Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › State of the Zeitgeist on the G700 sensor.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

State of the Zeitgeist on the G700 sensor.

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
I've noticed the conventional knowledge is that "g400 is superior" but looking at it I noticed most studies basing that are from a few years ago, when only the first laser mice were out, and with fan-based methods of measuring it.

I wonder what the conventional knowledge is about it now and what data supports it.

I'd be especially interested on studies that include all gaming mice that are currently on sale and with methods that do not satisfy the bias of a particular technology (e.g. only cloth mats).

Thanks in advance and may the old gods and the new be with you thumb.gif
PC
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4790K 4.6G 1.24v/1.74v, 5.1G 1.35v validation. GA-Z97X-Gaming 7 Tri-X R9 290 1100/1350 +0.012v G.Skill 2400 c10 
CoolingMonitorPowerCase
Noctua NH-D15 24EA53 IPS 76Hz OC EVGA 1000 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro 
Audio
SoundMagic E10 
  hide details  
Reply
PC
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4790K 4.6G 1.24v/1.74v, 5.1G 1.35v validation. GA-Z97X-Gaming 7 Tri-X R9 290 1100/1350 +0.012v G.Skill 2400 c10 
CoolingMonitorPowerCase
Noctua NH-D15 24EA53 IPS 76Hz OC EVGA 1000 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro 
Audio
SoundMagic E10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2 of 17
studies? plus g400 wasn't released when the first laser mice were out... it actually came out over a year after the G700 was out. Anyways there's been written so much about this... just search for information on the Avago 9500 and 9800 sensors and acceleration.
post #3 of 17
From my recollection (I don't own one anymore), the original Deathadder 3g sensor seemed to feel the best and the G400 sensor feels a little more sloppy. The original Xai was also the best laser I've used, it just had insane amounts of bugs in the firmware when you changed settings. It would randomly go to 99999999 dpi or something when you set 800 sometimes.
post #4 of 17
I had one of the first DA, then the "normal" DA, then the 3.5g DA and i can tell a difference between normal/fist and 3.5g if i really try to find it but theres none between first revision and the mostly popular 3g Sensor to me.


G400feels as good, all u need is getting used to it and you can play nicely.

Some players of team navi play with a kana, some with a sensei raw (really bad mouse if ur asking me:D) anad they are at the top level...the noobs who we are shouldnt even care and use what we like:)
post #5 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MONVMENTVM View Post

studies? plus g400 wasn't released when the first laser mice were out... it actually came out over a year after the G700 was out. Anyways there's been written so much about this... just search for information on the Avago 9500 and 9800 sensors and acceleration.
Can you direct me to specific URLs proving the supposed superiority of G400? I only found a fan-based benchmark test from 2006 using an LP player with an LP cloth mat. One of the mice apparently had the sensor G400 has.
Edited by fateswarm - 5/18/13 at 2:46pm
PC
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4790K 4.6G 1.24v/1.74v, 5.1G 1.35v validation. GA-Z97X-Gaming 7 Tri-X R9 290 1100/1350 +0.012v G.Skill 2400 c10 
CoolingMonitorPowerCase
Noctua NH-D15 24EA53 IPS 76Hz OC EVGA 1000 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro 
Audio
SoundMagic E10 
  hide details  
Reply
PC
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4790K 4.6G 1.24v/1.74v, 5.1G 1.35v validation. GA-Z97X-Gaming 7 Tri-X R9 290 1100/1350 +0.012v G.Skill 2400 c10 
CoolingMonitorPowerCase
Noctua NH-D15 24EA53 IPS 76Hz OC EVGA 1000 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro 
Audio
SoundMagic E10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by fateswarm View Post

Can you direct me to specific URLs proving the supposed superiority of G400? I only found a fan-based benchmark test from 2006 using an LP player with an LP cloth mat. One of the mice apparently had the sensor G400 has.

Well the G400 and other ADNS 3090 mice definitely aren't perfect but they aren't that far from it when it comes to 1:1 tracking although they might have some jitter at higher DPI settings (like at 3600 or 4000 DPI or whatever their highest setting is). When it comes to mice with the Avago 9500 or 9800 sensor (like the Logitech G700, G9x or the SteelSeries Xai as shown in the picture) the tracking looks like this:



On the x-axis you can see the speed at which the mouse is moved and on the y-axis you can see how many counts it tracked. That means that at for example 2000 dpi it should register 2000 counts when you move the mouse for 1 inch (obviously ^^). Ideally you want the mouse to always register the same amount of movement independent at which speed you move the mouse. In the graph that means you ideally want a perfectly straight line at 100% without deviations.

Looking at the graph above you can first off recognize the inconsistent tracking as it deviates from the 100% a lot (sometimes it registers more and sometimes it registers less counts as you can see). For example reading from the graph above (lets still keep the 2000 dpi setting as an example) if you move the mouse for just 1 inch at a speed of 0.65 metres/s it will register roughly 5% less counts than it should, which would result in about 1900 counts.

On the other hand at just a little faster hand movement of about 0.85 metres/s it will register roughly 5% more counts than it should, resulting in about 2100 counts. So all in all you could say that at 2000dpi there's a deviation of 200 counts when you move the mouse for 1 inch at two actually very similar speeds of 0.65 and 0.85m/s.

Also if you check the trend of the graph it is slightly rising and after 1 m/s it's always over the ideal 100% line at a peak of around 108% which is precisely the amount of positive acceleration a lot of people experience with this sensor. Also this is not a worst case scenario (the opposite) because on a lot of cloth mousepads things can get even worse where you don't experience positive acceleration at higher speeds but negative acceleration (the graph falling noticeably below the 100% line).

G400 and similar mice have much less inconsistency and therefore no noticeable acceleration.
Edited by MONVMENTVM - 5/18/13 at 4:03pm
post #7 of 17
the avago 9800 sensors also suffer from input lag too
Gaming Setup
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7 2700K Z77 Extreme6 Intel HD Graphics 3000 (GT2+) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 3GB 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
CORSAIR Vengeance 16 GB  OCZ 120GB Vertex 3 SATA COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 EVO  Windows 8.1 64 Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Benq XL2420TE Razer Blackwidow 2014 Thermaltake Smart M 850W Power Supply COOLER MASTER HAF XM RC-922XM-KKN1 Latch Side P... 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Deathadder 2013 SteelSeries QCK + Astro A40 2013 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming Setup
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7 2700K Z77 Extreme6 Intel HD Graphics 3000 (GT2+) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 3GB 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
CORSAIR Vengeance 16 GB  OCZ 120GB Vertex 3 SATA COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 EVO  Windows 8.1 64 Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Benq XL2420TE Razer Blackwidow 2014 Thermaltake Smart M 850W Power Supply COOLER MASTER HAF XM RC-922XM-KKN1 Latch Side P... 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Deathadder 2013 SteelSeries QCK + Astro A40 2013 
  hide details  
Reply
post #8 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MONVMENTVM View Post

deviates from the 100% a lot

I believe this raises various questions that should be answered either with solid theory or tests on different hardware or software:
  • Those tests might require perfection in OS interrupt handling. Has the test compensated for that? Has it been done on OSes with different interrupt handling technologies? (e.g. an "old" mouse might give a better graph simply because of interrupting the OS fewer times and letting it work more smoothly, as one example)
  • Is the sensor the only culprit? What about different circuit makers, different drivers? (e.g. testing a sensor on an old mouse and then extrapolating to newer mice might not be reliable)
  • What about the common settings in general? Does it occur on all DPI settings? All poling rates? All power-saving modes? On wired or wireless mode?

I'm trying to say, the evidence should be solid and there are various things that can go wrong so high scarcity of data is very unreliable: One can't project to the whole internet an idea about a particular mouse and not have solid and cross-referenced data to support it.

A good start would be to have tools that are easily accessible to all.
PC
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4790K 4.6G 1.24v/1.74v, 5.1G 1.35v validation. GA-Z97X-Gaming 7 Tri-X R9 290 1100/1350 +0.012v G.Skill 2400 c10 
CoolingMonitorPowerCase
Noctua NH-D15 24EA53 IPS 76Hz OC EVGA 1000 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro 
Audio
SoundMagic E10 
  hide details  
Reply
PC
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4790K 4.6G 1.24v/1.74v, 5.1G 1.35v validation. GA-Z97X-Gaming 7 Tri-X R9 290 1100/1350 +0.012v G.Skill 2400 c10 
CoolingMonitorPowerCase
Noctua NH-D15 24EA53 IPS 76Hz OC EVGA 1000 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro 
Audio
SoundMagic E10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #9 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by nlmiller0015 View Post

the avago 9800 sensors also suffer from input lag too

I guess that has more to do with implementation and maybe other features that might slow things down. All in all the 9500 and 9800 sensors are really fine for desktop/office use, but I would never recommend them for serious gaming. You could of course and a lot of people do, but it's not optimal. It's more like running a marathon with football shoes. The reason why people don't do it is because nobody is marketing football shoes for marathons (yet).
post #10 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by fateswarm View Post

I believe this raises various questions that should be answered either with solid theory or tests on different hardware or software:
  • Those tests might require perfection in OS interrupt handling. Has the test compensated for that? Has it been done on OSes with different interrupt handling technologies? (e.g. an "old" mouse might give a better graph simply because of interrupting the OS fewer times and letting it work more smoothly, as one example)
  • Is the sensor the only culprit? What about different circuit makers, different drivers? (e.g. testing a sensor on an old mouse and then extrapolating to newer mice might not be reliable)
  • What about the common settings in general? Does it occur on all DPI settings? All poling rates? All power-saving modes? On wired or wireless mode?

I'm trying to say, the evidence should be solid and there are various things that can go wrong so high scarcity of data is very unreliable: One can't project to the whole internet an idea about a particular mouse and not have solid and cross-referenced data to support it.

A good start would be to have tools that are easily accessible to all.

Sorry if I may sound rude but there's tons of information on this. Even what I've written above can be found several times in this forum and other places. Using "avago 9500 acceleration" as a search term in google will give you days of material to go through instead of asking the same questions over and over again, even if they have some knowledgeable terms like "interrupt handling" in them. Still:
  • OS doesn't matter as doesn't their interrupt handling technology, because it's the mouse sending the "wrong" movement data to the PC. Plus USB uses polling and not interrupts anyway.
  • Yes and no... let me tell you this: it's the sensor. But yes the Avago 9800 in comparison to the 9500 (which essentially is the same hardware) for example has been reported to have fewer troubles with negative acceleration on cloth pads. But the behaviour is essentially still the same no matter if you use an old Xai, G9x, G700 or a newer Sensei etc. I'm not saying that this whole thing couldn't be fixed by a firmware update by Avago one day... but we're waiting for a long time now and I wouldn't put my hopes up that they will/could.
  • Nothing to do with settings... as said before it's probably the tracking algorithm of the sensor.

I don't know what to say about the last section other than it's rude. Asking questions that have been asked so many times before and could've been found by a simple research on your part is one thing. But to critique in such a way without having done your own research first is certainly not a forum-friendly approach.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mice
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › State of the Zeitgeist on the G700 sensor.