ok, but do you have some proof about this? how did you test it?

I heard that 3366 got too much precision and its harder to use LG, but for CS seems to be better? ;)

also from your videos I saw that you cant see difference between mousepads lol ;<

using tons of mice is very bad thing to do f you want to be good player.

I test them in CS 1.6. Other games have issues like higher input lag which may mask sensor performance: http://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/preview2/

Lots of other people do the same:

youtube.com/user/Ramla777
Ramla777 posted a comment
1 year ago(today is dec 26 2012)
Currently I use the abyssus. I only use the wmo when I play 1.6. It just feels so much more accurate in that game. I use the abyssus for every other game. CS:S Quake COD SC2

how do you test it in CS?

by 'feeling' ?

Yep. That's all we've got.

There are no empirical tests available.

Also, I don't "use" tons of mice. I have tested tons of mice.

I commented on mousepads further down.

I didn't feel smoothing with WMO, DA, g100s, SS Kana v2 etc.

how about that?

also that smoothing thing is probably the hardest thing to notice but everyone talking about it.

smoothing is placebo

it's a myth because of OCD players ;)

smoothing isn't placebo.

Originally Posted by CPate View Post

CPI steps are 240-4000 in steps of 80 - so you can get native 400/800/1600/etc.

CPI range was extended, but there is still zero smoothing at 2000 CPI and below. 2080 CPI and above implement 4 frames (<1ms) of smoothing in order to mitigate ripple. Sensors with smoothing levels that people find problematic are typically around 4-7ms.

So who am i supposed to believe? a logitech rep or some thunderstruck champ who never vsed strenx yet considered himself a champ.

thats why we use native cpi?

do u even read bro? he said smoothing is placebo. i just proved him wrong. smoothing isn't just a cpi dependent behavior and even if it was i still proved him wrong.

its ok but with native cpi its possible to reduce such effect.

still smoothness or not, like somebody said below - hard to say whats better. And can't clearly said the mouse is bad because of smoothness.

also pls, define how you feel smoothing ?

i mean, how does it manifest itself ?

A loud bang and sulfur smell

So who am i supposed to believe? a logitech rep or some thunderstruck champ who never vsed strenx yet considered himself a champ.

I do not consider myself to be a champ. When I said i'm the best it was mainly for trolling people and having fun. People there are very reactive it's awesome :). And yes i played strenx in 2009 CA 1v1, and i won almost all hellsgateredux but lost dm6 (dm6 is such a bad map for CA anyway, especially 1v1). I also beat tox 2 maps to 1 lg only. But it was in 2009, these days i play worst than in 2009 or maybe it's just that the overall lvl of people has increased.
And even when i beat strenx and others quakelive pros at thunderstruck/hellsgateredux, i still do not consider myself to be a champ. I never won a tournament, and i didn't play people like k1llsen, stermy, fox etc. And in 2009 i lost to draven at thunderstruck, only to name him. So yeah, be carefull, back in the day i was the biggest attentionwhore/troll ever.

But at least what i can say is that i'm above average, i mean, i'm good, but not the best. And i'm good ONLY at CA, so people might laugh at me ^^.

Originally Posted by CPate View Post

CPI steps are 240-4000 in steps of 80 - so you can get native 400/800/1600/etc.

CPI range was extended, but there is still zero smoothing at 2000 CPI and below. 2080 CPI and above implement 4 frames (<1ms) of smoothing in order to mitigate ripple. Sensors with smoothing levels that people find problematic are typically around 4-7ms.

still, how comes there's no valid test available to see if there's smoothing in the mice ? I mean, you can easily measure malfunction speed, negative/pos accel, jitter on so on with programs like enotus/paint etc, but what about smoothing ? People talk a lot about it but there's still no valid program that cool measure it.
Oh yeah, some logitech dude somehow explained that you add 4 frames and blablablabla so those experiencing placebo smoothing are like "OMG I WAS RIGHT, SOMETHING FELT WRONG IN MY MOUSE!!!!!!".
I played for 1 year with the old abyssus, nobody said there's smoothing in the abyssus. Then switched to AM/FK and then krait 2k13, DA 2k13, and guess what ? I play the same i'm not better or worst, and i don't feel any inputlag/smoothing at all. I'm playing on a CRT 100hz 200fps, and my current mouse (DA 2k13) is just as much responsive as my old abyssus.

but maybe i should try a 144hz 1ms GTG and 250fps and i should finally be able to notice smoothing ? :>

ok i was a bit hostile with that comment but it's because you and esr think just because there's no 100% proof of smoothing, it doesn't exist and refer to these people as OCD or placebo. Evidence supports that smoothing exists more than it doesn't. For e.g. if you want a more legit source than a logitech rep, than logitech (yes the company themself) claimed their g502 mouse has zero smoothing, so that would mean they are risking being sued by making this claim if it turns out to be false. Also the reason it is so hard to test this is because the input lag is from the mouse so you can't just put two monitors side by side with a high speed camera. You need a high speed camera on the mouse as well and even if you show that on a high speed camera how are you meant to show the input lag? I unlike most people here believe the comments on oc.net have some legitimacy. I think this way because i've tried the taipan and i felt that it had huge amounts of smoothing and the same thing was said by oc.net. I also tried a about 7 other mouses and never noticed the amount of smoothing the taipan had and the same thing was said by the comments on oc.net. So the comments were correct by 8 out of 8 regarding my experience with the taipan. Ofc some of the mices with very little smoothing e.g. the g100s sensor may be placebo but ofc that's going to happen the harder and harder it becomes to notice. In short oc.net users are giving reviews on their feelings of smoothing on their mouse, and esr users ridicule them even when their is no other better way to test smoothing. Why ridicule someone for giving their review based on feelings if their is no other way?

Maybe BST could shed some light on this topic since he might be involved in the firmware source code of the mouse. Although i very much doubt it, if he really wanted to prove it exists he could show how increasing smoothing increases the max tracking speed and also increase it to such a ridiculous amount that we could notice it with a camera. Although even then it wouldn't prove that smoothing exists, it would only show proof that their are reasons to add smoothing to the mouse. Unless we have the source code of the mouse we can't prove it exists.

Honestly besides all this text i cannot give you bigger proof unless you try out the taipan yourself.

EDIT: Also besides increased max tracking speed a lot of rookies praise the mouse with heavy smoothing because it is smoother, and only the hardcore players complain about it so it wouldn't be far fetched to think that mouse manufacturers are adding smoothing to our mouse to cater to the noobs.

It's not a placebo. Try wmo @ 400 dpi vs abyssus @ 1800dpi for example, it should even be visible in paint. The question is however if one is better than the other. Personally I like the smooth feeling for lg, but for rockets i like the more direct feedback. Though that might also depend on your cm/360 and possible other variables.. all in all op's conclusion about the hype is stupid.

Play with Kinzu v2 and you'll want to smoothly destroy the face of the engineer who came up with it.

Takes one to know one.

WMO is a MLT04 mouse.

Kana v2 has been reported by a lot of people to have terrible smoothing, so right there your opinion loses all credibility with me. And even my friend who's not too keen on these kinds of things feels it on his g100s in quake.

With the DA it depends which version. The 2013 one is terrible, but the earlier versions are said to be good.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1440395/avago-3090...na-v2/0_50

opinions sucks.

you are very funny about feeling stuff.

Feeling is of the essence. I actually think specs don't matter that much in anything really. What does is how the product performs in practice, for which opinions, experiences and feeling matter way more than a spec sheet.

For example stats and specifications wise the WMO sucks and sucks badly, but in practice it's awesome because of how tracking feels and due to its shape. Both can only be felt (no stats on that) and both are something subjective, of opinions.

The opposite holds true as well, with some mice having this allegedly great sensor, great specs and great reviews and whatnot but are crap as a whole product anyway, like the first batches of the abyssus and even the zowie cooller mouse (falls apart in a couple of weeks).

lol no.

You can used to almost every mouse, even with prediction, smoothing etc. You can just learn it. Thats why 'oppions' are useless.
I know people who like prediction...

Some people just got talent and they play with mouse what they have...

kinzu v1 in terms of specs sucks (really wmo is much better)... but how many pros were using it? ...

wmo specs are not really bad. It can be good for really big crowd.
- mouse feet sucks, you can replace it
- low max speed but maybe its enough(fine for me)
- mousewheel cold be bad some some people
- you need to overclock it - proably the most annoying thing
and other things are perfect.

the truth is that there is plenty good mice with good sensor, then you can try to find something comfortable. And WMO is comfortable for almost everyone.

to be good you need to play with one mouse. Thats why its so hard to change WMO for somebody who played with it for years.

That's not true. I played with the IE 1.1 (probably the old sensor, and the grip/coating sucked for me) for years and when I switched to the copperhead my skill shot up drastically.

You can get used to a shitty mouse, but you don't have to play with a good mouse for years to be good.

IE 1.1. got same sensor as WMO

lol it wasn't comfortable for you... really? And thats why mouse sucks ? lol... because it was bad for you, uncomfortable. So I can say that copperhead is not comfortable for me, so its suck?

it suck because it fkin laser mouse. Still comfort is more important factor.

its very individual.

really choosing a mouse from 'good sensor list' then look for comfortable one and it will be good.

I'm having a hard time understanding your english, but the IE 1.1 had a different sensor back in the day. It was updated later to the same MLT04 sensor as the WMO and 3.0.

I agree with your last sentence mostly. But there is still a significant advantage to be gained by some sensors, mainly the MLT04 in FPS games.

sry writing in a hurry.

Being comfortable is an opinion, not a spec. So are "low" max speed, the "need" to overclock it (rapha and cypher have won dozens of tournaments with 125hz), that the mouse feet "suck" (I think they are fine), etc. etc.

Though I agree in this day and age mice are overrated. This isn't 1999 anymore, in which most mice sucked balls.

- comfortable is just different for everybody, for me its not an opinion, one mouse is comfortable other doesn't (for me), but you know it
- max speed is not an oppion... better o have higher m/s but if you don't hit negative accel is fine
- ok you don't need it but mouse performs better on 500 Hz, still you can do it.
- mouse feet, sorry but plastic are not comparable to true teflon which feels much better.

about WMO, its great in quake but I dont like it much in CS.

'low' max speed is subjective. i measured, and don't even hit 1m/s in quake hence i could play with a xai without it skipping, while you and others probably couldn't.

125hz won most quake tournaments, we're not a mousegeek fansite but a website for quake players and it doesn't seem to impact quake performance half as much as you nerds seem to believe.

I like WMO... still its not something special... I like its shape and weight mostly. Its DPI in windows is fkin annoying.

- the most bad thing with with WMO is that it impossible to get new one... still there is so many mice... that you dont need wmo....

- I dont hit negaive accel with WMO, mostly. Time to time only. But when I recommend it I don't really know what people need. I know poeple who need at least 3 m/s....

- wtf why are you talking about tournaments? mouse can't make somebody best player lol. Skill, talent, experience, getting used to one mouse... mouse is not that important... it is just a tool...

- winning tournaments is not any kind of proof. Quake is old game, and wmo was one of the best mouse for long years...

- many proffesional players were using wmo for years... and thats makes them almost impossible to switch to any other mouse.

- some people like me are playing other games too... and WMO is not universal mouse.

Like I said. Mouse is just a tool. And there is a lot of good mouse out there. I just choose something comfortable with 'flawless' sensor. WMO is one of them.

who cares about wmo?

'- max speed is not an oppion...'

higher max speed = better in tech. terms.

no, it's not. unless you, the player, needs it ingame it's a marketing gimmick same as 'high' dpi.

if my max speed is below 1m/s, which it is, i literally couldn't care less if one mouse has a max speed of 2m/s and the others one of 3m/s. same thing with dpi, yes it 'sees' more dots, but who cares if i'm not anywhere near needing that resolution?

sorry, don't explain to me this stuff lol, I know all of this shit.

I know people for who WMO is not enough coz low max speed
I know people for who g100s is not enough coz low max speed

so yes, with high max speed like over 3 m/s im sure that mouse will be enough for 99% of people if somebody will buy it.

and srsly 1m/s is fkin easy to hit.

you think that if you don't hit it than most people will not do that...

and tell me how did you measure it? The only way to measure it for me is that if I hit negative accel or not. Im hitting malfunction speed in tests with g100s but not while playing.

Also If I will go for eg. with csgo with very low sensitivity WMO will be not enough fosho. And almost everybody can change sensitivity and used to it.

yeah, you know all of the shit.

i was trying to explain to you that whatever is 'low' or 'high' to someone in regards to max speed - contrary to what you originally said - is subjective, in others words: an opinion.

it's like testing your bandwith, you might've more bandwith (a higher/better number) than me but does it help you with quake? no, then i don't care.

most people don't know what max speed they need and it could change.

so high max speed is safe for everyone.

WMO: 1.5 m/s @ 500 Hz, because of the 8 bit data path.

works on 1000 Hz without any problem, stable ;)

So?

then I need to go back and ask. You wrote:
"WMO: 1.5 m/s @ 500 Hz, because of the 8 bit data path. "

So what? :p

"and srsly 1m/s is fkin easy to hit." @ #115

"if my max speed is below 1m/s, which it is" ~ zealot

I asked for that. I know max speed of mouse, like wmo. But max speed of a player seems to be hard to measure, but he did it.

i let the program run in the background while playing? if that is what you're trying to get at.

What is your cm/360 in-game?
I occasionally hit 2m/s with 22cm/360 but I'll almost always go faster than 1.6m/s

same here: 19-23cm/360 over the years and i settled around 21. it's got more to do with playing style than sens though (imo).
claw/fingertip grip with lots and lots of small movement, no sweeps unless trying to impress with 360°s ;)

I have this balance wrist arm playstyle where I utilise my arm for less fine movements like close to close-mid range LG and close range rockets, then use my wrist to augment my arm speed which probably give me inflated values.
My wrist is used during strafe jumps and quick flicks and at long ranges for finer movements.

Also some fingertip claw grip hybrid

your close to mid range LG is a 'less fine movement'!?!? oh dear! :p

I pretty much used to play like you until the constant tension in my right shoulder kept bothering me. Now I reposition my mouse so often that hand/finger movements are very small and therefore probably not very fast in terms of 'm/s'.

My movement are quite smooth so less fine in my book doesn't really mean that it isn't fine, just not as fine as long range.

Well, to be honest it's just down to posture and setup whether a style like mine would be comfortable or not.

Kana v2 --> no accel, no prediction, no smoothing.

That's not what I heard.... http://www.overclock.net/t/1440395/avago-3090...na-v2/0_50

That's not what I used.

What do you mean?

You heard about it, I used it.

I think there is accel in the kinzu v2 tbh. I think this way because ino did a review on the g502 which he said has no accel and the g402 which he said has very little accel that it's not really worth worrying about. There are people who claim that they can feel accel in the kinzu v2 but not the g402 and the person who did the review claiming there is accel in the g402 has actually being confirmed by logitech - http://www.overclock.net/t/1504917/logitech-g...t_22647888 . These people may be OCD but time and time again they are quite consistent with their results even if they are based on feelings.

But they were talking about kana v2, not kinzu v2? ;p

We are talking about Kana v2.

Kinzu v2 is an utter piece of shit with heavy smoothing, jitter and low malfunction speed.

woops. Well for kana ino mentioned that the accel range is similar to the g402 = so little it's not worht mentioning. He might be wrong but his results are usually accurate if u ask me - hence the confirmation from logitech. Also see this - http://www.overclock.net/t/1504917/logitech-g...by-ino/120

I have no jitter on the kinzu v2, no idea what you mean by smoothing, to me it doesn't feel much different than the wmo, and the low malfunction speed isn't that much of an issue at least for me. It is higher than on the wmo which I used for a long time.

"to me it doesn't feel much different than the wmo"

omg

How can you not notice how utter shit it is?

I really have no idea. I did firmware update it when I first got it, but haven't since. I always use 400 dpi, 1000 Hz.

I don't know what jitter you're talking about, I don't have any.

Also could you describe what you feel with 'smoothing'?

The crosshair moves with a noticeable delay compared to the actual mouse movement. Feels very indirect - like playing with some wireless crap underwater. Smooth tracking is a pain, so as small but rapid corrections. Flicks have a random tendency, no snappy and crisp feeling, at all.

Also low malfunction speed. I managed to make it completely lose tracking very easily - way easier than with a WMO (and I use medium accel). There were also a few occasions. when it lost tracking (and turned towards the ceiling / ground) while moving it relatively slowly. Tried it on several surfaces. Not faulty product, since RMAd, brand new unit did the same.


Kinzu v2 --> ultimate garbage for FPS-gaming

I don't experience any of that. It does the look around thing once in a blue moon. That's it.

It's definitely not the "ultimate garbage". It's better than many mice I've used before.

I'd still be using the wmo but I prefer the kinzu shape. I was spoiled by having a kinzuadder for a while. So it when it broke I just got a kinzu v2.

For whatever reason I suspect that your experience is especially unique. The main complaint I have heard is the low perfect control speed. Like I said though, I had no problem with the perfect control speed on the wmo, and this seems higher. I think it states something like 1.8 m/s vs. the wmo 1.55 m/s. Shrug.

Also had a ton of good mice and tried most of the major gaming mice in the last 8 years.
The shape / weight is awesome (but this is subjective) and that's it. I would never encourage anybody to buy Kinzu v2 for shooters.

Tbh, the guy whom I selled it to, "doesn't experience this" too.

I feel that he heard about that somebody were using it.

I used kana v2. no accel for sure.

You could also probably attribute that 'accuracy' to the sensor that is slightly forward because he might feel that the slight increase in responsiveness from that helps with his grip.

Almost all non-MLT04 mice also have huge mouse feet.......

Also the G502 has slight prediction when you turn it off, but it sure as hell doesn't feel like it has smoothing.

from what i've read, the mouse you use yourself(kone pure military), has the most unstable, tracking affecting polling rate ever.
so i'm sorry that i can't trust anything you write.
(besides that you state, that different kind of mousepads, affect your game less than this or that decent mouse).

That unstable polling rate has practically zero tangible effect on the feel of the sensor.

And no, I don't use the KPM. I use the IE 3.0. I just said the KPM felt the best out of all the recent mice I've tested.

Regarding mousepads: what I look for in a mousepad is enough friction to provide stopping power, but not enough friction to hinder the tiniest movements. The $8 supermat provides exactly this. Also, you want mice without big logos because they can hinder tracking.

Buying and testing "gaming" mousepads is such a massive money dump and a waste of time and resources. Sure every pad feels slightly different. The problem is that you can't test them in stores. So you will either spend a massive amount of money on shipping, return, shipping, and restocking fees, or you'll end up with a ton of mousepads that you don't use and possibly never find whatever you're ultimately looking for.

I did all of that, only to find out in the end that this generic $8 pad was better and cheaper than all of them, and I wasted a ton of money on hype.

EDIT: forgot to mention that you can get the same effect as a different mousepad by changing mouse feet. And that's much cheaper.

supermat is solid, I used to use a gigantic one back in the day

The new super mat sucks. Absolutely atrocious backing (foam) that deforms at the slightest weight. It holds absolutely no candle to its previous incarnation.

Have you tried the monoprice xl pad?

I quite like it

Haven't tried that. In the process of buying a titan, will see how that goes first before committing funds elsewhere. The description of the monoprice states it has a microfiber cloth surface which leads me to think its similar to the mionix sargas 450 that I have. The mionix is quite nice, but a tad too fast and the edges hurt.

It's really smooth to touch, but not as slick as a goliathus control with the mouse.

from legit source I know that 0-500 Hz pooling rate is stable. 1000 Hz is unstable. With kone pure military.

maybe you mean kone pure optical?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1514896/wierd-find...itary/0_50

http://www.overclock.net/t/1514896/wierd-find...t_22976254

Pretty sure it defaults to 1000hz and I never installed the drivers.

Mice threads on ESR are filled with people that don't post regularly here and no that one has heard about before, so are noobs that don't represent the site. We ESR people only praise the WMO lord.

I just searched "3366" in those threads and:
Pärt 3: Only one comment, praising it, by "kyube" (one post).
Part 2: "popups" (registered on july 2014. 17 posts, all about mice); "hfcobra" (21 posts, all about mice);
Part 1: Zero posts.

Search G502.

But it's probably that one in part 3 which I saw.

Alright.

Part 1: Nothing.
Part 3: Nothing (so far).
Part 2: Posts by
- "th3l4st0ne" (4 posts total in the site, all about mice. Also criticizes the mouse);
- "hfcobra" again;
- "turnschuh" (8 posts, all about mice);
- Anonymous canadian;
- "rijst " replying to him (3 posts, all about mice);
- and Rauvz (known user. Didn't praise it really).


So in three threads, with over 4,000 comments and counting, only one known user talked about that mouse and sensor and didn't praise it really. All the rest only came here to talk about mice, in a non technical manner.

Anyway, the whole point is that a public site (forum or place) is not good or bad per se. It all depends on each poster and some topics do attract "outsiders" more than others, so in technical matters might as well skip the posts from unknown users and from known to be shitty players.

Please put 'shitty player with tons of mouse experience' next to my nick.

I've tried the main 3310 mice:

Zowie FK1, Roccat KPM, and the Mionix Avior 7000. From my own tests in ql, I would say the FK1 3310 implementation is the only one which I felt was raw and responsive. The avior has a weird laggy feeling to me, I know zsx uses it and loves it but for me the sensor just doesn't feel right. I just picked up a KPM last week, and this is probably the worst of the bunch.

1. 1000hz isn't stable..... at all! Polling goes from 1000 down to 10, it's completely erratic and it just doesn't feel right when I'm trying to trace someone with lg.
2. 500hz is stable but again it feels laggy to me
3. The drivers make everything feel even worse.

I know it's not me, placebo, whatever as I also have a roccat kone pure with the 3090, the diff as far as acc is night and day, the 3090 implementation feels snappy, this doesn't.

This is the best plot of the KPM I can get in mousetester, @ 500 hz, no drivers, on a qck.: http://i.imgur.com/BIQmpye.png It's much worse with drivers + 1000hz + other pads.

The peaks shouldn't do that, they should be smooth, like the following using a DA 3.5g:
http://i.imgur.com/9DilHu3.png

I can't think of any other game besides quake where you have to trace enemy's for a prolonged amount of time + with very heavy dodging. CS doesn't seem like a good way to test.

Yeah, that's pretty interesting because I've heard a number of people say the same thing... and I even went back and tested the mice again because of someone saying the FK1 felt better than the KPM...

But that was definitely the opposite of my experience.

Since you picked yours up last week it seems like you probably got the same firmware that I got...

My 1000hz setting was erratic too, but it didn't seem to have an affect on the tracking.

So you tried the KPM without installing the drivers first and it still felt bad? Are you moving the mouse fast for those graphs? I returned mine already so I can't graph it.

Well tracing enemies isn't the only way to test... Being able to snap to heads (flick shots) is the CS way.

I found that a good way for me to test was to hold a specific angle. The FK1 felt like it would move the cursor in the general direction, whereas the KPM felt much more precise - more similar to the MLT04, but not quite there.

I wonder what is causing the variance in performance...

Oh God...

Must we suffer your OCD obsession with the MLT04 on ESR now, too?

I already have you on ignore over @ overclock.net because all you ever do is put absolutely every new mouse down, because it does not have the MLT04 sensor that you so wish to get penetrated by - over and over and over again.

Time to find the ignore button on ESR now...

So somehow it's my fault that manufacturers have been releasing mice over the past 10 years with terrible performance?

It's my fault that they've been pushing to get higher and higher DPI (which is almost completely useless to most people) instead of trying to match the performance of a great sensor that was released over 10 years ago?

People like you who stand up for companies who don't give a shit about competitive gamers and actually releasing a quality mouse are the problem.

Every mouse/sensor that is released is hyped SO much, no matter how horrible it is. The 3090 was hyped as some "perfect" sensor. Now we know that is FAR from the truth. 3366 was hyped as "the end of the dark ages" in which manufacturers kept releasing terrible mice and forcing us competitive gamers to keep using 15 year old mice. Virtually every mouse/sensor that has come out in the past 10-15 years has had some major defect. Yet so many people continue to sing the praises of every new mouse that comes out and it's infuriating.

Casual gamers are being heavily marketed with misleading tactics like making them think they need 5000dpi, yet you attack someone that speaks out about it and demands quality products?

You disgust me.

the market is saturated with quality products. it's a nonissue. the g100s performs identically to the ime 1.1/wmo, while having a better shape and a default dpi that isn't useless for high res displays. your obsession with mouse sensors is borderline manic.

>the market is saturated with quality products

That is total rubbish. Every single mouse has issues, including the MLT04 mice. Most mice have MAJOR issues.

There is a very significant difference between an MLT04 mouse and other gaming mice made in the past 10 years.

This is someone from this website:

youtube.com/user/Ramla777
Ramla777 posted a comment
1 year ago(today is dec 26 2012)
Currently I use the abyssus. I only use the wmo when I play 1.6. It just feels so much more accurate in that game. I use the abyssus for every other game. CS:S Quake COD SC2

Even though he can't feel the difference in Quake, I know other people can.

I'm far from the only one "obsessing" about this. I've seen people talk about it everywhere, including places like overclock.net where mostly casuals hang out.

If it's not something that you can detect then I suppose you can count yourself lucky. That doesn't mean it's not a major issue, or that I'm the only one.

Do you complain about everything like that, lol. "This car is not good enough for me. I must buy that Pagani".

I can't think of another case where products being released were progressively worse. But if that were ever the case in anything else I'd certainly stick with the best product as long as possible regardless of its age.

I'm sure it happens. Come to think of it I've seen that talked about in reviews for a variety of products. But since I'm a nerd I haven't looked into any other product as much as I have with mice.

@first statement:
How about 90% of all products around the entire world?

actually it does mean it's not a major issue. i consistently hit around 45% lg on my 2100 elo friend, known for having ridiculous dodge, with a g100s. i'm pretty sure if it was a major issue, i would notice it when i switch between my g100s and intellimouse. whatever it is you're talking about, smoothing or whatever, MIGHT be an issue that would cause you to have 1% less accuracy, but it is most certainly NOT a major issue.

this whole mlt04 shit has ascended from legitimate concern to fanatical pedantry. buy a g100s and stop looking for problems that don't exist.

That or buy a WMO and just be happy, lol.

I'm not a competitive quake player. Like Ramla said, in CS 1.6 there is a very significant difference.

I've never use a g100s because it only has 3 buttons, but my friend who plays 1.6 and quake has used it along with the MLT04 mice and he said he can tell the difference even in quake.

So your personal experience hardly nullifies everyone else's.

yeah and your friend is probably full of shit and didn't convert his settings from one game/mouse to the other properly.

Shape is completely subjective. And while being a good mouse, don't forget about the G100s's super trash build quality.


M X 3 0 0
X
3
0
0

no, it is a fact g100s has the best shape. if you disagree you are retarded.

)))

I can't decide whether you post is just retarded or bad troll.

)))

Going with the safe bet. Both.

))

I understand your motivations, unfortunately mice productors only cares about moneys and intentionally develops crap defective expensive piece of plastic when really the mouse evolution could have stopped some 10 years ago, and we all could have near perfect mouses at the price of no more than 15 euro. And no, i'm not talking about wmo, wich is far from perfect.

I was dubious at 'MLT04' and then your use of the word 'feel' really put the nail in the coffin. That's when I stopped reading.

You might be right, but if you want anyone in charge of their critiical faculties to entertain your credibility, don't support your statements with an obvious sensor bias and then talk about feelings.

What a ridiculous comment.

There are no programs available to test this or any other number of problems/issues with mice.

There is no program to test mouse FPS, yet I'm sure you could FEEL the difference between a 9000FPS sensor and a 200FPS sensor.

Stop acting like I'm the only one as well. I've seen it talked about all over this site. There are even other people in this thread confirming.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1490440/input-lag-...t_22324505

i found something interesting here, read posts #57 and #58

if "smoothing" is similar to m_filter in that it causes input lag from interpolating multiple counts, then it may be possible to measure it if you record when the screen stops changing after stopping the mouse.

currently the only high fps tests done by fragga and noacc ( http://www.esreality.com/post/2640619/input-l...-csgo-q3a/ ) have been done by recording when the screen changes after starting to move the mouse, which can't be interpolated since its only a single count.

My point still stands.

You've made claims, so the onus is on you to provide proof. Your feelings might somewhat describe an accurate picture of reality, I'm not disputing that possibility; what I am saying is that they do not comprise proof, and thereby, do not warrant the position of authority that you seem to place as more important than any effective method of discourse.

Surely the point would be to test for the effects of mouse FPS, and the FPS is already known?

No, your point is ridiculous.

There are a whole host of things in every area of life which we don't have the technology to test. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

Strawman: you have twice now assumed that I am claiming that your claims are wrong, and attempted to debunk that false argument using inflammatory language, instead of the point that I have now twice made: that being that while something may be true but not testable, functionally we can not assume that it is true nor untrue until we have proof either way.

Your twice stated insistence that my point is proved ridiculous, by use of the point itself, provides so fragile a position that one is required to start to doubt that you yourself have much confidence in your own argument, but of course, once again, this does not mean that the target of your argument is incorrect, only that it requires a broader discourse than thus far you have provided, with respect to providing proof.

And, luckily, science doesn't claim shit about them.

People do.

We've felt the wind before science could explain what it was.

We smell gasses and odors before science could explain what it was.

We didn't shrug these things off as hocus pocus till science could explain what they were

The fact that you're being +'d is fucking retarded.

I've completely lost my respect for the majority on this site.

The most retarded arguments get plussed sometimes, don't read too much into it (and there's no downvoting). Also don't criticize bst. ;)

The problem is people are literally judging mice based on something extraordinarily subjective, and rather than be critical, questioning whether it's the sensor position, hand position, mouse feet, length of the mouse relative to the flange length which attenuates how much leverage you have (subject to mouse grip), people are judging mice based on non-scientific evidence. It's like prescribing medical treatment based on what they 'feel' has work when it's at best correlational. You might be able to notice the 2ms difference (if there is one) between mice, but how do you know what non-smoothing mice feel like? What guarantee do you have that stipulates that the MLT04 mice have 0 smoothing? Feel (i.e the adapted muscle memory from years of using the same mouse)? Without hard evidence (and Logitech seem to be pedaling this no-smoothing marketing campaign without evidence either), people are going to judge you.

The only way to do this without measuring tools is by doing a double blind test using the same mouse shell but with different sensors (and the sensors must be adjusted so DPI is EXACTLY the same).
And when you phrase your opening post as polemic as you did, which judges a mouse without being critical and not using any evidence, this community is going to be skeptical.

THIS.

>based on non-scientific evidence

Because scientific evidence isn't available.

You people keep bringing up this same retarded statement.

You want us to pretend nothing our senses detect is real until we have scientific proof? That's moronic.

No we want you to isolate a proper testing method.

And what the hell makes you think I have the knowledge and training to do that?

I'm not a mouse engineer, and it's possible that not even they could do it.

You might as well be demanding that I come up with a way to measure the affect each of the trillions of bacteria in our gut have on our bodies.

You people are ridiculous.

If you can feel it, describe the feeling accurately in hopes of isolating or someone else isolating.

We're getting nowhere because the discussion is degenerating in to what might as well be 'THEY THREW MY BLANKY AWAY' and nothing will ever feel the same.

I've done that numerous times. Both in my review videos, in the descriptions, and on other websites.

It feels like the cursor moves too much, or moves in the general direction rather than precisely on the head. It could also be described as laggy. It feels like the cursor is on ice.

It could be something as simple as having 6000FPS compared to 9000. But it's probably multiple factors.

Sounds like shitty firmware, not really due to the sensor model per say then.

You do realize the power the brain has, right? It's capable of making up all sorts of delusions.

There's many icecreams that have multiple colors, but the only flavor listed in the ingredients is Vanilla. People will still debate on whether the red is Strawberry or Cherry flavored.

Without scientific evidence you have no place to judge. Your senses can not be trusted on such a small degree with so many variables.

>Without scientific evidence you have no place to judge.

This is such a ridiculous statement that has now been uttered multiple times in this thread.

Scientific knowledge isn't advanced enough to the point where you can demand evidence for everything.

I'm an atheist and love science, but the amount of delusional demand in this thread is through the roof.

I wouldn't even be able to make a program that tests how much FPS one sensor tracks at compared to another. And that is a known variable.

I'm sure most people would be able to tell the difference between a 200 and 6000fps sensor. Yet since there's no program available to test that we should all conclude there is no difference? Moronic.

Clearly intelligence isn't a prerequisite to participate on competitive gaming forums.

They are only asking you to:

1. Get actual data, which is obvious.
2. If really impossible, which most likely isn't, then do blind tests, get rid of all factors that might have any impact on the results and use other means that will ensure they are correct and that the mice can be tested by someone else, getting the same results.

If this wasn't a gaming forum all your results and all what you wrote would have been deleted and/or mocked at immediately, because they are incorrectly obtained.

Or lets put it this way: I think everything you have said and all your results so far are wrong, because I say so and because I felt the opposite . Also, I say I can feel more things than you do and that every piece of information you gave me is wrong, because, again, I felt the opposite

What the hell kind of data could I come up with?

Most likely isn't impossible? How so? I commented on blind tests further down.

This is so ridiculous...

>If this wasn't a gaming forum all your results and all what you wrote would have been deleted and/or mocked at immediately, because they are incorrectly obtained.

Seriously....? I know you're a grown man. You've been on this site for decades. You should know better than to think that's a valid demand.

We're not all scientists in a specialized field who work in studies all day.

We're not even all engineers, much less mice sensor engineers. If we were all mice sensor engineers your demand would be valid. Since we're just competitive gamers, it's absurd.

As I've explained over and over, your demands for me - a non mouse engineer - to come up with empirical evidence for said mouse phenomenon are no more asinine than me demanding you produce empirical evidence that our gut microbiomes effect our brains.

Obviously everyone is free to weigh in with their own personal experiences. And everything is assumed to be anecdotal unless otherwise proven.

This is such a ridiculous statement that has now been uttered multiple times in this thread.

It's been said so many times for such an obvious reason.

Scientific knowledge isn't advanced enough to the point where you can demand evidence for everything.

Yes it is? Before you throw out something like the after-life as a dispute, that is not something that can be put to the test and therefore will never have a concrete answer.

I'm an atheist and love science, but the amount of delusional demand in this thread is through the roof.

You realize that being an Atheist means that you Do Not Know and that you throw feeling out the window for evidence, right?

I wouldn't even be able to make a program that tests how much FPS one sensor tracks at compared to another. And that is a known variable.

So you admit fallibility, meaning you accept that your answer may possibly be wrong.

I'm sure most people would be able to tell the difference between a 200 and 6000fps sensor. Yet since there's no program available to test that we should all conclude there is no difference? Moronic.

I can sit here and tell you that I feel no difference between the Zowie I'm currently using and the Ball mouse I used for 18 years when I had clean rollers. Other than the low velocity cap, there's no difference. My AIM was actually better 6 years ago with high sensitivity crazy flick shots than it is now with my Zowie.
That doesn't mean that there isn't a difference.

Clearly intelligence isn't a prerequisite to participate on competitive gaming forums.

If it was, then you wouldn't be posting.

>> Scientific knowledge isn't advanced enough to the point where you can demand evidence for everything.

>Yes it is?

You are so fucking clueless if you believe that.

If it was we wouldn't be making advances every day because we'd already have the means to test and prove everything.

>You realize that being an Atheist means that you Do Not Know and that you throw feeling out the window for evidence, right?

That is a HORRIBLE comparison. A god is something there is zero evidence of. None of our senses can detect one. Mouse performance can be detected by our senses.

>So you admit fallibility, meaning you accept that your answer may possibly be wrong.

No shit sherlock. Even if I had provided empirical proof via a testing program or machine, it would still have a chance of being wrong. That's why peer review and duplicate results/testing are a thing in science.

>If it was, then you wouldn't be posting.

Yeah, you really proved yourself to be qualified to make that kind of judgement with your complete naivety, irrational demands, and horrible logic.


This is the norm in regards to reviews: http://www.twitch.tv/justnvc/b/581050473

3 hours of personal opinion with no evidence to back it up. Yet you don't see people yelling at him to come up with a program or machine to test and empirically prove every claim he makes. The fact that it's happening in this thread is very very peculiar.

He says "why would you buy a rival when you can get a DA 3.5g". The normal reaction to that is to ask him why he thinks the DA is better.

Scientific knowledge isn't advanced enough to the point where you can demand evidence for everything.

it's not the knowledge, it's the method. and, yes, it works like that.

No. It works like that in professional environments, IE: scientists and engineers.

We are simply competitive gamers and do not work in the mouse engineering field. So such demands here are far beyond rational.

So... you need a Ph. D. and a lab to devise and perform an experiment scientifically? Ok. :)

Moreover, why should we listen to him if he's not an expert (his very own argument) and why does he think he is above using data and especially of using a (very basic) method.

>Moreover, why should we listen to him if he's not an expert (his very own argument)

Was it? I missed that.

>and why does he think he is above using data

I never said any such thing. Why are you flat out lying? The behavior of people in this thread is very concerning.

What I said was there is no such method available to collect any scientific data on this issue.

Please if there is one that I'm not aware of enlighten me. So far you've ignored all such requests and simply continue to suggest that I should somehow come up with some kind of data.

>and especially of using a (very basic) method

What method is that?

Nope. There are lots of scientific experiments people can do at home. The one being demanded in this thread isn't one of those.

For the 10th time, if you guys think it's so easy to get scientific data on this issue then please enlighten me on the procedures.

If you can't come up with a simple test to back up your claims, maybe you're not the right person to be reviewing stuff.

Lmao. Exactly. You can't come up with anything because no such thing exists.

Virtually every single review is personal opinion. We're not living in some scientific utopia, as you naive children on here seem to think.

Here's a pro player delivering 4 hours of personal opinion that is never backed up by any scientific proof: http://www.twitch.tv/justnvc/b/581050473

Are you gonna go message him now and tell him to stfu till he can come up with methods to provide scientific data proving everything he states?

You people are hilarious.

Perhaps we are. But you are definitely clueless.

he didn't come here busting balls

As we already told you, he is trustworthy because he is a pro. You are not.

omg they told you several times how to

I must have missed that several times then. Care to enlighten me?

CTRL+F: blind test.

And I responded to them about that a few times.

oh that's strange, i'm an engineer.

No shit sherlock. Even if I had provided empirical proof via a testing program or machine, it would still have a chance of being wrong. That's why peer review and duplicate results/testing are a thing in science.

Then why are you trying so hard to tell us you're right?

When there are no tools available to test the mouse behavior under discussion it comes down to reputation. Some people here don't trust MaximilianKohler's reputation enough as a mouse tester.

I'm a very skeptical person and tend to go with evidence only and I'm aware of the 'argument from authority' logical fallacy. But:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
"An argument from authority, when correctly applied, can be a valid and sometimes essential part of an argument that requests judgement or input from a qualified or expert source. The operation of the common law would be impossible without it, for example."

In other words: there is value in listening to an expert in a certain field, society does it all the time actually.
Some people believe MaximilianKohler has enough expertise in this matter, some don't.

I prefer scientific evidence, but as long as we lack the tools to get said evidence all we have is the opinion of experts.
This does not mean we have to automatically accept everything the experts say as guaranteed 100% correct, but it also means we shouldn't knee-jerk dismiss it right off the bat either.

If there's no scientific evidence available, then at best you can only share anecdotal evidence, not judge mice. That's all you can do, and is why we as a species have developed the scientific method - to avoid people who only use anecdotal evidence to coax others into thinking one truth.

If you think there's smoothing, fine. Other's in this thread disagree there is smoothing. They demanded evidence, you criticize them instead. You're presenting your findings in this thread as though you have evidence that proves your position is absolute. You don't.

You can say you notice something and posit it as a hypothesis towards smoothing, then you can have a discussion. Your opening post sounds like a conclusion rather than a results/discussion section of a paper.
You've found a problem that has no parameters and judged mice based on said parameters. This post would have been better if it asked questions instead of made statements, like ask people what smoothing is to finally get a definition of what the fuck smoothing actually is.

What do you mean, "you people"?

You're totally ignoring a criticism which, to many people, is completely valid. We all know there is no scientific evidence to indicate smoothing, and there won't be until someone cares enough to break out the oscilloscopes and signal generators to do some rigorous testing. The problem with your argument is that you're not doing nearly enough to convince your audience that the conclusions you draw about specific mouses and their sensors are isolated from other factors which will undoubtedly color your subjective observations. What you perceive as smoothing may be a lack of control caused by other factors that nobody is convinced you're even considering.

>What you perceive as smoothing may be a lack of control caused by other factors that nobody is convinced you're even considering.

And I'm perfectly open to having that conversation, but that's not what people have been demanding.

I've had that discussion many times on other forums and in private conversations.

i think it's exactly what people are asking. no one expects you to come with objective tests of the sensor itself. they want you to justify the claim that your subjective experience reflects reality, and aren't just due to placebo/bias.

Cool. I belive in Cyborg Ninja Pirate Jesus too!

Another strawman.

i'm sure you have fun at smelling farts, but i don't.
in other words, you could provide some proofs, which may transform personal feelings into something useful to share.
otherwise, the earth might be plain and the sun would be turning around it.

on a side note, in fact, i'm asking myself why I've got plussed.

There are a whole host of things in every area of life which we don't have the technology to test. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

this thread is about technical devices, maybe it's because of that. or because you keep being cocky since OP.

i'm also asking myself why i'm replying now, probably i'm as retarded as you :D

>you could provide some proofs

NO! NO WE FUCKING CAN'T. No such program or testing gear exists.

you fucking can't

Since your whole argument is about the subjective experience of using the mouse, it's quite easy to design a test. You probably never thought about that though because you seem to be one of those scientifically illiterate people who just take their subjective feelings as definitive proof.

Quite easy my ass.

If it's so easy then I'm sure you'll be able to come up with one in your spare time.

From above:

The only way to do this without measuring tools is by doing a double blind test using the same mouse shell but with different sensors

You really couldn't figure that out on your own?

I've thought about that before.

That couldn't be something I did alone for obvious reasons.

It would have to be other people giving me the mice to test. If there are people willing to buy and take apart mice to do this then of course I'd be willing to participate.

They would have to be in my city though as well...

I'm quite surprised this is even being talked about here though. I can't believe that people are acting like I'm the only one who experiences this phenomena.

Apart from being talked about over the years in the CS competitive gaming community, I've seen it talked about on this site as well.

so you admit there is a test, you just won't do it? so why should people just take your own subjective experiences as fact?

No one has to take my experiences as fact. I've said as much multiple times in this thread.

The blind test would have to be done with other people so they can make sure I'm not cheating/doing it right.

M L T 0 4
L
T
0
4

Doesn't sound as well as

W M O
M
O

But the first one includes the 1.1 and 3.0 :)

I can't use 3 button mice :(

No mention of the Blue Optical, not nerdy enough.

so... wmo is the best... what the reason to check other mice?

What?

The WMO, 1.1, and 3.0 all have the same sensor: the MLT04.

I test other mice because I don't like the shape/grip, buttons, weight of any of the MLT04 mice.

I want a slightly wider FK1 with MLT04 sensor with higher malfunction speed and maybe 800dpi.

Now that's not an MLT04, is it?

the mlt04 is ok, nothing special

I think MLT04 is overrated.
Been using a IE 3.0 for 2 weeks at 500 & 1000hz.
Its not like "wow this sensor is so crazy gud sjit!1!!".
I'm not 100% sure if I can tell it apart from G100s or even Rival.

If you can make the crosshair get to land on the same spot consistently (check Adrens crosshair guide thingy for example), then I dont see how smoothing would effect the player much at all.
So it doesnt really matter.

Besides that, Logitech seem to be the only company who mention smoothing, and thats very positive.
Not to mention they are the best at click latency aswell.

My mouse feels better than your mouse.

That's because I feed my mouse Kaytee Forti-Diet Pro Health Mouse, Rat, & Hamster Food, available at PetCo for $7.99.

I imagine you spending an allnighter brainstorming this gem.

Just ignore the OP.
He trolled Overclock.net for weeks, with massive rants about how the MLT04 is a "God sensor" and completely trashed the G502.

#1:
G502 has NO smoothing. ZERO. Yes there is -some- post processing but every mouse has this these days since they use *processors* (ARM, etc).

#2:
you can't compare different mice that have a different max CPI, when running at something like 400 DPI. While the DPI may be the same, how the mouse reacts to initial movement (which can effect trying to aim at an individual pixel) can be different. G502 and Deathadder 3G seem to react the same (certain amount of movement required is about the same) to start movement left/right at 1800 DPI (I use 1800 since that's native to the s3688 or whatever the 3G DA used). The Black edition is also 1800 native (3.5G) HOWEVER anyone who has both mice can see that the amount of movement required to start left/right sense is much lower on the black edition than on the 3G or G502. *much* lower. Whether this is inherent to the 3.5G sensor or some processing I don't know. The G502 will react just as quickly if you bump it up to 10,000 DPI.

I'm willing to bet anyone $100 that if you put all the mice at 400 DPI (WMO/IE 3.0, DA 3G, Logitech G502, even Black edition), even though I haven't used a IE 3.0 in years (I wish I still had mine...too bad all the 'new' one are Chinese fakes), the IE 3.0 will start initial cursor movement FASTER than the G502 or DA running at the exact same DPI (400). because that is NATIVE to the sensor.

more delusional than troll

Yeah, I'm delusional because you can't tell the difference between mice.

Ramla's delusional too I guess.

youtube.com/user/Ramla777
Ramla777 posted a comment
1 year ago(today is dec 26 2012)
Currently I use the abyssus. I only use the wmo when I play 1.6. It just feels so much more accurate in that game. I use the abyssus for every other game. CS:S Quake COD SC2


And all the other people who can tell the difference are simply delusional.

Your experience is clearly the only valid one.

who the fuck is ramla777 and why is he the only person you can cite? i just looked at his videos and they're literally two minutes of 'i feel i feel i feel i feel' and screenshots of enotus. you're an idiot.

Because I don't screenshot or record every time someone says something.

He just happens to be a well respected tester who has an easily accessible documented statement.

He's the best mouse reviewer I've ever found. The fact that you think he's shit says a lot.

Yeah, you really showed that I'm an idiot with that comment. Great job.

EDIT: Thomz, a former pro CS player, is one of many people who I've came across who's in agreement regarding the MLT04.

sorry, i feel you are an idiot. what about now?

That's an idiotic statement/comparison.

You use your senses to feel differences in things like mice sensors.

You use logical reasoning to determine that someone is unintelligent.

I used my senses in regards to the mice, and you did not use logic in regards to your deduction.

This site seems to be dominated by uneducated children that naively demand unobtainable scientific proof, and "+" comments because "ooh burn!!".

leave then, plz

4 examples of circular reasoning:

a) set one or more fallacious premises.
b) support argument.

NiP members are using:
Rival
Kinzu v2
Xai
Ikari

much smoothing, they can't play.

Allegedly one mouse there has smoothing.

there are worse things than smoothing:

- laser mice
- hardware accel (but some people really like it)

sensei was fine on a glass pad unless I flicked it really hard.

some lasers are very good, but cant be really compared to good optical mice... and surface is more important.

Yes, I know, I was pointing to that.

Another issue with you citing ramla is that he was probably using the 450cpi step on the abyssus in CS which always felt off to me because as far as I remember until very recently you couldn't set your sensitivity lower than 1 in CS 1.6, also IIRC 1800 and 3500 are the native steps which explains why the felt so great.

You are the person who can't tell the difference between mice.

You are only talking about feelings.

every person = different feelings

Whether you call it smoothing or post-processing is immaterial to me.

What we're saying is that you can feel whatever they're doing to their mice. And it's vastly inferior to older mice without it.

I'm pretty sure I saw a number of people like Ino or Skylit tell you you were wrong about your deadzone theories in #2.

When I tested mice I used them at their native DPI anyway.

I have used a WMO at 500hz, and I have used a G502, both very responsive, now the thing is I don't hail the WMO as the most responsive thing I've ever used.

As far as I'm concerned the Salmosa, the MX518, and the G9 stand on that pedestal G502 being pretty close if not up there.

Notice all those mice have prediction, or even slight in the case of the G502, G502 also has horrendously high friction and a perfectly centered sensor or rather you have to make sure not to pivot to get any accurate idea of responsiveness when comparing the mouse to a WMO which has a further forward sensor.

I have used a G400s which I could not stand, and am using a G400 rev.2 at the moment, and there is definitely something off about the G400s.

On another note I have used the CM Alcor which has coolermaster's own variation of the 4000CPI SROM which I'd say performs better than what's on the G400s.

Yeah. Salmosa is pretty awesome.

Best thing ever imo, though I never got to try a mx300 :<.

Using MX300 now. :>

FAK U LOLIDOLAN

Bought it in really good condition for 10 EUR (shipment included).

))

I know.

After I just told you. : D

You told me sometime ago too.

Don't remember. I mean I remember mentioning it in some thread quite a while ago, but that's it.


Anyways, try to get one. It's more than nice, even on 125 Hz.
On 500 Hz, it's a completely different mouse (in a positive way) - however I was not able to perform a successful USB hack with it on Win 7 x64 SP1.


My top 3:

1. MX300
2. Kinzu v1
3. Salmosa
+1: G100s, just the build quality..

I HAVE PUSHED A BUTTON AND IT STOPPED WORKING FUCK























scratch that, I pushed power button in PC.

with all this attention you pay toward your mice, you must have really good aim. 1v1 awp cs 1.6?

I'm actually on disability because of chronic fatigue. It effects my ability to do everything, including CS. I went from being called a hacker by everyone and kicked off multiple main teams because my own team thought I was cheating, to being called a shitty aimer.

I'd be happy to 1v1 you in aim and awp maps sometime when I'm feeling good enough, but I never know when that is. It's gotten rarer and rarer over the years.

So you are testing things only by personal feel when you don't play any game at any decent level, let alone compete at it?

Well that pretty much sums up all youtube reviews of everything.

No, I was a high level 1.6 player. And I kept playing up until recently despite my worsening condition. But why would my current condition affect any of my previous experience and expertise in regards to testing mice?

I agree that sums up most youtube reviews, but that's not what my case is, and in fact that is the reason I started my reviews.

Because, as daytripper said, if you are going to only provide personal subjective experience then you have to be an expert on the field. So, if you acknowledge to suck at games and also that you don't know the basics of testing...stuff, then you are not qualified to do the testing; that without providing proof of your findings.

That's silly.

First of all, IMO competitive gamers are probably better at testing products than experts in the field, IE: engineers. Proof of this should be apparent when looking at all the terrible gaming mice that have came out in the past 10 years that have major flaws.

Secondly, if you're referring to professional players as the "experts", I disagree with that sentiment. There are lots of professional gamers who use horrible mice and/or have much less knowledge than high-level but non-pro gamers.

One reason is that those people either have more natural skill than others, or had the connections to get in a pro team, or have some element like slightly better aim or communication or teamwork or game knowledge that is enough to get them on a pro team. But ultimately they never come across the need to do research and testing, so they end up not knowing as much about technical things when compared to other high-level competitive players who have done the research and testing because in order to try and boost themselves to the pro level.

Thirdly, pretty much everyone on every forum provides personal subjective experience. The fact that this is being overwhelmingly demanded of me all of a sudden seems absurd.

Fourthly, I didn't say I suck at games or that I don't know the basics of testing. I've been a high level 1.6 for many years. I used to give paid lessons when the game was active. I still do very well considering my condition. I'm currently rank 5 masters in SC2. What I was trying to say is that I'm nowhere near my potential and a lot of the time I can't play at all. This, along with being brushed off as a cheater in my earlier days has prevented me from playing at a pro level. Regardless, I sent him my steam info earlier to 1v1.

You wouldn't brush off input from Michael Jordan just because he's retired now and can't play at the level he used to.

You can see my CS movies here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZ2riV...ViqMCxYOhN

I would be more than happy to have a way to provide hard data and proof. But there is no such method available.

I disagreed with experts on String Theory and I only know the most basic Calculus.
Guess who won that battle!

No, I would not take Michael Jordan's word that a basketball smoothing effect.

Comparing yourself to Micheal Jordan? "High Level CS 1.6 player"?

I stalked you a bit and from your 2nd Cs vid (sick cs vid br0) I found you tagged as versadex. Maxifuckyourname. Google led me to this

Team: versadex, League: Intermediate, Event: Season 13, Game: Counter-Strike 1.6.

Intermediate in CEVO eh? Alright, danG you're good. Not even main let alone Professional but let's not mince words, you're in fucking CEVO man. Let's ignore the fact that 90% of those frag videos are random pub stomps (that kill on keyboardjizzstain as he casually misses you while standing still, man, what a stressful, high level game that was!) I think it'd probably be best to ignore the papyrus font, 11 year old style of editing in Windows Movie Maker on XP, and atrocious music choice across the board as well.

Also probably best to just ignore you, too.

The comparison wasn't with michael jordan. The comparison was with someone who has previous experience and expertise in a field.

You don't lose all credibility in a field you excelled in as soon as you retire. In fact, that's usually the time people respect your opinion the most, IE: become coaches, etc..

Yeah because people only play on one team their entire lives right?

Everyone who's professional, or in invite or main all started out there right?

Fucking morons everywhere.

What the fuck is wrong with you people. This place is a cess pool...

After following the BST threads clearly my expectations of the people on this website were way overblown.

Just kill yourself : )

After following the BST threads clearly my expectations of the people on this website were way overblown.

guess you didn't fell it right :(((

This place is a cess pool...

"Where gaming meets reality"

So what are your credentials to say you were a "high level 1.6 player for many years" and comparing yourself to motherfucking Michael Jordan, when it comes to having former expertize?

Provide major LANs you have won and the like; actual achievements instead of huge paragraphs that say nothing.

Put yourself in our perspective. We are reading how someone that doesn't play quake at all (this in a quake site) says he was beyond awesome at X game unrelated to quake, without any proof of that whatsoever and happens to claim he has this medical condition that made him lost all his skill so he cannot prove it today. Great. Also, somebody already discredited you.

I feel you and your feeling tests suck.

I don't know at what level he used to play, and I'm not interested in this debate anyway, but I'm pretty sure I remember him posting quite often on GotFrag several years ago, including in a thread discussing Obama's Affordable Care Act and how it would cover (I think) his medical condition - so that part's true ,-)

Despite the fact that I already explained the comparison is not with Micheal Jordan, but with someone who excels in a field and then retires, you ignore that and insist that I'm saying I'm the Michael Jordan of CS?

Why even participate in a conversation with such willfully obtuse and belligerent individuals?

We're talking about mice here, not quake. And that person who I gave my steam info to 1v1 hasn't added me.

Even though I've known about this site since the 2007 mousescore, I haven't participated because I don't play quake much. I followed the BST threads because they are relevant to my interests, and are related to the topic of this thread.

The MLT04 mice seem to shine especially in CS 1.6, but I know I've seen it talked about on this site as well. It's pretty curious to me that most people are acting like this is news to them.

I never played on the professional level or won any lans. I could list all the teams I've been on but since this is a primarily quake site no one would probably recognize them, and since IRC is dead and most of the old 1.6 players don't play anymore no one would be able to confirm or deny. So it's pointless to discuss.

No one "already discredited me". I responded to his ridiculous statement and you again chose to ignore it.

Naturally, anyone is free to agree or disagree with other's experiences with mice.

Stop dodging the question, rofl.

So no achievements then, not even at low level? Nothing at all, heck not even competing?

Okay, so you don't provide any data of your claims, then what you do is not reproducible and finally we have to blindly trust in your "feeling" and in yourself. I see. After that, you said that we should trust in your "feelings" because at one point you allegedly were stupidly good at one game, but in reality in your so called prime you didn't even play competitively, let alone have good results, which means you sucked and continue to suck.

Again, put yourself in our position. To us you look like yet another stupid (1) noob (2) that doesn't play quake (3) coming to ESR.

>and finally we have to blindly trust in your "feeling" and in yourself.

Nope. Not at all. I've said over and over everyone is obviously free to test mice and form their own opinions. I don't understand why you feel like I'm your mother demanding you go to bed... Virtually every single review of any product is almost entirely unscientific personal opinion based off of their experience. Such as this: http://www.twitch.tv/justnvc/b/581050473

>but in reality in your so called prime you didn't even play competitively, let alone have good results, which means you sucked and continue to suck.

Really? I said that? I think you're getting confused. You keep making stuff up.


This is my experience:
avelis - cal main central, terrorized - cevo main central, mousewarmers - cevo main central, nerv - cevo main central, method - old cal-i players central, intex - cevo main central, a team with RUDY and friends in esea main west, LTD - esea main west/cent, devastation - old cal-i players. BMW - cevo main west - they got 6 matches overturned due to cheating, I came in with new players and took them to 10-6 before the team died from inactivity. Many o&im teams, and plenty of pug/tournament teams with main/invite people, studied the game & gave/give paid lessons for years. I made guide videos for competitive 1.6 which are on my youtube channel, along with my CS movies.

Again, not that there is any way to prove it since the game is dead and all the players are gone.

Does any of those acronyms mean you went to a lan and did well or not

Nope. And I said as much in an earlier comment.

I also explained why that's a really terrible qualifier.

I don't follow quake closely enough to know who this guy is: http://www.twitch.tv/l1nkinql/b/553118942 but other people said he's known/good/respected, and he was totally clueless in his testing.

I've seen a lot of CS 1.6 pros say some really really stupid, uninsightful things about 1.6 vs CSGO that showed a really low level of care and analysis. After CGS, watching the US pro scene was like watching cal-o teams pug matches with slightly better aim, game knowledge, and teamwork.

Many/most pros are people who just happened to have all the right pieces in the right place at the right time. Unlike high level, non-pros who had to take time researching and testing in order to boost their skills as much as possible.

Pros also use terrible products and won't say anything negative about them because of sponsorships.

So much for you being a "highly skilled player" then.

That's total rubbish. I was better than lots of people who've done well at lans. My health, poverty, and difficulty finding stable teams because of people calling me a cheater, prevented me from attending and winning lans.

If you didn't compete then there's no way to know you were any good, therefore you never were a highly skilled player, even less so an expert.

Online and public servers do not count at all. You are saying you were as good as Michael Jordan....while playing in a public court .... against 80 year old retired white people.....in which even there you had 0 achievements (see all above posts from others and from yourself even).

holy shit he never said he was as good as michael jordan you fucking mongoloid.

Bro.. I don't know how it is in quake but in counter-strike we have online leagues. Big ones. That is the vast majority of the competitive community. Not lans.

A small percentage of the competitive CS community goes to lans.

>You are saying you were as good as Michael Jordan

Dude, I clarified this like 3 times already. I'M NOT SAYING I'M THE MICHEAL JORDAN OF COUNTER-STRIKE. I said that when someone who has long time experience and high-level expertise retires, they don't all of a sudden lose all credibility. And I used Micheal Jordan as an example.

Many/most pros are people who just happened to have all the right pieces in the right place at the right time. Unlike high level, non-pros who had to take time researching and testing in order to boost their skills as much as possible.

Pros also use terrible products and won't say anything negative about them because of sponsorships.

the fact that you believe that 'to have the right pieces in the right place' makes or brakes a progaming career is very telling ;)

see, those guys were better than the rest (including you) despite having a non-perfect setup and not caring about it. that obviously means the equipment used doesn't make as much of a difference as you seem to believe.

linkin is one of the top tdm/ctf quake players who happens (according to you atleast) to know next to nothing about 'mouse testing'. that just proves my point, doesn't it? he's good despite not caring/having a clue about hardware.

How does that prove your point? That's my point exactly...

These people are naturally better, thus they don't research and test as much (or at all) as others who aren't pros and who are trying to push themselves to that level.

So being a pro doesn't automatically qualify someone to comment on technical matters.

And how are you more qualified than them?

1. You are a way worse player.
2. Your tests are as bad if not worse than theirs.
3. This very thread proves you are not a technical expert by any means. People already proved you wrong on that matter (see h0m0's posts).

Because I've been testing and researching mice for 10 years. You don't need to be a professional player in order to analyze mice...

Being a high-level competitive player for 10 years while researching and testing mice, more than qualifies.

I ctrl+f'd "h0m0" and there is no one.

EDIT: obviously there are lots of people who have high technical knowledge but they can't seem to detect major flaws in their own products. Or they can but simply don't care.

It seems like competitive gamers, IE: people who spend thousands of hours competing in a game, are the ones more able to detect flaws.

h8m3*

true, it does not, but that leaves you with no qualification at all :p

What's funny is that until recently you couldn't use some mice like the DA 3G and the Abyssus 3.5G at their native DPI settings in CS, unless you wanted 22cm/360 that is...

Why's that?

450DPI was always the worst step on those mice.

You could use them on native dpi with 3/11 or 4/11 windows.

Lack of raw input in CS at the time, IIRC this was fixed recently, either way even if you had raw input changing windows slider sens would have no effect, also the mouse would perform worse with lower windows sens.

>also the mouse would perform worse with lower windows sens

Worse in what way? There were tons of people (including pro players like frod) who would use 1600 or 1800 dpi mice with 3/11 or 4/11 windows.

It's the settings above 6/11 which are bad. Not the ones below (except 5/11): http://mousespeed.net/sc2-mouse-optimization

For example, say you are using 3/11. Your windows multiplier is 0.25. If you move the mouse by one pixel constantly for 3 counts, 3 * 0.25 = 0.75, and the pointer is not moved at all. You then move another 2 counts, and 2 * 0.25 = 0.5 + the 0.75 from last time = 1.25. Now the pointer moves by 1. This happens because when Windows applies the scaling factor, it can only pass through to the game a whole (integer) number of mouse movement and it holds back or delays a remainder which is added into the next movement.

Taken from : http://www.funender.com/quake/mouse/index.html

From my experience it felt weird.

Again saying they played with this means nothing, it's not like people are not playing with DA2013s these days right?

sorry but, killing random annonymous players not make you michael jordan

i've been on pro competitive cenario for so long time.. and i played 3 majors already.

who is good dont tell people like that.

you can be expert in other stuff, but high level in 1.6 you arent
play well. but not expert

Dont listen to him. He is playing crap games, like CS!

Quake is the only great game ever made?

Depends.

I'd argue that CS is boring as hell, but, oh wait, that's plain subjective.

I see what you did there. :)

only Reflex.

What's only reflex?

http://reflexfps.net/

So you're saying both CS and quake are crap games and only Reflex is a great game?

ofc













not... just trolling.

Not the only great game, but without a doubt the greatest game made.

about this whole smoothing thing: perhaps it is possible to measure.

i have been measuring input lag by colliding an unwired mouse into my g100s and recording videos at 1000fps. example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IA0T_o9qQVc

if you look frame by frame, it's pretty evident that the g100s reaches its maximum speed essentially instantaneously (~1ms or less). this owes to the rigidity of the plastic shells of the mice; if i used a rubber ball or something soft to hit the g100s, the transfer of momentum would occur over a much longer timescale.

by looking at a mouse's raw output and plotting vs time, it may be possible to detect smoothing

see this diagram for what I mean:
http://i.imgur.com/zQ2Xrxl.png

here is a real plot with MouseTester. i held down mouse1 lightly while slamming another mouse onto the g100s' side.
http://i.imgur.com/YWf113k.png

it's not perfect though as the mouse could malfunction during the impact. for example, my logitech m100 (a serious piece of shit) shows the following in mousetester:

http://i.imgur.com/L2QSh6i.png

You should set an equal poll rate for both mice, the plots are hard to compare as it is...

Edit: In theory, the higher the polling rate (and CPI, depending on the mouse), the easier it'll be to see if there is some kind of smoothing going on or not.

i didn't mean for anyone to compare those two plots like that... just wanted to show that some sensors malfunction when the impact is too violent

The so-called 'smoothing' is essentially a framerate dependent internal low-pass filter which does not delay the most part of the motion. The filtering itself is exponential meaning only a few percent of the motion might get delayed for the next usb poll depending on the actual acceleration, which is fairly low in gaming conditions due to overall high inertia of the mouse motion

i understand. that diagram of a smoothed sensor's response is quite exaggerated.

in any event, if only a few percent of motion contributes to the data in the next usb poll for a polling rate of 500hz, it shouldn't at all be problematic as the characteristic timescale of the whatever fir filter is used is <2ms. how anyone would be able to feel that in a game is beyond me.

it's more likely that the mic with problematic smoothing have filters that have much longer durations... maybe 4ms or so. such a situation would be easily identifiable in mousetester

imo smoothing is a small delay in cursor movement. (?)

3366/3310/3090/ seems to dont have it.

there's is no 'in my opinion' in this case. they either have 'smoothing' or they do not. (hint: the answer is most likely yes, they do :)

maybe. still I don't know that whole 'smoothing' thing is wrong or not. They are way more wore factors than it ;p

'imo' was only about descrption what smoothing is.

could you let me know of a mouse which has significant smoothing? I'd like to test one and see if I can find anything which corresponds to significant filtering or whatever

http://www.overclock.net/t/1440395/avago-3090...na-v2/0_50

this guy is an idiot, 3090 is very bad example of smoothing...

I don't know what mouse. Never noticed it.

The A3090 is, in my opinion, one of the BEST example cases for studying "smoothing," partly because it is one of the most discussed, and also because we have possibly the best pair of devices to use in comparison for this purpose: the Logitech G400 and the Logitech G400S – both run the A3090 sensor, with the former running the older 3500 DPI SROM, and the latter running the newer 4000 DPI SROM. AFAIK, the two mice are nearly identical in every other way. Switching between these two mice on 800 DPI @ 1000 Hz in osu! I can absolutely perceive a difference in sensor tracking latency (read: input lag.) The difference is extremely subtle, to the point where I believe it would not be perceptible to most users, but it is there.

I caution users here in being so dismissive of this issue. I am sure many of you are familiar with the user Skylit, who frequents both this board and OCN. I think most people will agree that he is extremely respected and knowledgeable. Nearly every single post of his that I read is filled with highly technical knowledge, to the point where most of it goes over my head. He is always level-headed and always stays on-topic and discusses the issue at hand in as objective a manner as possible. I have never seen him get into a personal quibble with anyone or call anyone names. I think most of us can agree that Skylit does not talk out of his ass, does not say things just for attention, and clearly has immense knowledge on gaming mice through years of technical study of these devices on the component level. I have seen you, H1ghlander, yourself offering him words of praise for his knowledge elsewhere on this board. Here are his very words from the first page of that A3090 "Smoothing" thread from OCN:

"I would like to clarify that most will not have an issue with the 4k DPI A3090 SROM. [...] Smoothing might not be the best term (not really what's happening), but I suppose that best explains it in a coined fashion."

There are three takeaways from Skylit's statements here:

1. He is acknowledging that the phenomenon exists.
2. "Smoothing" is a terrible fucking term for it.
3. In the case of the A3090 SROM revision, most users will not be able to perceive a difference.

I wholeheartedly agree with all three conclusions.

If I were to (to the best of my ability) define the phenomenon referred to as "smoothing," it would be: the increasingly aggressive amounts of post-processing gaming mice manufacturers are adding to their sensor SROMs in an effort to keep up with the DPI arms race. This can result in unintended side-effects, such as increased sensor tracking latency.

Great post really.
But imo A3090 (without smoothing) is good to study "smoothing" in comparison... to mice which got high amount of "smoothing".

I think people who tried A3090 can feel better 'smoothing' in other mice.

But somebody asked for mouse with significant smoothing. Imo 3090 is not good example. A3090 seems to don't have smeething.

I had Kana v2 with A3090 and it was fine, but above 1600dpi it was unplayable, interpolated, low max speed, etc. 800 and 1600 dpi were fine. If some mouse cant wrk with high dpi it doesnt means its a bad mouse.

Also now im confused with terms, but G400 got prediction, G400s doesn't. And prediction is something different than smoothing.

Only some Razer mice and 3310 and 3366 can be used above 2000 dpi

Some early G400 models have prediction, most do not.

first revision was A3080E sensor, followed by S3095

This is correct. I was generalizing when I said "A3090" and was referring to the entire "family" of devices based on this sensor design/architecture.

To be more specific, A3090-based devices can be divided into a few different categories based on who designed the particular version of the sensor used. These categories can then be further subdivided between first-revision and second-revision SROMs.

First-revision SROMs have only two native steps, 1800 and 3500 DPI, although the 3500 DPI step generally performs extremely poorly. There are two exceptions to this: 2300 DPI Zowie products, and the Logitech proprietary version of the first-revision A3090. Both of these use custom lenses to modify tracking counts and lift-off distance (the sensor itself is still running at the two native steps, but the modified lens design causes it to track at a different real-world counts.) The details of the Logitech version can be found in the section labeled "C1."

Second-revision SROMs (which I referred to colloquially as the "4000 DPI A3090" in my original post) use more aggressive "smoothing" algorithms to attain higher maximum DPI numbers. In my personal experience, all devices in this category exhibit increased sensor latency / delay / lag; I have yet to come across a second-revision SROM device that does not exhibit this characteristic. (Ex. Remember all the notorious "smoothing" posts that appeared when the DeathAdder 2013 was first released?) My conclusion is that the "smoothing" is contained within the SROM. The SROM is the lowest-level and most-immediate processor in the input chain that first receives and manipulates the raw data coming from the sensor. In the A3090 design, it is not something that the manufacturer has access to or can modify (some later Avago designs allow for the manufacturer to make changes to the SROM through firmware flashes, although I am not aware of any that have utilized this feature.) Thus, the "smoothing" / latency / delay / lag is inherent to the design itself, and is not something that can be reduced, removed, or eliminated. This is why it is my opinion that the A3090 family of devices are one of the best cases for studying the "smoothing" phenomenon, because the two different SROM revisions exhibit such consistent behavior in this regard. The second-revision SROM also brought many more native DPI steps at 400 / 800 / 1600 / 2000 / 3200 / 4000.

Here's how I would categorize various A3090-based designs:

A1. The Razer proprietary version of the A3090, designated S3888. Used in the DeathAdder 3.5G and Abyssus 3.5G.
A2. The second-revision SROM of the Razer design, designated S3988. Found in the DeathAdder 2013, Krait 2013, and most recently, the DeathAdder Chroma. (These devices are nicknamed the "DeathAdder 4G" and "Krait 4G" on many forums—even though they support max DPI settings above 4000 DPI—because this is essentially Razer's version of the "4000 DPI" A3090 SROM.)

B1. The "actual" A3090. This is the version of the sensor intended for the open market. All 2300 DPI Zowie products (EC, AM, and FK) use this design, albeit with a modified lens which changes the real-world DPI steps. I am actually not familiar with any other products that use this particular design as the second-revision SROM was vastly more popular. I am sure others exist, but I have no personal experience with them.
B2. The second-revision SROM of the open market A3090. This is by far the most popular version; when most people hear A3090, this is probably what they're thinking of. In fact, I believe this is the most-used sensor design in gaming mouse history in terms of the sheer variety of different products that have used it. Used in such products as: Roccat Savu, Kone Pure Optical; SteelSeries Kana v2; CM Storm Alcor, Recon, Xornet; Corsair M40; and many others.

C1. The Logitech proprietary version of the A3090, designated S3095. This was used in the "second generation" of the Logitech G400 (the ones without prediction.) Rumor has it, the actual A3090 design itself was a collaboration by Logitech and Avago, with the "A3090" designation going to the open market version. The S3095 uses a custom lens assembly which modifies the 1800 DPI native step to 800 DPI, hence why this particular product has different native steps of 800 DPI and 3500 DPI. The G400 also tends to have a lower lift-off distance than most other A3090-based products, again due to the modified lens. AFAIK, the "second generation" Logitech G400 was the only mouse ever produced using this design.
C2. The Logitech G400S uses a second-revision A3090-based design, but is curiously still designated S3095. It inherits all the characteristics of the second-revision SROM: native steps from 400 - 4000 DPI, and increased "smoothing" / latency / delay / lag. I am skeptical as to whether this product actually uses any proprietary Logitech design at all, as it behaves pretty much identically to devices in the "B2" category. The native steps being identical to other second-revision A3090 designs leads me to believe that there is no custom lens action going on here, though I haven't compared the lift-off distance on this product to the "B2" category of products. My inkling is that the G400S actually just uses a normal second-revision A3090 design and that Logitech simply got lazy with their designations, but I haven't taken the time to confirm this hunch (nor do I really have the technical knowledge or ability, to be quite honest.) Then again, based on their previous design history with gaming mice, Logitech doesn't really seem like the type of company to get lazy in an area like this. Until someone with more technical knowledge on this product has a say, it's all just personal speculation on my part.

Based on my experience, a good rule of thumb to follow when trying to determine the SROM revision of an A3090-based device is to look at the maximum-supported DPI. If the max DPI is 3500 or lower, it is a first-revision SROM. If the max DPI is higher than 3500, it is a second-revision SROM. I have yet to find an A3090-based mouse that does not exhibit this characteristic.

A correction for my statements on the second-revision "native" steps: According to a post by Skylit that I read elsewhere, the second-revision A3090 doesn't exactly have "native" steps and will perform identically at any supported DPI setting. The 400 / 800 / 1600 / 2000 / 3200 / 4000 DPI steps I listed were simply the ones most commonly chosen defaults by manufacturers for driverless configurations. The confusion arose from the fact that I prefer to use only driverless configurations—many software drivers will inject themselves into the data chain and interpolate/modify tracking negatively. While the sensor will technically perform at any supported DPI setting, non-default steps can only be attained on some devices via software drivers. I thus incorrectly assumed that the popular default steps were the "native" steps for the second-revision sensor. If you have a second-revision A3090-based device that supports driverless configurations via on-board memory—such as the DeathAdder 2013 or Roccat Kone Pure Optical—your device should perform just fine on any supported DPI setting.

sorry, but so many things are wrong there.

A2: the sensors of the newest line of mice from razer are not related to the A3090 anymore, and therefore what you wrote before about the all DPI-steps are native now, relate only to this different sensor, and never to the A3090.

B1: Xornet uses the A3050 sensor, you might have meant the Spawn, which uses the A3090 but with horrible firmwares.

C1: the G400 does use a custom lens, but it has the same magnification as the Avago lens, and therefore the 800DPI setting is not an altered 1800DPI sensorwise(if this was the case, what would that mean to the 3500DPI/4000DPI setting?).

C2: the G400S uses the same lens as the G400, and the difference lies in the SROM in the same relation like with the 3500-/4000DPI SROM's.

Thank you for the corrections. My categorization of the devices are generalizations based on a combination of my personal experience and things I have read in places like this. It is all anecdotal and based entirely on my memory and judgement. I guess I should have prefaced my posts by saying that I do not have the immense bank of technical knowledge on the inner-workings of these devices as some others who frequent these boards do. I absolutely appreciate the input.

the sensors of the newest line of mice from razer are not related to the A3090 anymore

That is odd since Razer still designates it as the S3988.

[...]and therefore what you wrote before about the all DPI-steps are native now, relate only to this different sensor, and never to the A3090.

This directly contradicts what Skylit has said elsewhere on this forum:

Sensors like 3060/3080/3090 derive from an older architecture with limited DSP scaling. Limited resolution was previously combated by having a mcu interpolate or drop counts. In comparison to real CPI, the alternative values would feel off or show other irregularities such as speed loss at lower value (DA) .. hence the whole "native" hype.

3090 later got updated to a point where it could switch between sets of registries and the above was no longer a critical issue.

I made my correction post about the second-revision A3090 SROM based on a different post by Skylit on OCN—I looked again, but I can't seem to find it now; my memory is quite shit. :( In it, he basically said that the DeathAdder 2013 was no longer limited to the native steps of the previous generation DeathAdder 3.5G and would perform just fine at any supported DPI setting. Skylit's statements in these two posts corroborate what I was saying about the second-revision A3090 in my "correction" post.

the G400 does use a custom lens, but it has the same magnification as the Avago lens, and therefore the 800DPI setting is not an altered 1800DPI sensorwise(if this was the case, what would that mean to the 3500DPI/4000DPI setting?).

This is interesting. Do you know how/why then the G400 uses 800 DPI as a native step when no other first-revision SROM A3090-based device does? I mentioned the rumor that the A3090 design itself was actually co-designed by Logitech; perhaps this has something to do with it—maybe Logitech was able to make modifications to their custom S3095 design at a much lower level than any other manufacturer, such as being able to modify the SROM itself.

the G400S uses the same lens as the G400, and the difference lies in the SROM in the same relation like with the 3500-/4000DPI SROM's.

Thanks for the clarification.

I think you're confused about S3988, its not an enhancement of S3888, they're different.

All the steps on A3090 are "native", so on the 4000 DPI SROM its 800/1600/3200/4000. But you could add via the MCU a lot more steps, by playing with the counts. But the end user may not know what counts are added by the MCU, so thats why people want to know what the native steps are.

But even so, on the 4000 DPI SROM, the 800 DPI step performs the best.

I don't know what Skylit means by saying the 3090 got updated to a point where it could switch between sets of registries, I never saw an A3090 with lots of DPI steps that weren't calculated by the MCU. Anyway if its true, no one told me :( I saw it only on the newer optical sensors like 3310 and S3988.

I see! Much thanks to both of you for the corrections.

bst, could I get your opinion on something? I am part of the unfortunate minority who can perceive the latency difference between the first and second-revision A3090 SROMs. In your opinion, how does the 3310 stack up against these two in this regard?

I have a G400 rev 2, Aurora, and FK1, I don't notice any latency differences between them.

Is there a specific moment when you notice it? Eg: fast swipes or slow movement?

Both.

I'm not a quake player, but in CS 1.6 it's extremely noticeable for me with the FK1.

When making fast swipes (IE: flick shots, trying to headshot) it feels like the crosshair is only moved in the general direction, rather than precisely at the head - like it feels with my 3.0.

Then it's noticeable too when trying to make smaller, precise adjustments.

I don't know if you have CS 1.6, but for example, I was playing CT side on de_dust2 holding an angle towards tunnels from close up in the B site, and it was very apparent when trying to make small, quick adjustments to headshot people running out.


The problem I think why many people don't notice it is that it takes a certain level of skill and experience with a sensor like the MLT04, so that the person testing is at the point where they can depend on their personal skill/accuracy. I can see how someone who's only a mediocre player wouldn't be able to tell the difference between themselves missing and the mouse being inaccurate.

Also if anyone plays a game with accel on, that would probably completely nullify their ability to tell a difference.

I should have been more specific: I was more asking for your opinion based on your technical knowledge of these sensors rather than your personal experience using the actual devices built on them—I understand that the difference is not perceptible to most.

The difference is so subtle, I don't know if I can pin it down to a specific moment. Unlike Max, I am not a hardcore FPS player. The game I find most useful for gauging these things is the rhythm game osu! To play well in that game, the most efficient movements are to complete an action, and then wait until the last possible moment before moving the cursor to the next action. For example, say there is a slider on the left side of the screen, and the next action after it is a hit bubble on the right side of the screen that must be struck one second after the slider has been completed. I will complete the slider, and then my cursor will remain where it is as the timer is ticking down to the hit bubble. I will then move my cursor over to the bubble and strike it at the last possible moment. Of course, the timing and speed for each individual action differs based on the amount of time between actions and the distance required to get there. Using movements like these make it easier for hand-eye coordination because you are combining cursor movement and click timing into one synchronized movement instead of dealing with them as two individual movements that must be timed independently—most beginners will move their cursor to the next event early and will then wait until it is time to click. I suppose this type of movement would analogous to a "flick shot" in FPS games.

To answer your question, I cannot say I know if the latency manifests more with one type of movement as I never really paid attention to it at that detailed of a level. To be honest, I do not even know if I would be able to differentiate at that kind of a detailed level since the latency itself is barely perceptible to me to begin with. I suppose I can put some sessions in later and see if I can. I will say that my game-play style caters to fast, abrupt movements.

As an aside, I grew up surrounded by friends who played Super Smash Bros. Melee competitively. I frequently attended tournaments, and even traveled with friends out-of-state to large nationals. I never competed seriously, but having my ass handed to me regularly by those who did has resulted in my being quite a bit more skilled than most non-competitive players. Anyone who is familiar with competitive fighters will know how picky the players are about what kind of display is being used. The reason for this is that using a non-HD console on an LCD-panel television will introduce extreme amounts of latency. I believe growing up with such an experience has made me more sensitive to latency than most.

oldest 9800 implementations

Regarding the mlt04 vs g502 sensor debate, this is the only thing i think may be influenced by placebo. This is because of the sensor position like others have stated. Most people consider the da 3g, g502, and wmo to be the no smoothing mices. I would like these people to test BST's mouse for smoothing. If they say it has no smoothing i would like to see the people claiming that the mlt04 is the only no smoothing mouse to test BST's sensor inside a wmo.This will show whether or not it is affected by sensor position.

(ok, maybe not prove 100% but it's the best damn proof we can get until somebody OCD enough figures out a way to test for smoothing)

mlt04 has a simple architecture and DSP which doesn't allow any cpi scaling, therefore cause of simplistic algorithm which doesn't perform additional operations with frames it's behavior feels the most 'analog', it's not cause of some smoothing these OCD people tend to feel everywhere.

You mean maximilian waa wrong and has ocd? Who would have thought.

Why are you so biased? He pretty much agreed with me, with the exception that it shouldn't be referred to as "smoothing".

Hey bro (megaman3), I've read this thread and I think you're a big fucking jerk. Seriously dude, just shut up and let people discuss whatever topic they feel like. This is a niche gaming site where discussion of shit that would normally be considered "OCD" ought to be take place. Why don't you go over to IGN forum or something instead of trolling someone who wants to have a civil discussion?

TL;DR -- If you have nothing to contribute, go fuck a donkey or something.

well they aren't far too off if what you mean by more analog is less input lag. Like for e.g. less smoothing = less input lag but less input lag doesn't = less smoothing. So i get dissapointed when i see a site like esr that proclaims itself as hardcore community mock people over these stuff.

EDIT: Although i do agree people are making way too big of a fuss over these stuff. But my point is they aren't all crazy or affected by placebo. Also now that i think about it the sensor fps could have something to do with it as well since i'm pretty sure the 3366 has less fps than the mlt04. I don't know about the da 3g tho. Could have something to do with mlt04's internal mcu too.

it's not straight input lag, 90-99%(depending on acceleration) movement is instant, the rest is accumulated and exponentionally added throughout the next polls

Yeah... anyone who thinks a competitive gamer that spends thousands of hours competing in a specific game wouldn't be able to recognize a 10% margin of artificial movement shouldn't be making gaming mice. Because the difference is quite apparent.

Are you an engineer in the gaming mouse industry? Because your statement pretty much concluded what a lot of people have been saying: that gaming mouse manufacturers have been trading sensor performance for higher max DPI numbers.

difference is negligible, especially on proper sensors like 3366, N1303T and so on. It's not a cpi race, you dont want the mouse to only work on one specific dpi mode or one specific surface.Also 8k+ monitors is already the near future and absolute majority will not be able to use <2K cpi mice when they come. Anyway you still are free to use mlt04 mice if you want, if you are so picky what's the fucking problem

The problem is the shape, weight, and grip are bad for me. Since windows 8 we don't have a program to overclock to 500hz, so we need that to come built in.

They also have the scroll wheel bug where it doesn't go all the way and then randomly clicks on its own.

800dpi would be nice to have as long as it didn't hinder sensor performance.

The mice are also getting hard to find.

The difference between the MLT04 and 3366 is definitely not negligible for me.

You're really jumping the curb with the 8k monitors... The vast majority of people probably use 1080p and probably still will for the next few years. Even though 4k is available only very rich people use those.

The point is having a dpi above 1200 isn't really useless anymore, and having higher dpi values will become more and more useful as the years go by.

it is useless. from other thread:

"800-1000 dpi is going to be way more than enough for a long time. 6/11 1000 dpi @ 1440p is 6.5~ cm to move the cursor from the left edge of the monitor to the right, at 4k it's 9.6~ cm."

and the increase in horizontal resolution from 4k to 8k is 50% instead of 66% from 1440p to 4k, which means 11.6 cm to go from edge to edge.

I guess I'm one of those odd people who like 1200dpi at 1080p

you're not :) i like 1500+dpi for desktop use with 1080p, eventhough i play at 1000dpi.

1750 dpi is nearly unusable at 1080p, imo. it's slightly more bearable at 1440p. 800~ feels the best.

yes, for you it may be. not for me, not for everyone out there.

My point exactly.

to be fair, all the posts haranguing him for not being a pro-gamer are equally as dumb as his subjective 'testing'

it's not about him not being a pro but him saying he's better_than_y'all_they_call_me_cheater_so_I_couldn't_compete_at_high_level_now_ima_sick_so_i_cant_play

funny thing...

when Im sick I can usually play more than normal :P

maybe he doesn't have hands? Maybe he need bionic arm?

It ain't any flu it's wrist ebola.

omg

he is nazi negro!

Purely statistical study to determine differences between sensor X and Y:
1. Get let's say, 10 players. Ideally they're exact clones of each other, roughly equal skill, have the same mouse preferences etc...
2. Get 10 mice and give them to the players. 5 of them have the X sensor, 5 of them the Y sensor. In every other regard they're exactly the same and the players can't actually see what sensor they're playing with.
3. Have them play a few games* of 1v1 CA every day for 5 days or so, always at the same daytime, on the same map (something like eye2eye would be ideal of course), with the same weapon, etc.. Players with sensor X play against players with sensor X, the same for sensor Y.
4. After day 5, you take away all the mice and give each player the mouse with the sensor they haven't used yet. You don't change anything else about the playing routine and let them play again for five days.
5. Ideally you have tracked accuracies on a round basis (process the demos), so after the 10 days of them playing you'll have a shitton of data for both sensors.
6. Throw it into a statistics software such as R and play around with it, determining trends, eliminating variables that aren't related to the sensors (e.g. one players plays with orbb as enemy model) and calculating various meaningful statistical figures (this requires knowledge of both the game and statistics and some common sense).

In the end, you still can't prove anything, but you will probably be able to say something along the lines of "I'm 99% confident that there's a significant accuracy increase for users of sensor X on this skill range, on this map and with this gun in 1v1 CA" or "No significant difference could be deduced for one of the sensors".

*Of course a fixed number and ideally as big as possible.

it's not easy to draw conclusive results from this unless there is truly a huge difference between x and y. for complex things like aiming in video games, human performance varies significantly from day to day and even from hour to hour due to factors such as learning, fatigue, and whatever. statistical inference is predicated on some sort of model, and for any model that takes the natural unpredictability of human performance into account, the tiny differences in performance due to changing from x to y or vice versa would be completely masked and indiscernable from other factors.

if you want to do an objective study of sensor performance, it's really necessary to eliminate "human" factors as much as possible. imo the best way is to have some robotic arm move the mouse in a predetermined pattern, which mimics the types of motion our hands perform, and log the mouse's raw output. or maybe move the mousepad in that pattern, which would easily allow for multiple mice to be tested simultaneously

We need double blind test, quite impossible in mouse land.

As shell itself is huge difference

Your experience with the G502 was most likely due to shitty software + firmware.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1522857/how-i-debu...ech-people

Also, it is interesting that you speak so highly of the Kone Pure Military when you reviewed and returned it before the October 23, 2014 firmware update which fixed the awful click latency problem.

Yeah, I read that.

I never installed the drivers so I'm not sure what firmware I was using either.

I dont need reviews, its going to suck compared to wmo.

yo mama sucks compared to wmo

3366 is literally the most advanced and strongest sensor architecture ever released up to this point. Everything is best in class in regards to what a "high end" sensor model should be and supersedes nearly every possible aspect and feature in regards to current technology.

3988 would technically be second "best" based imaging spec, accuracy capability, and feature. Comparable and followed by current 9800/9500 (spec wise).

3310 is "weaker", but comparable to 3988.. They share DSP (9800 based), but offer differ sensor parameters, settings and layout design.

3310 is more akin to "copying" 3090 as a replacement, very different design though.

There a lot of aspects that are ignored when people claim something is bad or good and quite frankly I don't want to sit here arguing about personal perception, firmware settings, and what not. Truth is.. there are going to be a handful of people that think a product is better. There are also going to be those that think its worse for whatever reason fits.

I would love to hound you for specifics on the 3366 but I don't know how much you are allowed to divulge

This

why do all 3 profiles feel different when you set them at the same dpi, with profile 1 being best as others have said?

"3366 is literally the most advanced and strongest sensor architecture ever released up to this point. Everything is best in class in regards to what a "high end" sensor model should be and supersedes nearly every possible aspect and feature in regards to current technology."

In my opinion, this comment just goes to show how much of a disconnect there has been over the past 10 years between mouse developers and the competitive community.

You seem absolutely convinced that you've just achieved some great masterpiece, yet for people who actually spend their time using the mice to compete at a high level for 8-12 hours per day the mouse performs inferior to 10+ year old mice.

Clearly you don't have qualified people testing your products. And clearly you're missing something very important.

i like how clueless you are here: http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=925

And that's why I don't claim to be an expert in that area.

based on your logic in this thread, well you've played 3d games for 10 years so you should be an expert in evaluating whether a game's rendering is bugged

:DDD

g403 looking like top mouse these days!

Did anyone ever figure what the "9000 FPS" meant when they started selling the gamer edition 3.0?

I tried describing what it felt like to use this mouse (the 3.0) and I could never come up with anything besides that it felt more "direct" than later released gamer mice, but then of course people had to put it to a science test and it didn't measure up.

Why does there always have to be a science guy who wants to stick his nose up your ass crack?

Whatever makes you happy!

Shape->clicks->sensor

I use a Scream One myself, after having owned almost everything, including IME 3.0, G Pro, G403, Abyssus 3,5, Diamondback etc.