Overclock.net banner
1 - 20 of 101 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi!
My brother recently switched from a Steelseries Sensei to a Mionix AVIOR. I tried both of them for a few minutes and like the shape of both. However, I will only buy one of them. So I started reading through this forum and noticed that a lot of people here do not like the ADNS-9800, love the PMW3310, that the ADNS-9800 basically is an ADNS-9500 with more DPI and that the ADNS-9500's main issue is positive acceleration. "Okay i might go for the PMW3310 then!" - I thought. But after reading Ino's review on the NAOS 7000 I know that the PMW3310 also has acceleration.

So why is one sensor praised and the other one hated?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,584 Posts
the acceleration on the 3310 is a non issue because it is consistent and tiny. As long as acceleration is consistent, acceleration isn't inherently bad. And because it is so small, its virtually impossible to notice it through regular play, so if you dislike acceleration, you shouldn't have a problem with the sensor.

the 9800's sensor isn't consistent in the acceleration and is quite large, sometimes it will move farther then others when you move the mouse at the same speed, which makes it impossible to move the mouse consistently and precisely.
 

·
Mouse reviewer
Joined
·
3,104 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by on1z View Post

Hi!
My brother recently switched from a Steelseries Sensei to a Mionix AVIOR. I tried both of them for a few minutes and like the shape of both. However, I will only buy one of them. So I started reading through this forum and noticed that a lot of people here do not like the ADNS-9800, love the PMW3310, that the ADNS-9800 basically is an ADNS-9500 with more DPI and that the ADNS-9500's main issue is positive acceleration. "Okay i might go for the PMW3310 then!" - I thought. But after reading Ino's review on the NAOS 7000 I know that the PMW3310 also has acceleration.

So why is one sensor praised and the other one hated?
Atavax already said it, accel on 3310 is very minimal and more importantly consistent. Accel on 9500/9800 is not consistent.
It's not too bad, but it still is inconsistent and better avoided. There is a graph that gets thrown around usually with the Xai performance on a G-Pad, that is over exagerrated though as the G-Pad is a very specific glass pad. It's not as much of an issue on better capable surfaces.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,892 Posts
Furthermore, all optical mice have +-0.5% acceleration anyway, but the figure is 10x worse on the 9500 and 9800, 5% and very inconsistent.

Don't listen to anyone on here if they tell you otherwise; ALL 9500 and 9800 mice have this issue with inconsistent acceleration because it is baked into the low-level SROM associated with the sensor. Pixart would need to correct it, the manufacturers' firmware can't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,416 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillhaus View Post

Does the 3310 have more acceleration than the A3090 or AM010, or is it within the expectations of an optical sensor?
Yes, Variance on the LED 9800 is higher than on certain other LED illuminated Alternatives under certain circumstances, if you notice it, is up to you.

As for the rest of the thread, lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
568 Posts
Originally Posted by metal571 View Post

Furthermore, all optical mice have +-0.5% acceleration anyway, but the figure is 10x worse on the 9500 and 9800, 5% and very inconsistent.

Don't listen to anyone on here if they tell you otherwise; ALL 9500 and 9800 mice have this issue with inconsistent acceleration because it is baked into the low-level SROM associated with the sensor. Pixart would need to correct it, the manufacturers' firmware can't.

Skylit has been saying the acceleration (accuracy variance) is due to the specific illumination used with A9500 and A9800.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
252 Posts
Isn't the 3310 just a 9800 with different firmware and LED illumination instead of laser? I'm sure it's more complex than that, which is why I'm asking, but that's what I've gleaned from a lot of posts here on the forums. I might just be stupid.
tongue.gif
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,416 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrvirtualboy View Post

Isn't the 3310 just a 9800 with different firmware and LED illumination instead of laser? I'm sure it's more complex than that, which is why I'm asking, but that's what I've gleaned from a lot of posts here on the forums. I might just be stupid.
tongue.gif
Well yes, that is the tl;dr version, 3988, 3310, 9800 share the DSP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
677 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by metal571 View Post

Right, and it's not being compensated with in the SROM. I might have wrote that post before he mentioned that.
I hypothesized that the coherent light (laser) used by the 9500/9800 sensor caused the tracking variance because it was "too accurate" versus incoherent light based sensors for surfaces leading to the higher variance, so I was elated when I saw Skylit confirm what you are saying, meaning that Pixart would need more work for better tracking code, but that seems like it won't happen...
 

·
lololol
Joined
·
4,390 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreyka View Post

Skylit has been saying the acceleration (accuracy variance) is due to the specific illumination used with A9500 and A9800.
i don't understand... doesn't the sensor just work by comparing sequential 30x30 pixel images?

well i guess if the illumination isn't uniform there could be some systematic errors in the tracking speed... is that why?
 

·
Gone
Joined
·
8,731 Posts
Yes. There is a similar line with lets say a Deathadder 2013 (just an example). Still has acceleration above and below the standard line, but more tight nit.

Also depends on simple tolerances. No two products are completely identical, even if same make and model.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
223 Posts
It's sad because in principle laser illumination will be stronger which would result in a higher potential framerate for a given cmos sensor while maintaining the same image quality.

It seems there's a lot of wasted potential, as with the mouse sensor market basically having one player I doubt we'll see much innovation or refinement on anything but LED which already works fine. Not that 3310 mice aren't great for 99.9% of everyone and 60% of regular posters on this forums and to be honest I'm not sure what real benefits we'd see as tracking speeds are now about equal to human physical limits and cpi can be driven high enough to be completely unusable except in those few games with very fine sensitivity tuning. To be honest I don't really know f what better image quality and framerate would get us in terms of cursor feel.

But it's kind of cool to think about maybe ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edit: Actually, better image quality could also be accomplished either with a higher resolution sensor or a physically larger one, though these would/should come with their own restrictions in terms of illumination quality and lens focal length. I have to guess that either there's not much tangible benefit left to gain or that there aren't the resources or willpower to substantially alter the current design. Or -- given how markets work -- both?
 
1 - 20 of 101 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top