability over premium displays aligns with broader consumer preference for cost savings in VR technology.

While Apple and Samsung embrace expensive OLED displays in their premium headsets, Meta is taking a completely different approach to win the VR race. The company’s strategy is crystal clear: make VR accessible to everyone, not just folks with deep pockets.

Meta’s latest Quest 3S and upcoming Quest 4 stick with LCD displays instead of fancy OLEDs, keeping prices down to earth while the competition floats up in the stratosphere. The Quest 4, which has been confirmed for a 2026 target launch, is expected to maintain Meta’s commitment to affordability with a $500 price point.

It’s no secret that OLED microdisplays are gorgeous but ridiculously expensive—we’re talking about $350 just for a pair! That’s partly why Apple’s Vision Pro costs a jaw-dropping $3,500. Even Samsung, partnering with Google on their XR headset, is facing the same pricing headache. Virtual prototyping helps manufacturers like Meta optimize costs without sacrificing design quality.

Meta looked at those numbers and basically said, “Yeah, no thanks!”

The truth is, Meta canceled their own high-end OLED headset planned for 2027 after seeing Vision Pro’s lukewarm reception. Why spend billions developing something most people can’t afford? Instead, they’re doubling down on what’s working—affordable headsets that still deliver a good-enough experience.

It’s like choosing a reliable Honda over a Ferrari when you just need to get to work.

Of course, there are trade-offs. The Quest 3S uses older Fresnel lenses that don’t match the clarity of pancake lenses found in pricier models. Images might blur at the edges, and the sweet spot is smaller.

But at $299 versus thousands, many consumers are willing to live with these compromises.

The display tech battlefield might shift as Samsung and LG Display ramp up OLED production, potentially driving costs down. Samsung’s recent acquisition of eMagin positions them to enhance their microOLED production capabilities in the coming years. Apple’s even testing lower-resolution OLEDs (1,500 PPI instead of 3,391 PPI) to make cheaper Vision models—though “cheaper” might still mean $1,500-$2,500.

For now, Meta’s betting that most people would rather save their cash than splurge for slightly better blacks and colors. And judging by Quest sales numbers compared to Vision Pro, they might be onto something.