Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Independent Benchmarking System for Mice

Hemos posted more than 7 years ago | from the getting-a-wee-bit-specialized dept.

Input Devices 71

Heartless Gamer writes "Why benchmark a mouse? From ESReality; "In this environment where performance is king, it's ludicrous to think that mouse performance has never been measured for reviewing the products. Imagine reviewing the latest graphics card in the same way. Without benchmarks, reviewers would have to resort to loading up their favourite game and commenting on how their frag count improved. You would have no way to compare NVIDIA and ATI cards apart from the quality of the packaging. Without benchmarking, graphics card reviews would be almost entirely useless. So why do we put up with mouse reviews that are just as useless?""

cancel ×

71 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Duh (5, Insightful)

hcdejong (561314) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195550)

Um, because the most important aspects of a mouse (how it fits your hand, and how it feels) are unquantifiable? I don't care about dpi or whatever, I want to be able to use it all day without getting RSI.

Re:Duh (1)

Neoprofin (871029) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195700)

I have to use about four different mice in my daily life depending on where I am at the given time, only one of which ever gives me problems (which is no fault of the mouse, only of that computers owner for trying to use an small old table as a computer desk). Most mice these days are, for most people, comfortable. So if presented with multiple comfortable mice, at multiple price points, of varying quality, you'd rather just wing it?

So much for that (1)

mungtor (306258) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195754)

All the salient points answered in the first reply. Lively discussion will NOT ensue.

Re:So much for that (1)

Hillgiant (916436) | more than 7 years ago | (#17198978)

You must be new here...

Remind me again? (2, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 7 years ago | (#17200514)

Forgive me if I seem a bit obtuse. Why would I want to mark my benches with mice?

The furniture has already been marked, by the landlady's Siamese.

Re:Duh (3, Interesting)

eebra82 (907996) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195800)

...Which is why you go to the store to check out which one fits your hand. The people who read the reviews are often gamers and often hardcore gamers who want to know which mouse fits their needs, no matter how small the difference is.

Although I agree with you that the comfort is the most important aspect of today's mice, it is only ignorant to assume that everyone thinks the same way. After all, when _some_ people buy a car, they want one that looks and feels good but forget about what's under the hood. The same situation can be applied to mice, because not everyone need to know what's under the hood, but some want to.

Last but not least, what the article suggests is quite correct. A benchmark of a mouse does require proper benchmarking tools and so far, we've only had reviews that measure the looks and the software. I do however disagree with the author of the article, because comparing benchmarks of graphics cards to benchmarks of mice is just wrong. People who buy graphics cards want to know how fast their games will run, while almost no one who's purchasing a mouse wonders if their mice can read info of a surface at 100 miles per hour.

Re:Duh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17196444)

"People who buy graphics cards want to know how fast their games will run, while almost no one who's purchasing a mouse wonders if their mice can read info of a surface at 100 miles per hour."

Usually someone who spends 70 on a corded mouse does it because he wants some things like perfect movement (no negative acceleration and no skips), precision and shape. So yes, people really do look at these kind of things because that's why they buy these mice instead of a good ol' Logitech Pilot Mouse.

Re:Duh (1)

dami99 (1014687) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196670)

There are many very comfortable, but not equal mice.

I own two mx-1000's at home, they are great for everyday use, but very bad for gaming.
-- a little laggy
-- low usb polling frequency

OTOH, I own a G5 which is great for gaming, but not great for everyday use:
-- not wireless
-- fewer buttons

Both mice are great, and I can use all day without any wrist problems.

Re:Duh (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#17198398)

I care about both precision and accuracy. You can't use ANY traditional mouse without risking RSI... But one thing you CAN test is whether the mouse accurately returns to the starting point when moved four inches to the right and four inches to the left, for example. This is a necessity when playing FPS games and the like.

My independent test results: (5, Funny)

revlayle (964221) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195570)

Mouse 1: Only runs into walls 30% of the time; thinks poop are like legos; enjoys the "Macarena"

Mouse 2: Like expensive cheeses; chases own tail; finds Conan O'Brian Funny

Mouse 3: Got out of the maze; presumed missing; my tuna salad sandwich is missing

Results: Use rats next time? Republicans?

Re:My independent test results: (3, Funny)

creimer (824291) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195686)

Try using Democrats next time. They are cheaper by the dozen. However, they will redesign the maze so they can never find the way in or out and fully expect the cheese to be available all the time.

Re:My independent test results: (3, Insightful)

OldeTimeGeek (725417) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195924)

Rather than a Republican, who will say that it was their manifest destiny to get to the cheese first, designate cheese as a protected national resource and then kill anybody else that tries to take it.

Re:My independent test results: (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 7 years ago | (#17201192)

If you replace "cheese" with "babes," then yes.

Re:My independent test results: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17201252)

Instead of designating it a national park/wildlife refuge, so no one can eat the cheese?

Re:My independent test results: (1)

smbarbour (893880) | more than 7 years ago | (#17201212)

Rather than debate Republicans vs. Democrats or any other horse of a different color... let's just say "Try using politicians next time".

Joshua said it best... "A strange game. The only winning move is... not to play."

Re:My independent test results: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17195884)

Mouse 4: Has affinity for toy die-cast motorcycle; Found aspirin under the bed that none of the other mice found

Re:My independent test results: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17196018)

Like expensive cheeses; chases own tail; finds Conan O'Brian Funny

Creepy. Assuming that "chases own tail" is just an obvious euphemism, you've described me to a T.

Re:My independent test results: (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196774)

[...and now we resume our showing of "Mouse Dating Game", currently in progress]
Hello Mouse # 2: If you were a flavor of ice cream, what flavor would you be?

Why benchmark a mouse? (3, Funny)

elzurawka (671029) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195616)

Good point.

Chewing and leaving doots and drippings? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17195624)

I'd say chewing is completely independent of leaving doots and drippings when it comes to marking up my benches.

Why stop there? (3, Insightful)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195734)

As a longtime computer user and builder, I'm shocked - shocked, I say! - that we've never seen a really good benchmarking test for power buttons. I demand a definitive report and comparison on factors like clickiness, springiness, and LED brightness.

Re:Why stop there? (1)

the_tsi (19767) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195930)

Furthermore, not all cables with a NEMA 5-15 connector on one end and an IEC C13 connector on the other are created equally! I demand a panel be created to discuss the possibility of studying the feasability of starting a committee to establish benchmarking standards for computer power cords! This is a moral imperative to ensure the continued survival of the gamer community.

Re:Why stop there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17196038)

Please, please don't let the audiophile people see this. I've already had one try to tell me that a $300 power cable provided cleaner power than the $2 that the stereo came with, and this managed to give him a noticable improvement in audio quality.

Re:Why stop there? (3, Informative)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196332)

You know, that would almost-sorta-kinda-not-really make sense, except that in a computer THE POWER CORD GOES STRAIGHT INTO A TRANSFORMER ANYWAY!

Re:Why stop there? (1)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196660)

Tell that to the clueless audio nuts. I'm sure there are many audiophiles who actually know what they are talking about and won't waste money on completely stupid things, but one conversation I had with a self-described audiophile (who insisted that since gold-plated cables are great, and fiberoptic cables are better, that surely gold-plated fiberoptic cables were the future) still wounds me deeply.

Re:Why stop there? (2, Funny)

pipatron (966506) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196778)

As it does in 99.99% of all audio amplifiers. Hopefully you will never get in contact with the other 0.01%.

Re:Why stop there? (1)

justkarl (775856) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196206)

You're forgetting "slippability", "number of extraneous buttons", and "ability to calm nerves by rolling mouse wheel quickly".

Re:Why stop there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17199164)

Laugh all you want, but I've seen it! They tested several types of buttons, to see which ones were better/worse in terms of how much they "bounce" (electrically).

That was a pretty neat article actually. It helped me perfect my debouncing hardware & software (knowing for sure it'll work with most buttons - not that it had been an issue before though)

Re:Why stop there? (1)

Nicolay77 (258497) | more than 7 years ago | (#17224346)

Well, I don't know about you, but I touch my power button perhaps once a week, if I touch it at all.

The mouse, on the other hand, is used almost constantly and I find that review very useful. And I'm a gamer. I will buy a Logitech MX518 based in that, and of course the pictures of the mouse. It looks comfortable.

ludicrous (1)

Paradise Pete (33184) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195758)

it's ludicrous to think that mouse performance has never been measured for reviewing the products.

For sufficiently small values of ludicrous, of course.

mice men (1)

Sporkinum (655143) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195936)

Linkman: Perhaps we need to know more of these mice men before we can really judge them. Perhaps not. Anyway, our thirty minutes are up.

No benchmarks needed for PERFECT mouse (1)

SomeoneGotMyNick (200685) | more than 7 years ago | (#17195986)

We all know these are the mice [know-library.net] for those who want workmen's comp benefits due to RSI issues

Anyone else notice... (4, Funny)

wampus (1932) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196076)

From TFA: ESReports is an International site, so all Non-English posts will be deleted.

What the hell? Outside of this country EVERYONE speaks English?

Re:Anyone else notice... (1)

bunions (970377) | more than 7 years ago | (#17197044)

Pff, everyone knows that. Everyone speaks english, they just switch to Mexican or African or French or whatever when we're around just to make Americans feel stupid.

Re:Anyone else notice... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17197554)

Refer to the English language article on wikipedia, genius.

My mouse (4, Funny)

Stormcrow309 (590240) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196106)

Unfortunately, I picked up my mouse from the NIHM research facility. It has been horrible. I wake up in the middle of the night and the little bugger is correcting my code, playing with my pda, tweaking my project plans, embezzling from my work. Keeps shopping on line for peanut butter and sunflower seeds.

Now, if you excuse me. It is my time for exercise on the treadmill according to my pda.

Re:My mouse (1)

Lemmeoutada Collecti (588075) | more than 7 years ago | (#17197322)

If your mouse is scheduling your exercise, and you are following that schedule, give that bugger a raise to the all organic expensive peanut butter!

Re:My mouse (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17197872)

Ignore the parent post. I caught my own mouse posting it using my slashdot account. The bugger seems to have changed my password as well.

On a completely unrelated note, my schedule says its time for me to run around in my Zorb. Usually after I do that I find protein bars at my desk for lunch!

Re:My mouse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17197782)

So YOU are the one who got Brain. We were wondering about that. Um, there's something you should know...

Re:My mouse (1)

Minwee (522556) | more than 7 years ago | (#17200708)

Well, yeah, but where are we going to find rubber pants at this time of night?

Why the terrible results for laser mice? (1)

ClayJar (126217) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196298)

Having read the article and looked at all the pretty graphs, I cannot help but wonder why the laser mice get such terrible results for "malfunction speed" compared to the non-laser mice. It would be interesting to dissect the mice and compare the physical size of the sensors, the diopters of the lenses, etc.

Could higher DPI mice (such as the laser mice) be merely lower DPI mice incorporating a different lens? (The lower DPI modes of configurable mice are almost certainly just a downsampling of the high-DPI sensor data.)

Personally, I see no reason coherent light would be any better than incoherent light when it comes to a small illuminator and camera, which is all an optical mouse really is (plus buttons and software). Resolutions on the order of less than 3000 dots per inch are orders of magnitude larger than physical limits due to wavelengths of light and what-have-you. Without the quality of the light being a factor, all that remains are the optics and sensors.

Re:Why the terrible results for laser mice? (1)

BigBuckHunter (722855) | more than 7 years ago | (#17197730)

having read the article and looked at all the pretty graphs, I cannot help but wonder why the laser mice get such terrible results for "malfunction speed" compared to the non-laser mice.

Looking at the equipment, I would guess that it was a function of the surface that was used. Since he was using a turntable, I assume that he either had a felt or carbon-fiber isolation pad (to avoid deflection and low frequency feedback on albums). I assume that different surface types will produce different results with different types of optics.

That said, I'm on a 3 year old MX-500 at the moment, and it made me proud to know that my "old boy" did well against the competition. I lost my model M last year (one too many times in the dishwasher?), so my collection of reliable hardware is dwindling.

BBH

Re:Why the terrible results for laser mice? (1)

Reziac (43301) | more than 7 years ago | (#17211556)

I found the article interesting not as a gamer, but rather as an image editor at the single pixel level, where fine-grained control is extremely helpful.

I was a little amused that the cheap A4Tech did well -- he may not know the name, but they've been around since 1987, and in my experience their products have good hand-feel and are probably among the most reliable for lower-cost mice.

Re:Why the terrible results for laser mice? (1)

Havenwar (867124) | more than 7 years ago | (#17220882)

As from the article

"I then took my mouse surface and cut it into a circle to place on the turntable. I had a choice from many samples that had been sent to me for review, but in the end I used the SteelPad QcK+ because it turned out to be the easiest material to cut into shape and stayed flat on the turntable surface."

So, don't assume. He used a good mat for the surface, not whatever was around. He is also aiming to redo tests with various surfaces to effectively benchmark surfaces.

I believe the bad results for laser mice is part surface, but more importantly part hardware. As far as I've heard laser mice are being touted as the next best thing mostly due to resolution, not speed tolerance.

Re:Why the terrible results for laser mice? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17197846)

Optical mouse technology [mstarmetro.net]

Re:Why the terrible results for laser mice? (1)

PipsqueakOnAP133 (761720) | more than 6 years ago | (#17329658)

Like digicams and video cards, there's multiple factors in determining "goodness".

Digicams: Megapixels get you detail at the expense of noise and sensitivity. Color accuracy gets you prettiness. Color accuracy goes DOWN as megapixels goes up because of noise and sensitivity. Finding the sweet spot for a consumer camera becomes key.

Mice: Camera resolution (DPI) versus framerate (FPS).

To track at a higher speed, you need higher framerates. This is so that at the higher speed, it can actually get the delta between two frames. If your movement speed surpasses what your framerate gets you, it can't tell how far you moved because the two pictures look like it got one frame, and then instantly teleported somewhere else the next frame. No delta. Think about playing quake at 1 frame per second. You see the guy shooting you with a rocket launcher one frame, you see blackness the next. What happened? :)

Moo (1)

Chacham (981) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196648)

Oh great, now slashdot is posting stories of mice and men?

*my benchmark* (1)

guile*fr (515485) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196908)

Is it useable by a left-handed?

Ambidextrous Mice (2, Interesting)

gknoy (899301) | more than 7 years ago | (#17197364)

I wholeheartedly agree!

While I'm not left-handed, I swap between right and left hands at work, to help prevent/minimize RSI effects. I go into computer stores, and see all these funky right-handed mice, and sigh.

I love my Razer, at home.
At work, I'm very happy with this (wired) Logitech mouse.

well written article (1)

Random Destruction (866027) | more than 7 years ago | (#17196996)

"Having decided to benchmarking mice, there was several ways of going about it."

..what?

Microsoft Pain (1)

Deliveranc3 (629997) | more than 7 years ago | (#17197654)

My gaming mouse of choice has become the Intellimouse Optical [microsoft.com] .

But I've noticed something strange with Microsoft Mice, they use a specialized driver (19 megs no less) and develop huge stuttering issues when you don't use the driver.

There's also a problem involving the driver locking up occasionally.

Re:Microsoft Pain (1)

Apocalypse111 (597674) | more than 7 years ago | (#17197962)

Might I recommend a nice Logitech [logitech.com] for your gaming needs? I have one and can't praise it enough. Its a pity that they no longer make (and few programs anymore actually support) the iFeel line of mice they had. Force-feedback mouse, or basically a mouse with a servo-rumble pack. It was tuned very well, and I enjoyed the tactile responce on my desktop and in a few games (Tribes 2, Serious Sam 2, Black and White, Jedi Outcast, and others).

Re:Microsoft Pain (1)

dami99 (1014687) | more than 7 years ago | (#17202126)

I'll second that... Try something like a G5, you will notice a huge difference.

My only problems with logitech is that their setpoint software gets significantly worse with each version... and their bluetooth kb/mouse combo hasn't treated me particularily well when I use blueooth mode.

They have good quality, warranty, and support.

As an example, my middle mouse button was starting to get sticky. I knew it just needed a cleaning, but it was still under its 3 year warranty and I didn't want to break the warranty to take it apart and clean it. So I called them up, and they sent me better model of a brand new kb/mouse set.

Re:Microsoft Pain (1)

Reziac (43301) | more than 7 years ago | (#17211174)

Logitech makes durable, well-designed hardware. But lordy, their drivers... awful, awful, awful. First thing I check when someone's system is randomly locking up is whether it's loading a LT driver.

Myself, I never use any mouse driver other than the default DOS and Win drivers.

My fave mouse was a BSR (DAK era) that had some ridiculously high DPI -- less than 1/4 INCH of motion was sufficient to zoom it clear across the screen. Startling at first, but once I got used to it, it was SO nice, especially for pixel-level editing (I don't use a mouse in gaming, so can't speak to that). Not to mention it only needed a mousepad *literally* the size of a postage stamp.

Unfortunately, it rests in pieces, and I've not seen its like since.

Re:Microsoft Pain (1)

Cederic (9623) | more than 7 years ago | (#17221616)

Ah, I'm with you entirely.

Love Logitech mice. Every mouse I've bought for the last decade is Logitech. Five of them are still in use.

Every single PC on which I use them is using standard Windows mouse drivers. Hate Logitech mouse drivers.

Beautiful hardware, woeful drivers.

(I have the G15 keyboard too. Beautiful hardware, I suffer the drivers - the LCD panel is just that little bit too nice and too useful to ignore)

Re:Microsoft Pain (1)

Reziac (43301) | more than 7 years ago | (#17225710)

I don't buy LT products myself because they just don't seem to fit my hand right. But they sure do last. (For that matter, so do M$ mice.)

LT drivers were hideous all the way back in the DOS era. You'd think 15 years would be long enough to get it right?!

I once had a rodent that could do M$, LT, or Mouse Systems drivers, and you had to move a DIP switch to specify which it would use. Worked fine with the generic M$ driver (M$'s v8.20 mouse driver for DOS is wonderful.. in fact M$ themselves reverted to v8.20 after a brief foray into v9.x). Locked up constantly with the LT driver. Didn't work at all with the Mouse Systems driver.

Microsoft Paine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17198064)

Well I use the laser mouse 5000 and the only thing I've noticed without the drivers is loss of some functionality. BTW there don't really appear to be a significent difference between optical vs laser, however both can be gotten for the same price. Now all I need is the functionality of the newfangled keyboards with the feel of my old IBM "M" keyboard.

Re:Microsoft Pain (1)

Attrition_cp (888039) | more than 7 years ago | (#17198236)

The intellimouse is my mouse of choice in all situations, and I'm on my second one in about 4 years.

However I haven't noticed any stuttering issues and I have never installed any drivers for it. No locking up either.

Personally I wish I could find a black one to match the rest of my desk, haven't seen any, but on the back of one of a Microsoft keyboard box I saw it there, in front of the black keyboard, taunting me... damn thing. The buttons being on opposite sides are much better for gaming in my opinion though, you won't ever mistakingly hit the wrong button because your thumb slips.

Microsoft® Wireless Laser Mouse 5000. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17201264)

Microsoft® Wireless Laser Mouse 5000, Metallic Black [officedepot.com] It has a mail-in rebate [young-america.com] that knocks $5 off the price. I [slashdot.org] had the optical version , but I like the laser mouse button placement better.

There is a benchmark (2, Interesting)

perkr (626584) | more than 7 years ago | (#17198260)

There is something called ISO 9241-9 - Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals - Part 9: Requirements for non-keyboard input devices. It covers mouse performance, and a metric called throughput (TP). Its validity is a matter of considerable debate. You can read the following technical report [ibm.com] from IBM Research for much more information. There is also a recent article in the Journal of Human-Computer Studies 61:6, 2004 by the same author on the same topic.

22 pages? (1)

NickDngr (561211) | more than 7 years ago | (#17199082)

22 pages to talk about mice? No thanks.

.... lame benchmark. (1)

dami99 (1014687) | more than 7 years ago | (#17202254)

@ 2000 DPI, if it is accurately measuring up to 1M/s that is plenty.

I use a 2000 DPI mouse and I am sure the sensor doesn't cover an area of more than 5 cm2 when I am playing. That given, I have to move the mouse > 200 times back and forth in under a second, or move the whole 5cm in less than 1/200th of a second before that becomes a problem.

While I believe I may be able to move that fast, I know I can't accurately point that fast. Perhaps others can?

IMO USB polling speed & DPI are the most important measurements. (.. and only to a point there. I find 500MHz polling great, but 125MHz (Windows standard) greatly lacking)

So I think the "most important graph" really isn't that important.

Just my 2 cents.

(Also, I don't know any hardcore gamers who this would matter to that don't keep their mouse sensitivty VERY tight like me -- this may not apply to some mouse users who need a 1 m2 mousepad.)

Re:.... lame benchmark. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17202728)

You use 5 cm? Hardcore fps gamers use from 20 cm (7.8'') to 40 cm to make a 360 degree turn. Using around FOV 100 and a resolution of 800x600 (yes, they dont use higher res), and given:

360/100 = 3.6, 800x3.6 = 2880, 2880/7.8'' = 369 DPI.

So in worst case scenario a hardcore gamer would need a standard 400 DPI mouse. At this sensitivity they NEED to move the mouse really fast, not to aim, but to turn around quickly, here is were mice lack and what this bechmark is all about.

Re:.... lame benchmark. (1)

dami99 (1014687) | more than 7 years ago | (#17203916)

So what and where is your "hardcore fps gamer"? Also, where do your precise measurements/stats come from?

The lower resolution I can understand (I am the same, usually pretty low res, no/little antialiasing), but I've yet to meet a gamer that used that much room to swing a mouse.... I can't imagine how that is superior since moving your arm takes much longer. A quick twitch is much faster than a wide sweep.

Personally, I used to play a lot more fps than I do now, but I still play quite often. I find a when I have to move my arm further it lowers my stats, and I feel slower.... To each their own, though.

I find the G5s customizable DPI settings kind of nice, but in reality I rarely switch modes when playing. (The exception being while in vehicles in bf2)

Re:.... lame benchmark. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17206302)

Well, on the website that is hosting this mouse review you can find most of this info. You need lower sensitivity to get better aim, that simple. The more you need to move the mouse the more accurate and constant you can be, specially with hit-scan weapons. Constancy is really important, as higher sensitivity makes other factors really alter aim. If it gets chilly outside or you get nervous in tourneys youll start shaking, thats not good for your aim, specially with high sensitivity. You can also get sweat or dust on your mousepad or on the feet of your mouse and the friction is altered, you'll notice a great diference with high sensivitiy.
When i refare to hardcore gamers i mean people that actually win tourneys, etc. I dont mean your tipical 27/4 gamer sitting on his room eating cheetos that plays everything on the market. I mean someone that focuses on a game, attends events, plays on tourneys and plays it to win.

HxWxD (1)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 7 years ago | (#17206996)

Height, width and depth are pretty much the only important values. At least for me. I find most mice awfully humpy and generally aim for the flattest non-laptop mouse I can get my hands on, which currently is Apple's Mighty Mouse - arguably not a mouse for games which heavily involve both mouse buttons. But it feels good. (BTW, the previous one was a Logitech Optical Wheel Mouse.)

I don't give a shit about number of buttons buttons, DPI or polling speed if the mouse feels like a brick.

Re:.... lame benchmark. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17220464)

or move the whole 5cm in less than 1/200th of a second

More like 1/20th of a second, to reach an average speed of 1m/s. The thing is, for these purposes peak speed matters, so you're talking more like 1/10th of a second assuming a normal triangular acceleration/deceleration profile (in that case, the peak speed is twice the average speed).

Seems silly, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17203722)

The premise is actually quite true. With more products touting fancy technologies (optical, laser) and quoting meaningless figures (1000 DPI, 2000 DPI), it is nice that somebody is actually testing these mice to find out how they actually perform. Since the results are not as obvious as one might assume, there actually is justification for benchmarking. Sure, there are other factors such as ergonomics that factor heavily into mice, but that doesn't mean that benchmarks should be ignored. A lot of mice are similar enough in ergonomic design, for example, that the differences in shape are negligible... so then how do you judge between them, especially if there's a difference in price?

The two main criteria that he uses are good, those being "perfect control" and "malfunction speed". The secondary criteria, DPI vs resolution, is bogus however. This is because he uses pixel distance to measure rotational speed, as if rotational speed is based on resolution, which it is not (in a 3d or vector engine). His implication is that each "tick" of mouse movement corresponds with the screen shifting by one pixel, and this is false, as the game engine (should) translate mouse movement according to the game engine's internal units. The renderer determines the granularity of the image, not the granularity of input. His theory implies that lower resolutions = faster mice, which is only true for fixed-scale (i.e. sprite) graphics.

Linux polls usb at what rate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17264928)

Also 125 hz or what?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>