No sensor issues on the G600 since I tweaked a few settings. List is still silly.
what part of 'inbuilt and irremovable firmware issues' do you not understand? some of these sensors are fundamentally flawed in their in-built correction/precision methods. people who kid themselves that they can buy a shit mouse and untick the unwanteds under the options are dumb in the extreme. you are silly, not the list.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
No sensor issues on the G600 since I tweaked a few settings. List is still silly.
What specifically is wrong with the sensors in these mouses? You're not the first person I've heard it from but nobody has been real clear about why they're as shitty as people say they are
for example they have acceleration built in
as in you cannot turn it off
ever
as in you cannot turn it off
ever
"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"
put a mouse with a 'good' sensor next to a mouse with a purportedly 'bad' sensor and get them to do some fairly basic tests using ms paint, e.g. drawing straight-lines, drawing curves, etc. test on all of their DPI's and usb rates. you will be very surprised.
G600 on wood. As good as the G9X by my perspective, though it does lack the dedicated sensitivity selector (gotta program the side panel). It shoots or selects what I point it at in games and can move as fast or slow as I need it to. The initial issue of cursor jumping that made me want to chuck it through a window did go away with checkbox manipulation. You're free to recommend your own preference. I'm not arguing with that.
jesus you are an idiot. "by your perspective". the whole point is to get a bunch of mice and test them together. at all of their different DPI. i.e. something approaching a test and comparison. not to squiggle a few lines on a blank paint document and say "hey, looks good to me..."
and no, it's not "my own preference". SOME MICE JUST HAVE SENSORS WITH POOR PERFORMANCE OR IN-BUILT CORRECTION MEASURES THAT ARE ANTITHETICAL TO GOOD FPS GAMEPLAY, I.E. UNINTERRUPTED AND 'TRUE' AND 'RAW' INPUT. you seem so goddamn pathetically affronted by this. perhaps you just don't have the best mouse for gaming accuracy. that's fine, you know. some people prefer mice loaded with 100 macro buttons so they can switch tabs whilst they download porn and update their RSS feed. this being an FPS forum i just tend to rate mice based on how good they are for gaming purposes.
and no, it's not "my own preference". SOME MICE JUST HAVE SENSORS WITH POOR PERFORMANCE OR IN-BUILT CORRECTION MEASURES THAT ARE ANTITHETICAL TO GOOD FPS GAMEPLAY, I.E. UNINTERRUPTED AND 'TRUE' AND 'RAW' INPUT. you seem so goddamn pathetically affronted by this. perhaps you just don't have the best mouse for gaming accuracy. that's fine, you know. some people prefer mice loaded with 100 macro buttons so they can switch tabs whilst they download porn and update their RSS feed. this being an FPS forum i just tend to rate mice based on how good they are for gaming purposes.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-17 12:25:02)
this is something like a proper test
The whole reason for the EC eVo-series is because the sensor used in the original EC-series is no longer being produced. Enter the ADNS-3090, ZOWIE’s choice to replace the older sensor. The ADNS-3090 promised similar performance without the prediction. Therefore, you get a very good performing mouse, with a pretty high malfunction speed, and with no prediction. During test, the mouse definitely lived up to the numbers, matching the AM (which uses the same sensor).
Once again, the polling rates you can use are 125, 500, and 1000Hz. When using the 1000Hz setting, I found a stable 990~Hz. Everything less than that was perfectly on the dot, like 500Hz and 125Hz. As promised from ZOWIE, the ADNS-3090 is 100% prediction-free. The first two DPI settings, 450 and 1150, are completely usable and are very stable. However, once you hit 2300, you get slight interpolation and therefor a few jaggies when trying to aim precisely. I would recommend you to stay at or below 1150 DPI and try to keep 1000Hz.
the first mouse got a 97% rating, the second a 91%. both are considered very good mice, and both have one of the hotly-tipped 'ideal' basic sensors. the above RATZ mouse we were bitching about doesn't even have the decent sensor to start. as you can see, there are EMPIRICAL, MEASURABLE differences. it is not 'opinion'. quit talking out of your ass. if you have a mouse with a faulty/accel/correction laden sensor, just accept that you've probably got used to gaming through a slight accel or detection handicap.I was expecting great results since the mouse uses the Avago 3090 sensor. This mouse does have a small bit of prediction, so I’m stating that again for those who need to know it. I did a lot of tests with this mouse because I simply loved the shape that much, and I found some good stuff and some bad stuff. Let’s start off with the bad first, inconsistent performance over various polling rates, wide range of DPI performance, issues with multi-colored mousepads, and a relatively low malfunction speed. There are three options for polling rate, 125Hz, 500Hz, and 1000Hz. Each option provides a distinct difference in performance. I found 1000Hz to be almost unusable, and 125Hz to “choke” if you will. 500Hz seems to be the sweet spot for this mouse, at least in FPS games. I was able to get the most consistent performance from 500Hz and 800DPI. However, I was able to get the same performance with 500Hz and 3500DPI. 400DPI was almost unusable on any polling rate, so I would not recommend that option. As far as numbers go, I was looking at a maximum tracking speed of 1.6m/s (meters per second) or around 63ip/s (inches per second). Avago states the 3090 should have a max tracking speed of 60ip/s, so that is pretty close. Finally, like every mouse that has the Avago 3090, there is issues with multi-colored mousepads. The tracking speed is almost cut in half.
Each DPI offers a different malfunction speed too. 400DPI is the absolute worst, I could barely turn around with a medium sensitivity. 800DPI and 3500DPI were the best, while 1200DPI being average. Also, 3500DPI is not interpolated badly at all, and is completely viable to use, unlike a lot of mice on the market.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-17 12:36:52)
here is another list, based in some actual technological fact, rather than a 'huh, looks good to me!' personal-satisfaction test:
http://www.esreality.com/index.php?a=po … id=2024663
a few years outdated, so quite a few new mice aren't on there... but many mice that have been around for years are conspicuously absent.
http://www.esreality.com/index.php?a=po … id=2024663
a few years outdated, so quite a few new mice aren't on there... but many mice that have been around for years are conspicuously absent.
I'd actually be inclined to read your three posts if you didn't start off so emotional about it. But since you were all like GARBLE GARBLE GARBLE all I can do is restate the fact that the G9X and G600 give me the same practical performance. Or do you want an infographic?
lol. you are an idiot. the end. leave the thread until you can contribute something actually factual.
"the same practical performance". what does that even mean? browse my little brony sites with the same efficient ease? both fine for mouth-breathing over your space marine game? the fact is both mice have different hardware and thus different performance. whether or not you notice it in your own personal applications is kind of irrelevant. one mouse is objectively worse than the other.
"the same practical performance". what does that even mean? browse my little brony sites with the same efficient ease? both fine for mouth-breathing over your space marine game? the fact is both mice have different hardware and thus different performance. whether or not you notice it in your own personal applications is kind of irrelevant. one mouse is objectively worse than the other.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-17 13:40:59)
That insult could actually mean something coming out of you if you didn't use it every other thread at every perceived wrong.
Practical: $10 dollar mouse, headshot. $50 dollar mouse, same headshot. $80 dollar mouse, same headshot. $150 dollar mouse, same headshot. At that point, I feel fine about ignoring the "omg bleeding edge laser tech" mice and getting a mouse with the functionality I want that fits in my hand the way I like. I can't figure out what's so hard to understand about that, but the task of explaining it to you is about as unrewarding as a snagged zipper, so I'll leave it at that.
Practical: $10 dollar mouse, headshot. $50 dollar mouse, same headshot. $80 dollar mouse, same headshot. $150 dollar mouse, same headshot. At that point, I feel fine about ignoring the "omg bleeding edge laser tech" mice and getting a mouse with the functionality I want that fits in my hand the way I like. I can't figure out what's so hard to understand about that, but the task of explaining it to you is about as unrewarding as a snagged zipper, so I'll leave it at that.
extend your lousy reasoning to graphics cards. say you only play browser games and watch youtube. on one hand you have an 8800GTS. on the other you have a brand new AMD card. you could say "i get the same practical performance" all day long. doesn't change the fact the actual hardware that is used to MAKE the two devices is completely different. it's the same as mice. some sensors are flawed or have acceleration that is totally unsuitable for gaming. why? cost considerations. poor r&d. cutting corners. selling to a largely tech-illiterate "cool! look at the coloured LED's" audience. etc.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-17 13:43:58)
again. you're not talking about mice performance in any concrete, factual way. you're just excusing your terrible knowledge about mice with the fact that i call people stupid a lot, on a range of topics. great defense. address the facts now, child.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
That insult could actually mean something coming out of you if you didn't use it every other thread at every perceived wrong.
Pointing out your caustic rhetoric has nothing to do with technical knowledge, but everything to do with how serious I'm taking you at this point.
(which is to say, not at all)
(which is to say, not at all)
yep. ok. i win. carry on then.
Have fun with that. Meanwhile, the G600 is fine and dandy.
it uses an avago a9x00 series laser sensor afaik, so no, it is not fine and dandy. it is cheap and has acceleration. that's why they load it with other shit, so that the mouse makes up its value in other applications (and you could say other game types where decent mouse precision/aim isn't all that important). but it's not a good mouse. people need to stop excusing game peripheral manufacturers for making shitty gear. all too often the trend goes towards stacking up stupid extraneous features/101 buttons and whistles, whilst the basic mouse-pointing hardware is shit. it is the definition of 'plastic gaming brand tack'.
If it was actually holding me back, you can be sure I would replace it. Maybe it's because I started PC gaming with trackball mice (if the game supported one at all) and am easier to please as a result, but other than some initial (solved) issues, the G600 has behaved.
I'm also aware that there are other bits of hardware superior to what I'm running, but the performance I'm getting with what I have is perfectly fine. I feel no need to upgrade to next-gen video or double my RAM from 16GB to 32GB.
I'm also aware that there are other bits of hardware superior to what I'm running, but the performance I'm getting with what I have is perfectly fine. I feel no need to upgrade to next-gen video or double my RAM from 16GB to 32GB.
i started my competitive FPS 'career' using a track-ball mouse too. doesn't mean i'm going to use that as some silly excuse for using a sub-par mouse made with sub-par components now, today. do you voluntarily type on a typewriter, too, to give you a handicap?
also i wouldn't really say upgrading hardware w/r/t visual or loading performance has shit to do with input devices. input is kind of... you know... exactly how you interact with your computer. it's the first line of user-interaction and 'experience'. it's more important than loading up on high-quality shadows, or extra smooth aliasing, or whatever. i think you're deflecting the fact that you just rather simply use a mouse with a shitty, flawed sensor.
also i wouldn't really say upgrading hardware w/r/t visual or loading performance has shit to do with input devices. input is kind of... you know... exactly how you interact with your computer. it's the first line of user-interaction and 'experience'. it's more important than loading up on high-quality shadows, or extra smooth aliasing, or whatever. i think you're deflecting the fact that you just rather simply use a mouse with a shitty, flawed sensor.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-18 03:34:24)
Funny you should mention typewriters, because they're still useful for carbon transfer, but the last time I touched one other than to move it was 2011-ish.
Eventually we're going to look back on the best of today and laugh, just as we laugh at yesterday's technologies. I went to the G600 because of immediate local availability after the G9X cable detached and I didn't want to bother opening it up to fix it at the time. And you're right, I'd rather keep using it...until it breaks or I feel it's causing me problems or holding me back. As of now, it works fine. I'm not missing shots or mis-clicking, so why should I "fix" it?
The input device I do plan on replacing is this Kensington PK1100U keyboard with its flagging USB cable with a keyboard that doesn't jam when I hold down specific keys (which I do consider to be a handicap).
Eventually we're going to look back on the best of today and laugh, just as we laugh at yesterday's technologies. I went to the G600 because of immediate local availability after the G9X cable detached and I didn't want to bother opening it up to fix it at the time. And you're right, I'd rather keep using it...until it breaks or I feel it's causing me problems or holding me back. As of now, it works fine. I'm not missing shots or mis-clicking, so why should I "fix" it?
The input device I do plan on replacing is this Kensington PK1100U keyboard with its flagging USB cable with a keyboard that doesn't jam when I hold down specific keys (which I do consider to be a handicap).
except that the 'best of today', sensors wise, is in fact about 10 years old. this isn't about having the most ultra-new, that will then be outdated. the best gaming mice are mice with about 500dpi and a sensor with zero accel. this is technology that the microsoft intellimouse has had for over a decade. it's really not an 'arms race'. it's actually the converse: new mice load their shit with such ridiculously high DPI, in a sort of marketing-jargon war, that the actual performance ends up being terrible. ditto all the latest steelseries mice with fancy lasers and multicoloured LED screens on the underneath: their actual performance sucks. people recommend optical mice - a technology that is well over a decade old now - over new laser mice. you don't really have a point.
when it comes to input peripherals, bigger is not better, newer is not better. when it comes to 'input' you simply want something as 'true' and 'raw' as possible. if that has to be an optical mouse that you could buy for £15 in 2003, then so be it. these mice that are released today for $100+ that looks like a transformer just passed a 6-month constipated stool and attached it to a cable are a joke. the gaming peripherals industry is a joke. a lot of dumb kids buying shit with bright lights, as if they're shopping at toys'r'us rather than office world.
when it comes to input peripherals, bigger is not better, newer is not better. when it comes to 'input' you simply want something as 'true' and 'raw' as possible. if that has to be an optical mouse that you could buy for £15 in 2003, then so be it. these mice that are released today for $100+ that looks like a transformer just passed a 6-month constipated stool and attached it to a cable are a joke. the gaming peripherals industry is a joke. a lot of dumb kids buying shit with bright lights, as if they're shopping at toys'r'us rather than office world.
oh and ya, it's the same with keyboards: people generally recommend 1970's mechanical switches over any gimmick-laden macro-key LED-fest nowadays. it's pretty much the same with mice, only for some reason people seem a lot less well-versed in pointer technology.
I've all kinds of keyboards (even the fruit roll-up one) and the classic mechanical is still the best feel I've come across for typing or gaming. Easy to clean the dust out of and durable. Satisfying to use on the tactile level.
Another thing about the G600 is even if it is a right-handed mouse, it works great with my left-handed grip. Two-to-three fingers (my middle finger's "home key" is on the top center numberpad button, or G10) are available to manipulate its numberpad, which I use for sensitivity adjustment, jump or presets in FPS's or for unit selection in RTS's. The pointless gimmick of the thing is actually the LED lighting, which you can turn off with a button on the mouse itself. You can be sure that if I felt it not doing what I told it to, I'd move it to the office and replace it right away.
Another thing about the G600 is even if it is a right-handed mouse, it works great with my left-handed grip. Two-to-three fingers (my middle finger's "home key" is on the top center numberpad button, or G10) are available to manipulate its numberpad, which I use for sensitivity adjustment, jump or presets in FPS's or for unit selection in RTS's. The pointless gimmick of the thing is actually the LED lighting, which you can turn off with a button on the mouse itself. You can be sure that if I felt it not doing what I told it to, I'd move it to the office and replace it right away.