Nice find =).

My average reaction time over 5 clicks was 198 ms.

Zowie FK...

Mac OSX: 196ms average, best 155

Win 8.1: 149ms average, best 98

*** Win 8.1 has been optimised using r0ach's gaming guide.

funny thing is I have 170ms for visual reactions and 210ms for sound. But all literature says that it should be vice versa...

Ear lag!

ok remeasured it with headphones instead of speakers its 120-130ms on avg so I'm not mutant :D:D:D

hi.
posting in a reaction time thread.
185 ms first try.
cy@.

your computer aims well ...
:D

Tox was doing it on a server for like 30 mins, he had an average of 100ms..

i remember stermy saying they ran a reaction test (among other things) at some q4 event, where he was the fastest. dont know if tox was present, but it was q4 so i gotta imagine

stermy was also one of the younger ones playing Q4 at the time IIRC

dont think it would matter in that profession and age group =PPP

but ive to say, tox being at 100 ms sounds unbelievable. i dont know how a person with reactions like that hits under 60% lg :D

Yeah, come to think of it probably shouldn't matter.

297 average :-)

197, good enough!
140 for sound

did it 3 times .

199 - 183 - 179 , into test 3 i noticed my brain was trying to anticipate the green and started to press too soon, and so if the green pops up always at same interval you can learn to time it, only first times count after that starts to occur.

the fighter pilot test is most likely not comparable to this one.

And this test is only for mouse clicking, not actual reaction time of the brain that then should send signal to make the body do something or to generate a thought to base a conclusion upon.

Electrodes to the brain , seeing the real reaction times of when the brain picks up the color differences would be interesting =p

Also i wonder how much the mouses makes a difference, im on a wmo , lets make a seperate thread for this, hah, a joke :P

152 average
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/allresults.php
ive done 60 clicks total and the average is 179
my lowest was 60 but it doesnt account to the average
edit:totally wrecked my 173 and i got 152 average on 60hz LEL

Lol, noctis has read this thread 21 minutes ago and scored 174 average. :D

noticed the same :D

Actually impressed myself with that, considering i did it at work on a 60Hz monitor via a VNC connection on a virtualized Workstation...

excuses

lol, demon 174 too :)

I wonder how favourite Q4 cyborg would do in this test. :)

over a VPN


routed through China.

ur new score @ home?

Yeah

I wonder how much the mouse click resistance and distance affects results.

The greater the click resistance and distance, the greater the lag.

A super 'weak' click with an equally short distance should offer an advantage.

Snow - what mouse do you use?

Zowie FK here, the click is quite 'strong'. My old G1 mouse is much weaker/easier, I might give that a pop (if I can be arsed).

tested zowie ec2 evo vs g500s vs crappy 3$ defender. zowie and logitech have no difference. 3$ 125hz mouse adds ~10ms on avg.

DA 2013

Hey snow could u please post ur current cfg + hud ^^? if its possible ofcourse ^^

also what pollingrate and dpi do u use on that deathadder :D ?

400 dpi 500 hz then uninstall synapse
http://pastebin.com/h09KLQZt-cfg
switched from my old hud to a basic one

it says its removed :(

http://pastebin.com/PVvZfjHT

172ms average with the Logitech G1.

102ms being the single fastest, the next closest being 155 (different runs though).

This reaction time doesn't directly apply to games though
maybe some situations where You are holding a angle(in CS)
or waiting for a guy to cross and u just click
but usually there is movement of the hand etc.

I would disagree, pressing the mouse button (firing) is as direct a link as you can get. In a game as fast as Quake, 20ms could be the difference between who's rail shot hit who first, especially with flick/reflex or pixel rails.

There are other factors of course which compound lag; movement, stress etc, but that applies to any mouse/hardware used in a consistent manner.

I agree and disagree but you have a point.

I remember I was getting consistently 20-30 ms better results with mx518 than with the Abyssus I'm using now. Not sure if it's just the buttons that are faster or if it's the angle of the buttons that is more comfortable for the fingers.

shouldn't be the due to button latency: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-96AfvZFodLI/U10Nv0V...140427.png

(G400 ~= mx518)

Windows XP or 7 maybe?

Same OS. Most likely it was just the angle of the buttons. MX518 feels more comfortable to click.

350 :d

224, 60hz power

188

make sure to disable "aero" and to don't use firefox for it.
both add delay.

I remember cfebns doing this a ton. he considered monitor input and even switch delay from the mouse. he had worse times with specific mice compared to other ones.

sound
name avg. time when
anonymous 112.60 ms 1 seconds ago

visual
174ms average

This is an interesting thread. I got 176ms average and I suck at fps games.

180ms

If you're on an LCD your times will be far worse, I can't get anywhere near my CRT times on this LCD screen.

I prefer my lcd even if the crt will get me faster reaction times. My crt is tiny.

180

on LCD ~180 milliseconds. on CRT ~140 milliseconds.

200, must be Monday.

my best was 162 ms average with 5 tries, not like you losers with a lucky 1 try.

5 tries 152 y u mad though

1337 ms

i average 300. the fuck?!

hi stren-ex

135 average, my normal is more around 150(15 tries) due to getting a bit out of shape from summer.
Using the vg248qe

Applying a little bit of pressure on the mouse before click dropped me ~40ms... lol
220 to 180

I had the same experience, dropped me from abysmal 260 to crappy 220 :)

I got 219ms 4/10 times, what are the chances of that \o/

4 in 10

So you're saying that 4 in 10 times, I will get 4x 219ms's in 10? :D

yes, and you will prove it no matter how long it takes

challenge accep...declined :(

ran 10 tries each:
242 average with firefox (all in the 230-260 range)
213 average with chromium (all in 190-220)

with linux that is, gonna check windows later :P

i press the fire button with both hands

i have fire on left alt on my keyboard and i can press mouse1, but nowadays don't really use it. i checked and don't even have it bound in quake.

so i tested both hands.

left hand pressing alt was giving me 40-60 ms more than right hand pressing mouse1. 260-280ms for left hand, 200-220ms for right hand. my guess is the keys on that kb model have to travel a lot more.

420

42.

245

I averaged like 190 in 5 tries

got 7ms one time, them mlg spam shots 8)

whaz school

avg. of 224 (5 tries)..yeah, my reaction time isn't the best.
got around 140 on the audio test.

140ms avg over 5 clicks, on crt / g400s
http://i.imgur.com/kZXmkLj.jpg

That's very impressive for the g400s, that mouse has a bad click relatively to some other mice.

g400s does have a bit of a stuff click, i positioned my finger at the tip with slight pressure which helped but also resulted in many accidental clicks. i remember a few years ago there was a test going around where it would register on mouse up so you could hold the button and let off on color change, was much easier to get 100-120ms with that one.

as for hearing response being quicker it sort of makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, since you can only see a certain fov but hear in all directions (and be waken by sound), and the sound of approaching danger can cause a spike in neurotransmitters etc.

I remember hearing of a test a while back where they had two parallel bars that moved and when they became parallel the subject was to press a button, then they administered sub-threshold amounts of psilocybin and the results were improved, suggesting that the psilocybin increased visual acuity

windows 8
firefox got around 250
chrome was 202

What browsers do you guys use?

I also remember that I was faster on windows XP

try ie too

240

This test is heavily influenced by your browser mostly and hardware/cfg.
rendering it an online epenis competition with no real comparison of reaction times.

I'm sure better scores are obtainable with old browsers, I read somewhere or dremt it.

Still it's interesting how much more lag the eyes have compared to the ears, when light is so much faster than sound o_O

That's why they say to use headphones instead of speakers!

I inteded this as a joke, but I performed calculations, and if I'm right the distance between your ears and speakers - roughly 0,5m should be covered by sound in 1.5ms.

Still it's interesting how much more lag the eyes have compared to the ears, when light is so much faster than sound o_O

Not really. The neural system for visual stimuli is simply more complex. a lot of shit going on from the moment light hits the retina till your brain interprets it!

"a lot of shit going on"
this ^^^^^^
Then I need my Google glasses and gpu wired straight in to my frontal cerebral cortex ;-)

246 average

227 average

Happy with that!

172 average (over 20 clicks) using Zowie in Windows. Less input lag than Mac OSX obviously!

I remember when I used to do under 200ms average. Now I'm old.

Define old :)

Reaction Time >= 200ms

Touché.

I get 120ms with timenudge -20

265. I think the water I drank last must have contained some alcohol.

Optimised W8.1 using r0ach's gaming guide (to reduce input lag):

149ms Average
98ms best

can u link that guide

I think he means this
http://www.overclock.net/t/1433882/gaming-and...ch-edition

ye thanks thats what i wanted

That won't do anything. I am using Windows 8.1 x64 defaults, as long as your dpc latency isn't stupid high it is not a problem.

That guide took my DPC latency down from 1000 average to 8.

BIOS settings are the key to that.

Windows 8 will always show 1000us on dpclat, use latencymon.

dpclat showing me 8-10, Windows 8.1.

That's because you changed the settings by following that guide.

Ah I see, you mean that essentially the BIOS is tweaked for the app, and the app is reporting incorrectly?

you nearly had me there, are you working for r0ach? sarcasm;-)
just checked the dpclat authors website and he clearly states that it reports wrong values on win 8.. and needs updating?

You disabled Windows 8 native scheduling which by default always reports at 1000us according to dpclatency. To see the real performance with the default settings you would have to use latencymon.

If you are getting 8-10us with your settings that is incredibly good and you should leave it.

Interesting to see that the average reaction time has gone up 30-40 ms over the past eight years. Surely our lifestyles have no impact on such things :[

This b0se guy is full of shit, 142ms average? Give me a break LOL.

That's not that hard. I have a friend who can do around 120ms, he's in the navy as well and plays quake.
I just did the test late at night just now again and did 147ms average.

Apparently Daigo the street fighter player is below 100ms.

source on daigo please

Apparently on the counters to chun li's kick has 80ms gap windows and he countered them all.

You can also tell when he plays he is beyond fast.

There are situations where you buffer during the animation, basically count the startup with active frames and how many hits the move does then the -ve frame advantage window,

80ms implies 5 frames or so, fastest moves in SF are 3 frames, usually 3 frame moves are safe besides reversals and some odd antiairs, so lets go with 5 frames as a start up, first active frame is the only one that matters so the start up is 5 frames unless the move has more hits.
So that's 160ms.

Tell me which kick it is and I can tell you whether it's a reaction or read, also I can point to why he could be confident with a read since daigo is very keen on conditioning the opponent which is why his playstyle is so wild he's a master of playing the player not the system, not saying he doesn't have a good grasp of the system but he really does understand when players' habits arise and what they do when they don't follow the habits through his first few rounds.

if you're talking about evo moment #37, you're so stupid

next level stupid.

I think you are referring to that classic video, evo moment #something.

From what I understand that super is parried by moving forward before the move starts, so not a reflex, After that there's a simple slow-ish pattern, so it's just practicing the timing like everyone does. Then it finishes with a known and practiced combo for that situation. This means not a single parried kick nor the combo had a thing to do with reaction times, but of prediction and of execution.

That's the whole point of the video: Daigo read the opponent entirely and was completely calm under the worst case scenario, in-game and when he was about to be out of the tournament. Very few can do that, not even cooller can.

(see, I managed to write cooller on an unrelated topic)

I assume you had a shit score? I have far more interesting things in my life to do other than garner false 'interest' in a gaming forum.

I hit 98ms in one of the tries (which they count as luck and hence ignore in the rankings, which seems fair enough).

I can't replicate it though, I had 6 scores on the leaderboard last night in the 161 to 167 range.

They only show your best recorded score, so see position 7:

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/allresults.php

The ranked score is 12ms off the 149 total score, which averages at 2.5ms difference per click. Quite achievable.

The leaderboards change monthly on that site.

Indeed, it was to show nvc that he was the one spouting bs :¬)

well u cant see nvc's score in the top so :)

T_T

I have managed an average of 124ms once with prediction clicks, which is most likely how he managed it as well. Sub 100ms clicks aren't being counted/saved tho.

No prediction, entirely reactive. Got 161-167 six or so times, it's quite consistent.

Has to be after gaming for an hour or so, doing it cold is about 20ms more.

Yeah it's possible to hit 142ms average once or twice with an early click or two but it's not reactive as you're suggesting, especially not consistent. You just truely believe it is because you saw it change to green at that split second too, albeit after or as you clicked. Just because you clicked before you physically registered the change (essentially a false positive) doesn't mean it didn't change to green anyway and you were blind to it.

Besides, requiring just five successful clicks above 100ms is not enough, it should be at least 10-20... the more the better. Plus discarding any early clicks is bad, they should add +1 to your required clicks to make things more interesting!

I never stated that 149ms was my usual average, I said I hit that score. I also stated (in a later post) that I was getting the 160-170 mark consistently.

Why you're creating such a fuss about such an incidental - negligible - thing, I have no idea.

I'm just contributing to the thread.

Which is why the test should be for about 20 clicks.

The test doesn't really mean much anyway, it's just easier to see how fast people see someone in game. e.g spart1e, when someone shows up he will move his mouse nearly instantly.
That along with how fast they shoot when their crosshair lines up. e.g tox.

I remember LuGia had insane scores back in 2007, my record average without predictive clicks was about 160 EDIT: in 2007.

219 avg

jet-fighter pilots have avrg reaction time over 200ms, but the quake players are the best and have twice better/faster reaction time! Fuck yeah! (deal_with_it_emotion_icon)

222 avg, 150 best. I am not that good with this :)

It is clear, we need Chrome for this test.

Firefox : 234 and 241
Chrome : 190

Guys with Firefox should retry the test.

Edit : i am 43 years old
:)

True.
I'm at 230 with firefox and at 210 with Chrome.

420

163ms with laggy chrome and windows aero @ 144hz

1337ms

Considering the average person's nerve conduction velocity, you must have really long arms.

No point comparing times on different machines, mouses, web browsers etc.

Better do a ruler test!
Have someone hold a ruler diagonally for you. Put you fingers around it at 0 mark. The other person drops it at random and you catch it as fast as you can.
Read the length and calculate your time in ms.

Not really, why would you game with a shit setup in the first place?

Why would you play with 80 ping in the first place? Why would you play with LCD rather than CRT? Because you can still crush a moron with 100ms reaction time.

This is purely for bragging rights so lets do it properly.

Because I live on the West Coast, there is nothing I can do about playing on high ping if I want to play Quake Live. I can still beat people with 80ms ping in combat even if they have 10ms ping :)

Also I prefer my vg248qe over any crt monitor, crt monitors take way too much desk room.
The ruler test is more about how fast you can grasp your hand, rather than your reactions.

Hah, that was a good guess :-) That's the point - non-perfect setup doesn't make ql unplayable as you've noticed yourself. I bet 80 ping vs 30 is worse disadvantage than few ms of input lag. Human brain can adapt to such things with ease.

Ruler test is ok - you are supposed to almost hold the ruler with just tiny space left. You'll be surprised how far down it will fall.

99% of people have no idea if they have shitty setup with lots of input lag.

Damn you are in the proud 1 %.
Congrats :-)

do it on lan

Black people should be kings here as their muscles are 10ms faster.

wow ur dumb

get off your proxy americuck

how do i go under 150 wow

174 sober and 237 drunk.

190ms average // 8ms best.
happ1ness

250 before turning off aero.
192 after
Tried again and got 176

182 avg on home desktop.

EDIT: tested on laptop, 204ms avg. fuckin windows 8

215ms avg of 20 tries

Waiting for people to use scripts auto-clicking on color change.

8 seconds

http://puu.sh/g7K1R/dd9e1e731e.png

average 248 ms !

average 174ms

http://puu.sh/gbg6V/3859884ce7.png

around 140ms minus ips screen lag

That's not too fast for a 17 year old.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/46294175/aim%20stuff/rt.PNG

10 clicks, 133ms average, 0 were below 100ms.

260-270 if im drunk or john blazed, 220ish if im normal.

but ive been sitting back all chilled ready to just click a button, im pretty sure if i say in proper position and actually griped my mouse properly i would get better!

Averaged 186 whilst in bed with man flu on a laptop and overdosed on "Bells Cough Compound of Glycerin, lemon & ipecacuanha".

I'm more concerned with this green/yellow slime I keep coughing up.

That's why you get flu shots, noob.

Shit, I'm in the 220's nearly 10 years later.

Ahh physical decline, to be fair this monitor is a 60hz
POS but it does 4k and its 28 inches so its good for what I need.

average 225 with 60hz and razer deathadder. But I'm ill and sleep depraved though :p gotta retry next week.

average 420 ms

Just tested myself. Average 182ms on a 120Hz monitor at the age of 36.

EDIT: average 175 on a 2nd try

160ms on 360Hz monitor

mine is around 9 years and 4 months

on 144hz and while actively gayming, sub 150.

now on 60hz 4KKK screen, 200:qqw