Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › FPS in mouse
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

FPS in mouse - Page 2

post #11 of 26
What I'm saying is that I think FPS is the 'lingo' for DPI.
If you want precision, DPI. If you want fluid motion, polling rate.
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
3770K @ 4.7 [1.27v, +90mv, dld TX-4/TX-4] Asus P8Z68-V/Gen3 MSI GTX670 @ 1228 [SLi]>  <[SLi] MSI GTX670 @ 1228 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB [1600, CL8, 1.50v] Samsung 840 EVO 250GB Western Digital Blue 320GB Western Digital Blue 320GB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Lite-On Antec Kühler H2O 620 [2x120mm, TX-4] Windows 7 [Home Premium 64-bit] Dell S2740L 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
PCP&C Silencer MkII 950w X-Clio Windtunnel [2x250mm, 1x120mm] Logitech G700 XTrac Ripper 
AudioAudio
X-Fi Xtreme Gamer Creative 2.1 Speakers/Sub 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel E6600 Foxconn 775 MATX On-board 2GB 667 DDR2 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
320 WD XP 32bit teamviewer... Dell XPS 410 375w 
Case
skeleton de' Dell Dimension 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Atom Dual Core 1.6GHz Ion 330 2gb DDR2 800MHz 160GB 
OSMonitorKeyboardCase
Win 7 64 32 inch Vizio Generic Wireless Revo Net-top 
MouseMouse Pad
Generic Wireless Couch 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
3770K @ 4.7 [1.27v, +90mv, dld TX-4/TX-4] Asus P8Z68-V/Gen3 MSI GTX670 @ 1228 [SLi]>  <[SLi] MSI GTX670 @ 1228 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB [1600, CL8, 1.50v] Samsung 840 EVO 250GB Western Digital Blue 320GB Western Digital Blue 320GB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Lite-On Antec Kühler H2O 620 [2x120mm, TX-4] Windows 7 [Home Premium 64-bit] Dell S2740L 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
PCP&C Silencer MkII 950w X-Clio Windtunnel [2x250mm, 1x120mm] Logitech G700 XTrac Ripper 
AudioAudio
X-Fi Xtreme Gamer Creative 2.1 Speakers/Sub 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel E6600 Foxconn 775 MATX On-board 2GB 667 DDR2 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
320 WD XP 32bit teamviewer... Dell XPS 410 375w 
Case
skeleton de' Dell Dimension 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Atom Dual Core 1.6GHz Ion 330 2gb DDR2 800MHz 160GB 
OSMonitorKeyboardCase
Win 7 64 32 inch Vizio Generic Wireless Revo Net-top 
MouseMouse Pad
Generic Wireless Couch 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by pengs View Post

What I'm saying is that I think FPS is the 'lingo' for DPI.
If you want precision, DPI. If you want fluid motion, polling rate.

Mice are rated in Frames Per Second image processing actually. Take a look at specs now and then.
Quote:
BlueTrack Technology - World's most advanced tracking technology for gaming with image processing of 13,000 frames per second.

DPI is a sensor measurement, FPS is a measurement of the mouses ability to process the incoming data. Two seperate things, FPS inherent to optical mice, not sure about laser.
Edited by RainMotorsports - 12/22/11 at 1:50pm
RainONE
(13 items)
 
ASUS G50VT
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K @ 4.5Ghz ASUS P8Z68 V PRO GTX 570 MSI TF III @ 950/1900/2300 16GB Corsair Vengeance 
Hard DriveOSKeyboardPower
2TB Seagate 5900 RPM Windows 7 x64 Ultimate Ideazon Z Board Seasonic X750 
CaseMouse
Thermaltake V9 BlacX Logitech G700 
CPUGraphicsRAMOS
Intel Core 2 Duo T9600 2.8Ghz @ 3.1Ghz Nvidia 9800M GS (OC @ 640/1600/800) 4GB DDR2 800Mhz Windows 7 
Mouse
Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
RainONE
(13 items)
 
ASUS G50VT
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K @ 4.5Ghz ASUS P8Z68 V PRO GTX 570 MSI TF III @ 950/1900/2300 16GB Corsair Vengeance 
Hard DriveOSKeyboardPower
2TB Seagate 5900 RPM Windows 7 x64 Ultimate Ideazon Z Board Seasonic X750 
CaseMouse
Thermaltake V9 BlacX Logitech G700 
CPUGraphicsRAMOS
Intel Core 2 Duo T9600 2.8Ghz @ 3.1Ghz Nvidia 9800M GS (OC @ 640/1600/800) 4GB DDR2 800Mhz Windows 7 
Mouse
Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13 of 26
He talking about frames per second like 12000 frames per second on the xai and on the sensei. Or the 9000 fps on the intel 3.0
post #14 of 26
Slap:
avago sensor direction magnitude fps

Into google.

One example of their documentation for the old 6010 sensor:
Quote:
The Avago Technologies ADNS-6010 optical mouse sensor, a 20-pin staggered dual inline package (DIP), is based on a new, faster architecture with improved navigation performance. It is able to measure changes in position by optically acquiring sequential surface images of over 6400 fps and mathematically determining the direction and magnitude of movement.

Edited by whybother - 12/22/11 at 2:16pm
My System
(17 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsMonitorKeyboard
3570k @ 4.4ghz Gigabyte GTX670 @ 1300/1700 Sony FW900 + Asus VG236he CM QuickFire Red - PBT white keycaps 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
g4Adder in progress Zowie P-TF Onkyo SE-90 Marantz PM7003 amplifier 
OtherOther
Wharfedale 10.1 speakers Sennheiser HD595 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(17 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsMonitorKeyboard
3570k @ 4.4ghz Gigabyte GTX670 @ 1300/1700 Sony FW900 + Asus VG236he CM QuickFire Red - PBT white keycaps 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
g4Adder in progress Zowie P-TF Onkyo SE-90 Marantz PM7003 amplifier 
OtherOther
Wharfedale 10.1 speakers Sennheiser HD595 
  hide details  
Reply
post #15 of 26
Surely it would all be bottlenecked by the USB polling rate? Whether it be 250/500/750/1000(max) ?
Complications
(26 items)
 
Mining Rig
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500K @ 4.8Ghz 1.4v ASUS P8P67 Pro EVGA GTX 690 @ 1200 core G.Skill RipJaws X 8Gb 2133Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Corsair Neutron GTX120 (RAID 0) Corsair Neuteon GTX120 (RAID 0) WD Caviar Black 1TB SeaGate 7200.12 500GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
WD Green 2TB WD Green 2TB RX360 Raystorm CPU Block 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
XSPC Pump / Res combo Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit Samsung PX2370 1920x1080 Razer BlackWidow 2013 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair HX850 Corsair 800D Razer Death Adder Black Edition Razer Goliathus Alpha 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Schiit Magni Headphone Amp ASUS Xonar DX Sennheiser HD650 Sennheiser HD555 Modified 
Audio
Akai APC40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Celeron G470 MSI H61m P31 ATi HD5870 Corsair XMS3 4GB 1333Mhz DDR3 
Hard DriveOSPower
160Gb SeaGate Ubuntu 13.10 Thermaltake LitePower 450w 
  hide details  
Reply
Complications
(26 items)
 
Mining Rig
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500K @ 4.8Ghz 1.4v ASUS P8P67 Pro EVGA GTX 690 @ 1200 core G.Skill RipJaws X 8Gb 2133Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Corsair Neutron GTX120 (RAID 0) Corsair Neuteon GTX120 (RAID 0) WD Caviar Black 1TB SeaGate 7200.12 500GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
WD Green 2TB WD Green 2TB RX360 Raystorm CPU Block 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
XSPC Pump / Res combo Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit Samsung PX2370 1920x1080 Razer BlackWidow 2013 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair HX850 Corsair 800D Razer Death Adder Black Edition Razer Goliathus Alpha 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Schiit Magni Headphone Amp ASUS Xonar DX Sennheiser HD650 Sennheiser HD555 Modified 
Audio
Akai APC40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Celeron G470 MSI H61m P31 ATi HD5870 Corsair XMS3 4GB 1333Mhz DDR3 
Hard DriveOSPower
160Gb SeaGate Ubuntu 13.10 Thermaltake LitePower 450w 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 26
The FPS a mouse runs at is internal to the outputted report rate. I'd guess counters are increased until it's time to report how far you've moved the mouse. A comparison would be running 300fps in a game on a 60hz/120hz monitor. Mouse input feels far smoother than running the game at a fixed 60/120fps due to increased updates.
My System
(17 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsMonitorKeyboard
3570k @ 4.4ghz Gigabyte GTX670 @ 1300/1700 Sony FW900 + Asus VG236he CM QuickFire Red - PBT white keycaps 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
g4Adder in progress Zowie P-TF Onkyo SE-90 Marantz PM7003 amplifier 
OtherOther
Wharfedale 10.1 speakers Sennheiser HD595 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(17 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsMonitorKeyboard
3570k @ 4.4ghz Gigabyte GTX670 @ 1300/1700 Sony FW900 + Asus VG236he CM QuickFire Red - PBT white keycaps 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
g4Adder in progress Zowie P-TF Onkyo SE-90 Marantz PM7003 amplifier 
OtherOther
Wharfedale 10.1 speakers Sennheiser HD595 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 26
FPS is the number of frames captured by the sensor per second in order to detect and calculate movement.

Here's a very simplified example:

Imagine your mouse operated at 2 FPS, your USB report rate is 1Hz, you want to quickly move your mouse to the right about 5 cm, then left about 1 cm.

0:00 - First frame captured, mouse reports update to USB
Mouse location: (0,0) on imaginary Cartesian plane.
0:30 - Second frame captured
Mouse location: (0,0) on imaginary Cartesian plane.
You quickly move the mouse right, then left.
Mouse location: (5,0) on imaginary Cartesian plane.
Mouse location: (4,0) on imaginary Cartesian plane.
1:00 - Third frame captured, mouse reports update to USB

Each time the mouse is polled by USB:
  1. The mouse analyzes all of the frames captures since the last USB update to estimate the new cursor position.
  2. The mouse reports the new cursor position via USB.

On this example, the movement to (5,0) occurs between frame updates, and the mouse only captures frames at (0,0) and (4,0).
When the USB report occurs, the mouse takes the two locations it has, and determines that your mouse moved to (4,0). The mouse doesn't know about (5,0) and doesn't report it, and the mouse cursor doesn't accurately reflect your movement.


In a more complex example, FPS also relates to the mouse's maximum PCS.

Imagine you have a mouse operating at 1FPS and the size of the 'picture' the mouse takes is 1cm^2. The mouse will be limited by the FPS to a maximum PCS of less than 1cm/sec because the pictures the mouse take must overlap in order for the mouse to correctly calculate the mouse's movement. If you move the mouse faster than it can take pictures, it will lose track of the relationship between the pictures and won't be able to represent movement. This is one version of malfunction speed.

A mouse works kind of like a composite photo. By taking enough pictures, the mouse can determine what the surface looks like, and it can decide what direction it must have moved by comparing the pictures taken. If enough pictures aren't taken, the mouse can't get a complete picture of the surface or the movement. The smaller the picture taken, the more FPS is needed to get good accuracy, so just knowing FPS isn't enough unless all sensors take the same size picture.

Therefore FPS affects maximum speed, and it can affect accuracy.
post #18 of 26
Thread Starter 
Well the kana will be a **** so, 3600 fps sucks :S... You will 'feel' unprecise right ?
post #19 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luhz View Post

The smaller the picture taken, the more FPS is needed to get good accuracy, so just knowing FPS isn't enough unless all sensors take the same size picture.

This is important, comparing FPS only isn't good idea.
post #20 of 26
It's actually a balance.
Let me explain, but keep in mind that's only how I am figuring out it happens from my experience studying CS :

Sensor takes a number of "pictures" from your mousepad, let's say for simplicity they're taken at a 9x9 pixels resolution (a small, low-quality square), at 125 fps, and is connected to your PC at usb rate of 125Hz (hence it would be 1:1 matching and there would be no need of MCU/MPU). Let's consider the mousing surface an ideal one, that the sensor can differentiate with ease, and let's say that each "picture" the mouse takes of the surface is a perfect 1x1 mm square. Also let's consider mouse optics and the sensor a flawless one ( wink.gif )

Then we would have a mouse that each frame could tell you if you moved one position to each side, so the additions or substractions on the cartesian plane would work a bit like that matrix :
(-1,1) (0,1) (1,1)
(-1,0) (0,0) (1,0)
(-1,-1) (0,-1) (1,-1)

So both in the x and y plane the differences referring to your current position would be translated into your mouse pointer, raw, no interpolation, no processing, 125 times per second, fully synchronized.

What you would have here, though, would be that in a certain speed that you move in a certain axis, you would hit negative acceleration, which would happen once you move faster than constant 125mm/s, which would make you go at 0.125m/s, which is laughable.


Let's put more fps on that sensor, and let it hit 1000 "pictures" taken per second, and let's overclock the USB port up to 1000Hz.

Now you will have that your negative acceleration would be hit at 1000mm/s or 1m/s, which is much, much better than the example above.


We can, from here, fork into three ways of improving the mouse perfect tracking speed :

a) We make the sensor take higher-resolution pictures.
So instead of a 9x9 pixel matrix in which we only add or substract 1 unit on each axis, we can have a 17x17* matrix of pixels to compare with previous input, hence maximum change would be abs((8,8)), and thus that would fill into a 3byte bus** or a 17-bit bus (which is NOT standard). (This would be translated as having higher DPI on the mouse)

Here we have to make a compromise :
1- If we keep 1 squared mm area for snapshots, it means having much better scanning technology and it would be much more expensive, but it would have much higher DPI, probably a very low LOD (borderline to unusable) and a perfect tracking speed of up to 16000mm/s or a whooping ass 16m/s in the most ideal conditions. This approach is the one that was taken when the first laser mice came out, and it's supposing perfect surface scanning. But that's not realistic, let's see the other pharagraph :

2- If we think our mouse should not be too expensive, and thus we strive for a cheaper way to achieve good results, we'll make a compromise and make the mouse scan a wider area with the same 17x17* resolution we defined before here in a), so let's say we take a 10x10mm (or a square centimeter) area for our snapshots. That would boost our DPI the same as in 1-, we would have a higher LOD (depending on lens it would be from 1-2mm to 1cm), it would be a "cheaper" way to boost performance but the perfect tracking speed would go at 1600mm/s or 1.6m/s.

Of course, if we forced the sensor to take the same pictures at 5x5mm (half a square centimeter), we would get 3200mm/s or a more desireable 3.2m/s. But that would be far more expensive again, as the tech would need to be much sharper (and higher res).

* Odd number just so we have a line that acts as "previous x" and another line that acts as "previous y", else it would jitter A LOT if there was no soft or MCU controlling what the default was. Else we would have one side and either up or down clipped one count.
** Range would be -8 to 8, effectively 17 bits, so it would actually be 2bytes + 1 bit, typed 3 bytes for simplicity

b) We make the sensor take more pictures per second.
We still have our "ownage" 9x9 pixel matrix to compare over our last capture, but now we upgrade it accordingly :
- The sensor now captures at 5000fps
- We introduce a MCU that takes care of the excess input, since now we would have 5 scans for each output to the USB, so that MCU only adds the number of counts of the last 5 scans (and since our sensor is "perfect", we don't need to think about bugged or invalid scans wink.gif ), which would make a max number per axis of abs(5,5), thus at much we would need 11 bits per axis (range -5..5).

So now, our improved, high fps sensor, with a perfect implementation of the MCU and perfect sensor, would be tracking at 5000mm/s or 5m/s.

But the more FPS, the less reliable the sensor gets :
-The scanning area and the resolution would be the same, so taking 5x the number of snapshots would be much more expensive to implement without faulty scans (and thus we would need a MCU to discriminate good and bad scans, or a newer technology [such as laser was when it was introduced]).
- To not to make the sensor too expensive, we would be able to reduce the resolution of the sensor in order to save some space and silicon, optimize the results, and get only matrixes of either 4 or 5 elements instead of 9 (We would need the MCU to calculate the optimized movement).
- The MCU would cause a (minimal) delay and could also produce some "anomalies" depending on the implementation (jittering, input lag, angle snapping, etc), so it has also some letdowns.

Also, such a sensor would be more expensive than our "beloved" 1000fps one.

c) We make the sensor take pictures in a wider area.
So with the same resolution, we would have a wider area to take the snapshots, so the chances of taking _good_ snapshots are greater, but that would increase LOD dramatically.
Since we don't change the resolution or the fps, the maximum perfect tracking speed would be 1m/s, but since we have a bigger area, we could go and try to modify other aspects of the mouse to gain performance :

1- We up the resolution of the sensor, so with a wider area, we get more DPI. Thus we get the improvement of a) on board. Since the area is greater, the LOD would be higher (you can't scan from a certain angle, you're restricted by the lens), but we would have a similar pixel density as we had at first, just with much higher resolution. So if we had the same 17x17 resolution sensor as a)2-, we would already have 1.6m/s of perfect tracking out of the box. But the wider the area, the more resolution we can have with the same density, so we could crank the DPI high up, let's imagine it would take 33x33 snapshots, we would have 3.2m/s of perfect tracking. Of course, it is far more expensive to have a sensor at 1000fps taking 33x33 snapshots than one that only takes them at 17x17, but you need to compromise somewhere.

2- We up the fps of the sensor (and add a MCU). Since we've got a wider area and the same 9x9 resolution with which we started, the number of good snapshots should be way higher, so the number of anomalies would go down, and should be filtered by the MCU whenever they happen. We can achieve a huge amount of fps by making the area wider, but it's in compromise with the resolution, so we would end up having a perfect tracking speed of as many thousands of fps we would have (in that example).

3- We balance both and manage to improve resolution AND fps (it seems to be happening currently with the best optical mice out there), so we get a compromise between high DPI/CPI/PPI and lots of fps, thus we have the benefits of higher perfect tracking speed and more resolution, without making the sensor much more expensive (thus being valid for scale market economies), so we're talking of around 2-5m/s of perfect tracking speed and CPI as high as around even 4000, both coupled up. If we add an MCU here, we can get different DPI steps by modifying both the fps and the resolution at which the sensor works, thus we will get different max tracking speeds at each step for a given implementation of the sensor/lens/MCU.


Sorry for the wall of text, and I am responsible for any inaccuracy that you might find, which I guess there are many smile.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mice
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › FPS in mouse