OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using VR headsets Methodology v3.0
VR headsets Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum VR headsets Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore VR headsets Methodology v3.0

Pimax Crystal Super review: 90 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,770Weight:816 gResolution:3840x3840Refresh rate:90 HzDisplay type:QLEDDevice type:PC VR

Pimax Crystal Super Review: Compare 90 technical specifications, 14 expert and video reviews and 13 best-of lists to see how this product ranks in the VR headsets category and whether it is worth buying.

Pimax Crystal Super
7.9/10

Overall score

Score
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, best-of lists, expert reviews and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 35%, List score 30%, Reviews score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 79% of models
Score components

35%

7.5

Technical score

30%

8.4

List score

25%

8.0

Reviews score

10%

7.5

Sentiment score

▲Better than 79% of VR headsets
5.9

Value for money

Value for money
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the VR headset's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a VR headset with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components

70%

7.9

Overall score

30%

1.2

Price

▼Worse than 95%
7.5

Technical score

Technical score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 84% of models
Score components

58%

8.1

Display

22%

6.6

Tracking

10%

8.9

Controls & Audio

4%

4.0

Hardware

3%

6.4

Connectivity

3%

5.2

Design & Power

▲Better than 84%
8.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 71% of models

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

7.1

Popularity

Grades by review (14)
14 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▲Better than 71%
8.4

List score

List score
8.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 30% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (13)
List score: in 13 of 77 lists (17%)
▲Better than 79%
  • pimax-crystal-super
  • pimax-crystal-super
  • pimax-crystal-super
  • pimax-crystal-super
  • pimax-crystal-super
  • pimax-crystal-super
  • pimax-crystal-super
pimax-crystal-super
pimax-crystal-super
pimax-crystal-super
pimax-crystal-super
pimax-crystal-super
pimax-crystal-super
pimax-crystal-super
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Pimax Crystal Super

Based on 0 · 14

Reviewers agree the image quality is outstanding, but the high price and demanding PC requirements are major drawbacks.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the Pimax Crystal Super

Based on 192 owners sharing their experience in online comments

38%positive15%mixed47%negative

Owners praise sharp, immersive visuals and wide view, while display defects, comfort, and software issues spoil the experience.

What owners dislike

  • Owners report visible mura, a screen pattern of horizontal and vertical lines or tissue-like haze, especially on solid bright areas and in flight sims.24
  • Owners report distortion, edge blur, chromatic aberration and motion blur when turning their heads, with sharpness dropping away from the lens center.23
  • Owners find the headset heavy and uncomfortable, and say the weight and lens focus cause eye strain and headaches during longer sessions.22
  • Owners report software trouble, such as SteamVR not launching, games crashing, and the headset not being detected until settings are changed.21
  • Owners say the ultrawide module delivers only about 118 to 124 degrees of horizontal field of view, short of the advertised 140, and settings changes barely help.13
  • Owners say Pimax support is slow, and replacement modules and parts take months or are hard to get.12
  • Owners report defective units, including scratched lenses, buzzing or rubbing from the IPD motor, and dead or broken parts out of the box.12
  • Owners say the headset is expensive, and buying an extra optical module such as the ultrawide or OLED adds a steep cost.11
  • Owners say the headset needs a very powerful GPU, such as an RTX 5090, to hold steady frame rates at high resolution, and performance often falls short.11
  • Owners report controller and tracking failures, including controllers that won't pair or turn on and tracking that drifts or fails during use.8

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

VR headsets model ranking

Ranked #13 of 63 models in VR headsets (Overall score)

Technical Specifications of VR headset Pimax Crystal Super

Technical score
Technical score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 84% of models
Score components:

58%

8.1

Display

22%

6.6

Tracking

10%

8.9

Controls & Audio

4%

4.0

Hardware

3%

6.4

Connectivity

3%

5.2

Design & Power

7.5
Reviews score
8.0
List score
8.4
Value for money
Value for money
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the VR headset's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a VR headset with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components:

70%

7.9

Overall score

30%

1.2

Price

5.9
Resolution
3840x3840
This VR headset has a screen resolution of 3840x3840 which is higher than that of 100% of VR headsets.
Screen size
?
Refresh rate
90 Hz
Market range: <72 Hz – >120 Hz
This VR headset supports a refresh rate of 90 Hz which is higher than in 17.8% of VR headsets and equal to that in 51.1% of VR headsets.
Visible FoV (horizontal)
127 °
Market range: <87 ° – >120 °
This VR headset offers a horizontal FoV of 127 ° which is wider than that of 96.6% of VR headsets.
Visible FoV (vertical)
?
Show more
What reviewers say
Tracking type
inside-out
360° head tracking
yes
This VR headset supports full 360° head tracking. 1.6% of VR headsets support this tracking mode.
N. of tracking sensors
4
N. of cameras
4
Market range: <0 – >6
This VR headset has 4 cameras which is more than in 63.5% of VR headsets and equal to that in 15.9% of VR headsets.
Tracking frequency
?
Show more
What reviewers say
Operating system
Windows
OpenXR support
yes
This VR headset supports OpenXR. 43.8% of VR headsets support this cross-platform VR standard.
Wireless PC streaming
no
This VR headset does not support wireless PC streaming. 31.3% of VR headsets support cable-free PC VR streaming.
Wi-Fi connectivity
no
This VR headset does not have Wi-Fi. 31.3% of VR headsets have Wi-Fi connectivity.
Wi-Fi version
N/A
Show more
Touch controllers
yes
This VR headset includes touch controllers. 30.4% of VR headsets come with dedicated hand controllers.
Game controller included
?
Spatial audio
yes
This VR headset supports spatial audio. 16.7% of VR headsets support spatial audio.
N. of speakers
?
N. of microphones
2
Market range: <0 – >2
This VR headset includes 2 microphones, which is more than 52.5% of VR headsets and equal to 42.4% of VR headsets.
Show more
What reviewers say
Device type
PC VR
Chipset
N/A
CPU clock speed
N/A
GPU model
N/A
RAM capacity
N/A
Show more
What reviewers say
Battery capacity
N/A
Battery life
N/A
Charging time
N/A
Weight
816 g
Market range: <295 g – >800 g
This VR headset weighs 816 g which is heavier than 96.6% of VR headsets.
Headstrap type
?
Show more
What reviewers say

Pimax Crystal Super vs the average VR headset

246810TotalDisplayTrackingConnectivityControls & AudioHardwareDesign & Power
  • 180 nits higher peak brightness
    This VR headset has a higher peak brightness than the average VR headset (280 nits vs 100 nits). The average VR headset has a peak brightness of 100 nits.
    280 nits vs 100 nits
  • 26 ° wider horizontal FoV
    This VR headset has a higher horizontal visible FoV than the average VR headset (127 ° vs 101 °). The average VR headset offers a horizontal visible FoV of 101 °.
    127 ° vs 101 °
  • Higher screen resolution
    This VR headset has a higher screen resolution than the average VR headset (3840x3840 vs 2000x2040). The average VR headset has a screen resolution of 2000x2040.
    3840x3840 vs 2000x2040
  • Eye and gaze tracking
    This VR headset supports eye and gaze tracking, the average VR headset does not. 15.4% of VR headsets include this tracking feature.
  • Better lens type
    This VR headset uses aspheric lenses, while the average VR headset uses fresnel lenses.
    aspheric vs fresnel
  • Wider IPD adjustment range
    This VR headset has a higher IPD adjustment range than the average VR headset (58–72 mm vs 60–68 mm). The average VR headset supports an IPD adjustment range of 60–68 mm.
    58–72 mm vs 60–68 mm
  • 6 years newer release date
    This VR headset is newer than the average VR headset (2025 vs 2019). The average VR headset was released in 2019.
    2025 vs 2019
  • 13.5% higher list score
    List score
    8.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 30% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (13)
    List score: in 13 of 77 lists (17%)
    8.4 vs 7.4
  • 13.5% higher list score
    List score
    8.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 30% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (13)
    List score: in 13 of 77 lists (17%)
    8.4 vs 7.4
  • 11.1% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 71% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    7.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (14)
    14 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.0 vs 7.2
  • 180 nits higher peak brightness
    This VR headset has a higher peak brightness than the average VR headset (280 nits vs 100 nits). The average VR headset has a peak brightness of 100 nits.
    280 nits vs 100 nits
  • 26 ° wider horizontal FoV
    This VR headset has a higher horizontal visible FoV than the average VR headset (127 ° vs 101 °). The average VR headset offers a horizontal visible FoV of 101 °.
    127 ° vs 101 °
  • Higher screen resolution
    This VR headset has a higher screen resolution than the average VR headset (3840x3840 vs 2000x2040). The average VR headset has a screen resolution of 2000x2040.
    3840x3840 vs 2000x2040
  • Better lens type
    This VR headset uses aspheric lenses, while the average VR headset uses fresnel lenses.
    aspheric vs fresnel
  • Wider IPD adjustment range
    This VR headset has a higher IPD adjustment range than the average VR headset (58–72 mm vs 60–68 mm). The average VR headset supports an IPD adjustment range of 60–68 mm.
    58–72 mm vs 60–68 mm
  • 6 years newer release date
    This VR headset is newer than the average VR headset (2025 vs 2019). The average VR headset was released in 2019.
    2025 vs 2019
  • Eye and gaze tracking
    This VR headset supports eye and gaze tracking, the average VR headset does not. 15.4% of VR headsets include this tracking feature.
  • 2 more cameras
    This VR headset has more cameras than the average VR headset (4 vs 2). The average VR headset has 2 cameras.
    4 vs 2
  • 1 more microphones
    This VR headset includes more microphones than the average VR headset (2 vs 1). The average VR headset includes 1 microphones.
    2 vs 1
  • 16% lighter controllers
    This VR headset is lighter than the average VR headset (126 g vs 150 g). The average controller weighs 150 g.
    126 g vs 150 g
  • 45.7% heavier
    This VR headset is heavier than the average VR headset (816 g vs 560 g). The average VR headset weighs 560 g.
    816 g vs 560 g
  • Not compatible with Android
    This VR headset is not compatible with Android, the average VR headset is. 54% of VR headsets support Android pairing or companion apps.
  • Not compatible with Android
    This VR headset is not compatible with Android, the average VR headset is. 54% of VR headsets support Android pairing or companion apps.
  • 45.7% heavier
    This VR headset is heavier than the average VR headset (816 g vs 560 g). The average VR headset weighs 560 g.
    816 g vs 560 g

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
LunarDude
≈ estimated
24/08/2026
Hands-on review · one week of use
Verdict
Pimax Crystal Super is a strong choice for enthusiasts and sim users, but it is too expensive and heavy for regular consumers.
9.0
Tetiana Discovers
≈ estimated
01/10/2025
Comparison · 50 vs 57 PPD · game-by-game advice
Verdict
Pimax Crystal Super's 50 PPD and 57 PPD versions are both strong, so pick the wider or sharper one based on the games you play.
9.0
Reload Gaming Videos
≈ estimated
21/08/2025
Hands-on review · DCS dogfighting, eye tracking and field of view
Verdict
Pimax Crystal Super is one of the best high-end headsets for DCS, mainly for its wide field of view, though it is not the best value for money.
8.0
Tyriel Wood - VR Tech
≈ estimated
13/08/2025
Hands-on review · comfort, visuals, software and tracking
Verdict
Pimax Crystal Super is worth it if you can afford it: a future-ready, full-featured PC VR headset, but the price is steep.
8.0
SimFanatic
≈ estimated
08/12/2025
First look · unboxing and first impressions
Verdict
Pimax Crystal Super looks promising for high-end VR, though its high price and heavy weight are drawbacks.
9.0
Practically Geek
≈ estimated
29/10/2025
First look · unboxing, setup and early use in sims
Verdict
Pimax Crystal Super is a strong contender for PC VR enthusiasts who want top image quality, though comfort is a drawback.
8.0
VRelity
≈ estimated
24/08/2025
First look · unboxing and feature overview
Verdict
Pimax Crystal Super is a solid pick for hardcore VR enthusiasts, though the price is on the high side.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Brand video

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Pimax Crystal Super

  • A 127 degree horizontal view gives a wide picture.
  • Eye tracking is built in.
  • 3840 x 3840 pixels per eye give sharp detail.
  • Peak brightness of 280 nits makes highlights stand out.
  • Haptic feedback and spatial audio are included.
  • Two microphones are built in.

What customers don't like about Pimax Crystal Super

  • At 816 g it is heavy for long sessions.
  • There is no Wi-Fi.
  • There is no wireless PC streaming, so a cable is needed.
  • There is no hand tracking.
  • There is no color passthrough.

Verdict

Eye tracking and a 127 degree view are what set the Pimax Crystal Super apart from other PC headsets. Its 3840 x 3840 pixels per eye keep the image sharp, and the 90 Hz refresh rate keeps motion steady. Peak brightness of 280 nits makes bright scenes look punchy. Touch controllers, haptic feedback and spatial audio round out the set. The catch is weight: at 816 g it feels heavy after a long session. There is no Wi-Fi and no wireless PC streaming, so it links to the PC by cable. Hand tracking and color passthrough are missing too, which some buyers will miss. It suits a PC gamer who cares most about a wide, sharp view and eye tracking, and who can handle the extra weight.

Compare Pimax Crystal Super with other products in the VR headsets category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Pimax Crystal Super and other products in the VR headsets category

No results found