Anyone else think a refined AM010 would be superior to these 3389 mice? - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

Anyone else think a refined AM010 would be superior to these 3389 mice?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 78 (permalink) Old 01-05-2020, 08:37 AM - Thread Starter
New to Overclock.net
 
r0ach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,380
Rep: 176 (Unique: 115)
Anyone else think a refined AM010 would be superior to these 3389 mice?

Yea, the 3389 has higher granularity, but that is it's only positive feature. I and numerous other people in the past have noticed the AM010 is a more responsive sensor than the latest and greatest from Pixart. Logitech and other companies should be attempting to refine and improve upon the AM010 branch and give up their current trajectories. I've tried the 3327 (which people claim is some sort of evolution of the AM010) in the Corsair M55, and while something about Corsair's implementation is a little rough around the edges, you can tell the potential is there and would probably be a lot better in a Logitech mouse.

The M55's concave sides making it uncomfortable to hold is a different story and why I don't use it, but as soon as someone releases a good shape with an evolved AM010 sensor whether it's the 3327 or something else, I think you'll see people start switching off the 3360/3389 line. Both the AM010 and 3327 feel very similar in responsiveness to each other and a bit more raw in nature like an MLT04, while the 3389 doesn't seem to have the hair trigger response and is also starting to get into the realm of the cursor movement feeling entirely synthetic in nature.

People were trying to claim the AM010 feels twitchier due to being a low FPS sensor, but apparently that is not the reason:

Quote: Originally Posted by qsxcv View Post
i dont think am010 feels the way it does because of fps. 3366 which has comparable fps up to ~0.75m/s feels considerably smoother than am010 even at low speeds

This QVC dude tries to sell it as a positive for the 3366, but it's not. All he's really saying is the 3366 is taking your input and overly cooking it making it too synthetic. I realize sensors have to filter out some 'noise' or clip values outside a certain range to prevent jitter, but the further they go trying to make things like jitter completely impossible by clamping all your input into a narrow band, the further they make sensors feel absolutely nothing like how they should feel - like an MLT04.

Maybe this could be solved by forcing Pixart to remove the two frames of interpolation/smoothing/whatever you want to call it they put on these 3360/3389 sensors, but I have no idea if the sensor tracking implodes for some reason without it. I hear there was a zero frames interpolation G303 firmware, but I don't have a G303 so never tried it. I'm guessing all of their anti-jitter "technology" relies on interpolating these two frames and if they didn't do that, they would only be able to raise DPI to like 3000 and want to try and fool people with one million DPI marketing gimmicks instead.

Mouse Input Lag BIOS & Windows Optimization Guide
too many personal messages to reply to
r0ach is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 78 (permalink) Old 01-05-2020, 08:54 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
gipetto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 560
Rep: 13 (Unique: 9)
The zaunkoenig devs mentioned they're using the srom_0x05 firmware which removes much of the smoothing. I don't know the exact specifics but i'm using it on my custom mouse at the moment. There was talk of an NDA with it, but it's been hosted on their github in the open so it's there for whoever wants it.
gipetto is offline  
post #3 of 78 (permalink) Old 01-05-2020, 09:19 AM
Mouse Junkie
 
vanir1337's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: localhost
Posts: 1,433
Rep: 39 (Unique: 35)

Logitech G PRO Wireless | Custom Huado Mousepad | Sharkoon PureWriter TKL Blue | HyperX Cloud
vanir1337 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 78 (permalink) Old 01-05-2020, 09:28 AM
►¿¿¿
 
Axaion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Denmark
Posts: 2,212
Rep: 56 (Unique: 48)
Quote: Originally Posted by r0ach View Post
Yea, the 3389 has higher granularity, but that is it's only positive feature. I and numerous other people in the past have noticed the AM010 is a more responsive sensor than the latest and greatest from Pixart. Logitech and other companies should be attempting to refine and improve upon the AM010 branch and give up their current trajectories. I've tried the 3327 (which people claim is some sort of evolution of the AM010) in the Corsair M55, and while something about Corsair's implementation is a little rough around the edges, you can tell the potential is there and would probably be a lot better in a Logitech mouse.

The M55's concave sides making it uncomfortable to hold is a different story and why I don't use it, but as soon as someone releases a good shape with an evolved AM010 sensor whether it's the 3327 or something else, I think you'll see people start switching off the 3360/3389 line. Both the AM010 and 3327 feel very similar in responsiveness to each other and a bit more raw in nature like an MLT04, while the 3389 doesn't seem to have the hair trigger response and is also starting to get into the realm of the cursor movement feeling entirely synthetic in nature.

People were trying to claim the AM010 feels twitchier due to being a low FPS sensor, but apparently that is not the reason:




This QVC dude tries to sell it as a positive for the 3366, but it's not. All he's really saying is the 3366 is taking your input and overly cooking it making it too synthetic. I realize sensors have to filter out some 'noise' or clip values outside a certain range to prevent jitter, but the further they go trying to make things like jitter completely impossible by clamping all your input into a narrow band, the further they make sensors feel absolutely nothing like how they should feel - like an MLT04.

Maybe this could be solved by forcing Pixart to remove the two frames of interpolation/smoothing/whatever you want to call it they put on these 3360/3389 sensors, but I have no idea if the sensor tracking implodes for some reason without it. I hear there was a zero frames interpolation G303 firmware, but I don't have a G303 so never tried it. I'm guessing all of their anti-jitter "technology" relies on interpolating these two frames and if they didn't do that, they would only be able to raise DPI to like 3000 and want to try and fool people with one million DPI marketing gimmicks instead.
>This QVC dude
its qsxcv, it really shows youve been gone forever when you have no idea who he is on the mice forum

That being said, i still prefer mlt04 at 1000hz over my Pro Intellimouse (3389, iirc), while the xm1 feels better to me than the Pro Intellimouse does, but has a really bad shape and size for me, both have too stiff buttons on top :\

-.-
(14 items)
CPU
3700x
Motherboard
Crosshair VII Hero
GPU
MSi GTX 970 Gaming 4G
RAM
G.skill FlareX 3200Mhz CL14
Hard Drive
SX8200 Pro 1TB +30 TB Spinning Rust
Power Supply
Seasonic SSR-1000TR
Cooling
Dark Rock 4 Pro
Case
Fractal R6 (Dont buy, terrible HDD trays)
Operating System
Win 10 Pro x64
Monitor
Viewsonic VX2268wm
Keyboard
SteelKeys 6G
Mouse
Pro Intellimouse
Mousepad
QcK Heavy/Artisan Zero XL FX
Audio
Craptive AE-5
▲ hide details ▲
Axaion is online now  
post #5 of 78 (permalink) Old 01-05-2020, 10:04 AM - Thread Starter
New to Overclock.net
 
r0ach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,380
Rep: 176 (Unique: 115)
Besides the AM010 and 3327 both feeling a bit more responsive than 3389 sensors, the XM1 for me has the issue of feeling less linear in nature in terms of movement as well. From start to finish in a flick shot, the G302 feels linear all the way through, while the XM1's 3389 is way less consistent. I think it's due to variable framerate and having a large difference in peak and 'idle' on this sensor. It gives you a feeling of inconsistency similar to acceleration even if it doesn't show up as acceleration on a graph.

I think the G302 has variable framerate as well, but has a much smaller gap in idle and peak, high speed framerate. The idea of having variable framerate on a "gaming mouse" is completely and utterly stupid. It should be a wireless mouse ONLY feature, but it's on a whole lot of sensors now and not just this XM1. As for other XM1 issues, buttons have lots of post-travel that causes the buttons to rebound with a loud "thunk" sound (which has to be fixed by sticking a folded over piece of paper towel under the buttons), and the Chinese Omrons instead of a 'click' sound have a way higher pitched glass breaking sound.

Mouse Input Lag BIOS & Windows Optimization Guide
too many personal messages to reply to

Last edited by r0ach; 01-05-2020 at 10:07 AM.
r0ach is offline  
post #6 of 78 (permalink) Old 01-05-2020, 10:06 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
NDUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 87
Rep: 7 (Unique: 6)
I've tried MLT04 mice and they felt good at low speed but not that good at high speed. I don't know why, but it seemed inferior to PMW3360/3366 for flicking.

I'm really dying to see what a true 8khz implementation of the PMW3360 feels like (M1K). I have an aiming style that despises low polling rates [youtube.com/watch?v=xscDMgxHhBQ make sure to leave a dislike :^)].

If I drop to 500hz my accuracy plummets. It seems that polling rate matters a lot w/ regard to flicks, I guess because the mouse needs to read acceleration/deceleration at an extremely high rate to accurately produce the "apex"/stopping point of each flick.
NDUS is offline  
post #7 of 78 (permalink) Old 01-05-2020, 10:22 AM - Thread Starter
New to Overclock.net
 
r0ach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,380
Rep: 176 (Unique: 115)
I'm also a lot better with 1000hz than 500hz, but anything higher than 1000hz is extreme diminishing returns and is just going to cause too much IO spam. Using a 1000hz keyboard instead of a 125hz one already degrades performance of the mouse and bogs down cursor movement, so cranking polling of the mouse to 8000hz is probably entirely self-defeating with more negatives than positives. You'll probably see increased stutter in things like video frame delivery too.

I tested XM1 on a Haswell 4 core box and it was doing 12-15% cpu usage when I moved the mouse fast with Chromium open on Win 8.1 just at 1000hz. Raising that to 8000hz will be the equivalent of DOS'ing your own computer blowing up your CPU and entire system IO where it has no time to deal with anything else. As I said, I think it will be a completely self defeating process and in practice I wouldn't be surprised if the mouse in the real world felt the same at say 2000hz as it does at 8000hz because both diminishing returns and the USB controller not reliably handling anything higher over a certain point no matter what mouse tester says.

Mouse Input Lag BIOS & Windows Optimization Guide
too many personal messages to reply to
r0ach is offline  
post #8 of 78 (permalink) Old 01-05-2020, 10:35 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
numberfive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 613
Rep: 21 (Unique: 11)
Quote: Originally Posted by NDUS View Post
It seems that polling rate matters a lot w/ regard to flicks
not really

Quote: Originally Posted by NDUS View Post
I have an aiming style that despises low polling rates
not really

Quote: Originally Posted by NDUS View Post
I guess because the mouse needs to read acceleration/deceleration at an extremely high rate to accurately produce the "apex"/stopping point of each flick.
mouse reads it exactly the same way with 125hz and 8khz polling, because the frame rate at which sensor takes the snapshots of the surface is dynamic and unrelated to polling rate
numberfive is offline  
post #9 of 78 (permalink) Old 01-05-2020, 11:13 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
NDUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 87
Rep: 7 (Unique: 6)
Quote: Originally Posted by numberfive View Post
not really
You have psychic knowledge of the effect polling rate has on my accuracy?

Quote: Originally Posted by numberfive View Post
mouse reads it exactly the same way with 125hz and 8khz polling, because the frame rate at which sensor takes the snapshots of the surface is dynamic and unrelated to polling rate
Yes, but the reporting of that data is less accurate/up-to-date, especially in high-speed acceleration/deceleration. I don't know why we're even arguing about this. Go turn your mouse on 125hz and flick in mousetester, then do the same thing in 1000hz and observe the recorded peak & fall. Odds are that there's a polling gap at the peak of the flick on the lower-polling-rate graph.
NDUS is offline  
post #10 of 78 (permalink) Old 01-05-2020, 11:15 AM
ٴٴٴ╲⎝⧹˙͜>˙⧸⎠╱
 
TK421's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,787
Rep: 164 (Unique: 128)
Quote: Originally Posted by r0ach View Post
I'm also a lot better with 1000hz than 500hz, but anything higher than 1000hz is extreme diminishing returns and is just going to cause too much IO spam. Using a 1000hz keyboard instead of a 125hz one already degrades performance of the mouse and bogs down cursor movement, so cranking polling of the mouse to 8000hz is probably entirely self-defeating with more negatives than positives. You'll probably see increased stutter in things like video frame delivery too.

I tested XM1 on a Haswell 4 core box and it was doing 12-15% cpu usage when I moved the mouse fast with Chromium open on Win 8.1 just at 1000hz. Raising that to 8000hz will be the equivalent of DOS'ing your own computer blowing up your CPU and entire system IO where it has no time to deal with anything else. As I said, I think it will be a completely self defeating process and in practice I wouldn't be surprised if the mouse in the real world felt the same at say 2000hz as it does at 8000hz because both diminishing returns and the USB controller not reliably handling anything higher over a certain point no matter what mouse tester says.
what are your comments on logitech mercury sensor?

nͫٴiͤٴcͫٴeͤ੮Һ૯ ცɿ૭ ૭คעٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴ ٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴ ٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴ ٴٴ
█▀█ █▄█ ▀█▀ ▀█▀
PC 1
(6 items)
CPU
Ryzen 9 3950X 1900FCLK
Motherboard
Crosshair VIII Hero Wi-Fi
RAM
B-die 2x16 3800MHz F4-3600C16D-32GTZN
Hard Drive
Samsung 960 Pro 512GB
Power Supply
EVGA 750G2
Cooling
Swiftech H360X3
▲ hide details ▲


TK421 is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off