Do we class PSVR as high fidelity VR? Im only going by the terminology that MS themselves have used around Scorpio.
Honestly? In some applications it's better than a Rift, and in others noticeably worse.
Rift is more consistent across games but it has a noticeable screen door. PSVR has OLED mura effect sparkles in darker scenes which aren't as noticeable (to me) and it actually feels higher res in some situations due to the reduced screen door. In some games - Driveclub especially - it's blurry and really disappointing but on the other hand Bound and Rez Infinite are better than anything I've played on Rift.
Neither really warrant the 'High Fidelity' label though. It's fairly obvious you're playing a visually cut down version of a game even on the Rift (even at High Quality in game settings). Elite Dangerous is amazing, but it's very clearly not the super clean picture I get on my monitor - so I find it hard to gauge how Microsoft are trying to spin 'High Fidelity' VR, in my experience the three non-smartphone headsets are visually really quite similar indeed, with their own minor positives and negatives.
Edit:
Pardon my ignorance but how does that compare to what's in the PS4 and XB1, around the same, worse or better?
It's a tricky comparison to make - the 2600K even though it's old will trounce the CPU in the Jaguar APU in compute tasks but IIRC the Jaguar part has more cores so it punches slightly above it's weight more than it's raw speed numbers suggest. I think the Jaguar part is more comparable to the previous Nehalem generation of Intel Core processors than the Sandy Bridge 2600.
I have no clue about AMD's PC roadmap though - I'm sure there's probably a directly comparable part but I didn't follow what they were doing when I was building my PC.