Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › Highest frame per second optical sensor.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Highest frame per second optical sensor.

post #1 of 23
Thread Starter 
So the MLT04 has 9000 FPS which I believe is the highest framerate for optical sensor?

Second highest I think is Comfort Mouse 6000 which has 8000 FPS.

Anyone know of any mice that are higher than these in terms of frame capturing speed?

I don't know why but high frame per second count seems to make tracking very smooth. The comfort 6000 tracking and precision is EXTREMELY good as is the WMO/intelli 1.1/ms 3.0. I wonder whether its due to FPS.
post #2 of 23
MS x8 had a 13000 FPS Bluetrack.

Avago 9500/9800 run at a maximum of 12000 FPS

Cypress ONS 1001 samples @ 40khz (40000000hz) Speckle scan detection.

Framerate is typically dynamically adaptable. Not always maximum register.

Influences precision, though it's not entirely limited.

Comfort 6000 isn't amazing, but its ok. Main con is no controller detection via hidusbf.
post #3 of 23
Thread Starter 
MS Comfort 6000 data sheet says 'dynamically adaptable up to 8000 frames per second' and this is higher than most gaming mice. The 125 Hz locked polling rate can be a problem for some but for £16 this mouse seems really good... tracks very smoothly considering its 1000 DPI.

Also, when playing Quake I find the WMO 1.1a far and I mean far better in terms of precision and smoothness than the Logitech G400 at 400 DPI... this could partly be due to frame per second I thought... literally my accuracy is 15% better with the WMO than the G400 (not joking). G400 has 5800 frames per second and WMO 1.1a has 9000 so quite a big difference there. I don't think the tracking quality of the G400 is good at 400 DPI - feels like there is much more ripple.

Wmo 1.1a @ 125 Hz has better tracking than the G400 with 400 DPI at 500 Hz. Against nightmare bots I could only get 33% lg with the G400 compared to 45% with the wmo. It literally feels that much better.
Edited by Mancubus - 5/27/13 at 5:53am
post #4 of 23
Yes. Subjective shape is very important to an individual.

You bring up the G400 and while I understand you dislike the shape (or even tracking feel), doesn't mean it's bad for everyone. I assume you target this mouse due to the amount of general hype it has gotten. (Specifically due to brand recognition, 3rd pt pricing, and support of last generation model).

I don't disagree that a mouse @ 125hz has better precision than a device @ 500hz. There's more delay between each update, thought you also limit smoothness and minimal latency. Your other peripherals such as monitor delay/hz or even computer ram influence perception extensively.

WMO1.1/IO1.1/3.0 were actually released as 6000 FPS mice. Only later versions were capable of a maximum 9k registry. Regardless of that, don't misunderstand me. Those mice are some, if not the best in terms of precision. I'll even go as far as to say that many people hated the feel of the Mx518/DA etc.. architecture before tracking algoritm was modified into current state. It's inevitably why WMO1.1 and etc.. carry the reputation they have. (At least apart from shape)

I'll also bring up that even with the same architecture, one design may feel nicer than a newer or older model. Specifically referring to tracking modifications made to code.

It's nice if you want to give out personal stats, but those are fairly meaningless. What matters is that you like what you use, nothing more.
Edited by Skylit - 5/27/13 at 6:43am
post #5 of 23
Thread Starter 
Maybe how good a mouse is can be due to subjective feel... but for me the custom Avago coupled with the shape - the G400 just does not feel right to me - I play at 26cm/360 in QL and I have tried playing with the G400 and I have also tried (had for the longest time) playing with the WMO... and with the WMO I am literally 15% more accurate on average than with the G400... with the WMO where I point the mouse is where it WILL go and it will track how I want it. With the G400 it just doesn't feel right at all compared to the WMO. I was using it at 400 DPI setting at 500 Hz.

I may try the Razer Deathadder 3G or 3.5G or 4G and see whether I like it or not... but for me the G400 is like marmite - I hate it. I have bought and subsequently returned three of these mice. No matter how hard I try to like the G400 I cannot. I won't be making the same mistake again.
Edited by Mancubus - 5/27/13 at 6:54am
post #6 of 23
What do you think about 800 DPI? Apart from it torturing your hand.

Curious.
post #7 of 23
Thread Starter 
At 800 DPI it tracks fairly well and doesn't feel as laggy as the 400 DPI setting. AFAIK Logitech says that 800 DPI is the native value on the G400 and all the other steps are interpolated... so at 400 DPI every second count is discarded. I don't know whether its this or the fact that the frame rate is so much lower compared to the WMO... (5800 vs 9000). I definitely feel the WMO is smoother on its default settings compared to 400 DPI and 500 Hz on the G400. But I can't compare the WMO @ 800 DPI vs G400 @ 800 DPI because the WMO is limited to half of that. Another member of this forum shares a similar view to mine... that 800 DPI is the only usable setting and that if you are not a palm gripper that this mouse is simply unusable. In CAD it is indeed like holding a torture device. Also 45% lg with the WMO and just under 35% with the G400 vs nightmare bots is a BIG difference so its not like I am imagining things, 10-15% accuracy is huge.
Edited by Mancubus - 5/27/13 at 8:56am
post #8 of 23
the caoting plays a big role here as well.. imo the mx518 is still better suited for palmgripping cuz it will stick to your hand. your hand position wilkl never change on that thing and it will become an extension to your hand after some time.. the rubber+glossy is simply superior to the matte plastic the g400 is using now.
post #9 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mancubus View Post

At 800 DPI it tracks fairly well and doesn't feel as laggy as the 400 DPI setting. AFAIK Logitech says that 800 DPI is the native value on the G400 and all the other steps are interpolated... so at 400 DPI every second count is discarded. I don't know whether its this or the fact that the frame rate is so much lower compared to the WMO... (5800 vs 9000). I definitely feel the WMO is smoother on its default settings compared to 400 DPI and 500 Hz on the G400. But I can't compare the WMO @ 800 DPI vs G400 @ 800 DPI because the WMO is limited to half of that. Another member of this forum shares a similar view to mine... that 800 DPI is the only usable setting and that if you are not a palm gripper that this mouse is simply unusable. In CAD it is indeed like holding a torture device. Also 45% lg with the WMO and just under 35% with the G400 vs nightmare bots is a BIG difference so its not like I am imagining things, 10-15% accuracy is huge.

800 and 3600 (4000) resolution counts are native registries. 400 and 1800, or 2000 (S model) are halved and recalculated on controller level. This can cause a slight delay feel and is common among many mice, not including any external changes to actual code. All variations of Deathadder do this as well.

I have a few 6000 and 9000 FPS intelli's. Both feel rather good and the change is negligible to me, though I understand what you mean by smoothness when it comes to switching out to an entirely different architecture and or tracking code. PS: Maximum G400 framerate is 6469, not 5800 (Over driving LED may or may not raise this), though as I mentioned earlier, this is dynamic and fluctuates to optimal range.

Basically, other factors play a significant role. I don't believe your issue is limited to sensor, but rather shape, comfort and weight.
post #10 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylit View Post

800 and 3600 (4000) resolution counts are native registries. 400 and 1800, or 2000 (S model) are halved and recalculated on controller level. This can cause a slight delay feel and is common among many mice, not including any external changes to actual code. All variations of Deathadder do this as well.

I have a few 6000 and 9000 FPS intelli's. Both feel rather good and the change is negligible to me, though I understand what you mean by smoothness when it comes to switching out to an entirely different architecture and or tracking code. PS: Maximum G400 framerate is 6469, not 5800 (Over driving LED may or may not raise this), though as I mentioned earlier, this is dynamic and fluctuates to optimal range.

Basically, other factors play a significant role. I don't believe your issue is limited to sensor, but rather shape, comfort and weight.
does this explain the sailing feeling i get on the deathadder 2013
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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mice
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › Highest frame per second optical sensor.