Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › CM STORM RECON VS DEATHADDER 4G
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CM STORM RECON VS DEATHADDER 4G - Page 2

post #11 of 20
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotAgain View Post

I think I've seen one person here mention that, and you've repeated it here more than they have. As I understand it, negative acceleration is a problem with the way a game engine processes inputs and has nothing to do with the mouse that you use.
The problem is that the higher sensitivity (DPI) input you give to an engine with this problem, the more negative acceleration there will be. So a 400 DPI mouse might not show any, a mouse at 1800 DPI might show some, and a mouse at 6400 DPI might show a lot.
So if you were to use the DA2013 at 6400 DPI, you would experience more negative acceleration in the game than if you had the mouse set to a more reasonable DPI like 900.
This is nothing specific to the DA2013 and would affect any mouse capable of high DPI, because it's a problem with the game, not the mouse.
Laser mice tend to suffer from about 5% positive acceleration built into the hardware, but with this being an optical mouse, it shouldn't have that problem.
If I recall correctly, what this person said was that there is no point in buying the DeathAdder 2013 with its 6400 DPI sensor, because anything over 400 DPI in that engine would cause negative acceleration problems.
This completely ignores the fact that most current optical mice will malfunction at 400 DPI when moved at high speeds, which the new 3988 sensor in the DA2013 fixes with its improved tracking and surface calibration feature.
And unlike the Microsoft WMO1.1/IME3.0 which require you to install hacked USB drivers (which doesn't appear to work on Windows 8) the DeathAdder supports 500/1000Hz polling as standard.
I haven't much experience with the CM Storm mice, but I think they're using the 3090 sensor, which is a generation behind the DeathAdder 2013. (every other optical mouse is now a generation behind the DeathAdder 2013)
I liked how the DeathAdder Black Edition felt, and I am not a big fan of the old DeathAdder 3.5G. The surface finish on the 3.5G was very slippery. The BE didn't offer much grip either, but was better than the 3.5G. The 2013 has a textured plastic surface that feels nice, and has textured rubber panels on the sides that provide a good grip. The shape is the same and the weight difference is minimal. (the measurements on the site include the cable weight prior to the 2013, which makes it look like a bigger difference)
Tracking on the 2013 feels better than the Black Edition, only at lower DPI, because I can't make it malfunction, and I could make my BE malfunction below 1800 DPI in games.

There are also people sayin the mouse goes crazy, and it constaly skips (and the DA 3.5g did not). Your answer doesn't help too much.
post #12 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by vss vintorez View Post

There are also people sayin the mouse goes crazy, and it constaly skips (and the DA 3.5g did not). Your answer doesn't help too much.
One person is saying they're having tracking problems on an Artisan Hien (Artisan pads are known to be bad with optical mice) only after performing surface calibration on it. With it disabled, he says it tracks properly.

I've done some testing, and I think the way Razer performs their calibration is not optimal for bad surfaces - they aren't resetting the previous calibration or lift-off distance.
If you set the lift-off distance to 10 prior to performing calibration, it should work correctly.
post #13 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotAgain View Post

I don't have any experience with the WMO1.1/IME3.0 overclocked, but I have yet to find an optical mouse that doesn't malfunction for me when using it at 400 DPI in games. I haven't been able to make the DA2013 malfunction at all.
It is easy to experience negative accel using WMO and it isn't hard to make it malfunction. WMO's max speed is just above 2 m/s. There are some optical mice with max speed above 4 m/s have you tried them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotAgain View Post

I've done some testing, and I think the way Razer performs their calibration is not optimal for bad surfaces
Don't you think it's funny? At bad surface calibration is not doing what it should and at good surface calibration is not needed at all. Razer managed to screw the driver again, fortunately they were fixing their drivers in the past so I hope they do it now.
Edited by Glymbol - 12/6/12 at 1:28am
post #14 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glymbol View Post

It is easy to experience negative accel using WMO and it isn't hard to make it malfunction. WMO's max speed is just above 2 m/s. There are some optical mice with max speed above 4 m/s have you tried them?
I've tried a number of 3090 mice and the 3.5G DeathAdders. (3888)

DeathAdder 2013 compared to a DeathAdder Black Edition and a Left-Handed DeathAdder:
untitledx0lgz.png

Roccat Savu (3090) at 400 DPI:
shidenbvk87.gif

Don't think I have copies of any other tests to hand.
post #15 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotAgain View Post

I've tried a number of 3090 mice and the 3.5G DeathAdders. (3888)
DeathAdder 2013 compared to a DeathAdder Black Edition and a Left-Handed DeathAdder:
untitledx0lgz.png
Roccat Savu (3090) at 400 DPI:
shidenbvk87.gif
Don't think I have copies of any other tests to hand.

so which mouse belongs to which graph you drew?
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon E3-1230v2 MSI ZH77A-G41 Nvidia GTX 570 G Skill f3-12800cl9 2gbnq 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
Samsung 840 Pro Windows 7 600 watt Seasonic Gladiator 600 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon E3-1230v2 MSI ZH77A-G41 Nvidia GTX 570 G Skill f3-12800cl9 2gbnq 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
Samsung 840 Pro Windows 7 600 watt Seasonic Gladiator 600 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 20
The DeathAdder 2013 was the one which I was unable to have malfunction at low DPI. (second line in the DeathAdder image)
post #17 of 20
Doesn't look good indeed. DA 3G works better at 1800 DPI, I wouldn't use it at 450 DPI if I'd like to achieve best possible max speed. I don't know if the Respawn behaves this way too.

On which mousepad mice were tested?
post #18 of 20
The DeathAdders were all tested on a Razer Pro Pad, on the control surface. (the speed surface malfunctions even quicker, ironically)
The Savu results are from an Artisan Shiden, though results were similar on the speed side of the Pro Pad. (not quite as bad though)

It's true that 450 DPI will not achieve the maximum speed without malfunctioning, but low sens players still use 450 DPI.
I can still make the mice malfunction at 1800 DPI though. (but not the 2013)

I think Synapse also runs the DeathAdder 3.5G at 1800 and uses interpolation for lower DPI, so that would in theory raise the malfunction speed but keep it at a low sensitivity. I can still make them malfunction even then...

Even with better surfaces (goliathus etc.) I can still make them malfunction at low DPI.
post #19 of 20
Are Pro Pad and Shiden white? Maybe the color isn't working good with optical mice or the surface is too smooth. I always used cheap, black, large soft pads and had no problem. It's possible I'm just lucky smile.gif .
post #20 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glymbol View Post

Are Pro Pad and Shiden white? Maybe the color isn't working good with optical mice or the surface is too smooth. I always used cheap, black, large soft pads and had no problem. It's possible I'm just lucky smile.gif .
The Shiden is gray and the Pro Pad is white. The Pro Pad tracks much better than the Shiden though.

But like I said, I can get them to fail on a Goliathus (extended) as well, and other mats I've tried. It's not a surface problem, but the surface you test with can definitely reduce the maximum speed before malfunction.

I've not been able to get the DeathAdder 2013 to malfunction on anything I've tried.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mice
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › CM STORM RECON VS DEATHADDER 4G