Apple Vision Pro 2, lower-cost Apple Vision coming in 2026

A new report claims that both a successor to the Apple Vision Pro and a different, less expensive Apple Vision headset are likely to launch within the next two years.

Rumors suggest that the lower-end Apple Vision headset would likely cost around $2,000, compared to the $3,499 Apple Vision Pro. It would allegedly use a less-powerful chip and lower-resolution screens than the higher-end model.

Bloomberg's report suggests the lower-end headset would drop some technology seen in the Apple Vision Pro, such as the Eyesight feature. That required a lenticular display on the outside of the headset, allowing others to "see" the wearer's eyes.

The lower-end Apple Vision is likely to be powered by an A-series chip used in a future iPhone lineup rather than the M2 that currently runs the Apple Vision Pro. As for materials, it seems reasonable to assume that it will make greater use of lighter materials to make it less weighty on the wearer's head.

A successor to the current Apple Vision Pro is expected to ship alongside the lower-end Apple Vision model. This will give Apple the opportunity to offer consumers interested in an AR/VR headset a choice of features and price points.

Apple is said to expect to sell twice as many of the Apple Vision headset as it will the Apple Vision Pro, due to the lower price tag. Work continues on a second Apple Vision Pro, but the primary hardware change is currently expected to be an upgrade to the processor.

Both are expected to arrive at some point in 2026. Apple is said to also be working on an augmented-reality "smart glasses" project alongside the Apple Vision and Apple Vision Pro headsets.

Latest Exclusives

Latest comparisons

31 Comments

DAalseth 3033 comments · 6 Years

About 1 month ago

Dropping EyeSignt is more than the screen on the outside. It’s the cameras that looked at the wearers face, and all of the processing overhead to assemble and ‘undistort’ the eyes into the image on the front. This all was more cost and processing overhead that did not adde to the users experience. This is a very good first step.

retrogusto 1138 comments · 16 Years

DAalseth said:

Dropping EyeSignt is more than the screen on the outside. It’s the cameras that looked at the wearers face, and all of the processing overhead to assemble and ‘undistort’ the eyes into the image on the front. This all was more cost and processing overhead that did not adde to the users experience. This is a very good first step.

I wonder if some of those cameras might be needed for the digital avatar feature, but a lot of people would probably also be willing to give that up too if it meant a lighter and less expensive device. And some of the hardware will probably also just cost less over time, so they may not need to make too many sacrifices to produce a cheaper model.

retrogusto said:

DAalseth said:

Dropping EyeSignt is more than the screen on the outside. It’s the cameras that looked at the wearers face, and all of the processing overhead to assemble and ‘undistort’ the eyes into the image on the front. This all was more cost and processing overhead that did not adde to the users experience. This is a very good first step.

I wonder if some of those cameras might be needed for the digital avatar feature, but a lot of people would probably also be willing to give that up too if it meant a lighter and less expensive device. And some of the hardware will probably also just cost less over time, so they may not need to make too many sacrifices to produce a cheaper model.

As others have said elsewhere, it may not make sense to go to a “less powerful chip”. Now that the M4 is out, the M2 IS the less powerful chip.

Cesar Battistini Maziero 401 comments · 8 Years

Almost there!!! Fo that price I expect a carrying case to be included.

Marvin 15335 comments · 18 Years

DAalseth said:

retrogusto said:

DAalseth said:

Dropping EyeSignt is more than the screen on the outside. It’s the cameras that looked at the wearers face, and all of the processing overhead to assemble and ‘undistort’ the eyes into the image on the front. This all was more cost and processing overhead that did not adde to the users experience. This is a very good first step.

I wonder if some of those cameras might be needed for the digital avatar feature, but a lot of people would probably also be willing to give that up too if it meant a lighter and less expensive device. And some of the hardware will probably also just cost less over time, so they may not need to make too many sacrifices to produce a cheaper model.

As others have said elsewhere, it may not make sense to go to a “less powerful chip”. Now that the M4 is out, the M2 IS the less powerful chip.

If they are happy with M2-level performance, the iPhone chips will reach this soon and cost less:

https://gfxbench.com/device.jsp?benchmark=gfx50&os=iPadOS&api=metal&cpu-arch=ARM&hwtype=iGPU&hwname=Apple%20M2%20GPU&did=121741673&D=Apple%20iPad%20Air%206th%20Gen%20(M2)

https://gfxbench.com/device.jsp?benchmark=gfx50&os=iOS&api=metal&cpu-arch=ARM&hwtype=iGPU&hwname=Apple%20A18%20Pro%20GPU&did=123295110&D=Apple%20iPhone%2016%20(iPhone17%2C1)

A18 Pro is just behind M2, A19 Pro on 2nm in 2026 will get even closer:

https://www.tomsguide.com/phones/iphones/apple-a19-pro-chip-rumored-to-be-the-first-in-the-world-to-use-2nm-manufacutring-process

This could save them $150. To hit a $2k price point, they need to get $1700 costs down to around $1000. Cutting the Eyesight feature will save around $100, maybe more.

The number of AVP units sold are likely below 300,000.
At a $2000 price point, they can sell 3m units, which is $6b.
At a $1500 price point, they can sell 5m units, which is $7.5b. If they hit $2000, there will eventually be units available at $1500.

Meta has a VR install base of over 20 million, active userbase around 1/3 of this.

Within 2 years of having a more affordable headset, Apple could become the most widely used platform. This would need a focus on comfort and usefulness. Movie content is the most widely appealing use case.

There's an 8K (same as AVP, dual 4K) headset that was announced recently but may not ship priced at $1899 and uses a headband for comfort like the PSVR and HoloLens:

https://en.shiftall.net/products/meganex8k

Distributing the weight across the top and sides of the head and away from the eyes and nose in a compact design would make it more widely appealing to wear on a regular basis.

The ones in the video below weigh 1/3 the AVP, Apple can get to this kind of form factor with the 2nd model:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lRkCbhABvo