wireless vs wired mice

[Bombastinator]

28 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Not sure how that's relevant since the point you were making is that wireless mice are too heavy.

It actually is possible if the bottleneck is elsewhere, like the USB2.0 connection. And even if it was slower, it is only by 1-2ms which is impossible to notice and can definitely be considered as fast.

You can get a G305 for $50 or even less.

Yes, but I assume that you aren't that serious about gaming. I doubt it is too sensitive, it's probably not accurate enough TBH.

Not perception, they filmed it with a slow motion camera and the wireless was 1ms faster than wired on average.

Re: weight

wasn’t my point.  I can see how it could come off that way though.  I personally don’t see the point of an ultralight mouse, but apparently others do. So absolutes rather than merely usability.  
 

re: speed

port saturation and perception again.  Treated but interesting flip in between comment on weight.  
 

re: cost

if it’s within range it’s within range.  Would have to compete with a wired mouse at a similar price point though.  One would assume such a mouse would have more features but that might not be the case.

 

Re: camera

The only way that would be possible is if they're  doing more processing but faster. I suspect they’re avoiding using standard mouse drivers and specialty wireless dongles.  So no longer apples to apples.  The speed improvement would not be in the mouse but in the way it’s data is handled.  Could be in computer or in dongle.

Doesnt matter I guess if such specialty stuff is unavailable for wired mice.  It would be a gimp of wired mice.  Possibly deliberate if they use outside software for both. Possibly not deliberate if software improvement is done in dongle.  Logitech has been using software apps for mice for a long time now.

Edited August 11, 2020 by Bombastinator

[Oswin]

18 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

You can get a G305 for $50 or even less.

to add to this a G703 may also be found for under $80 new on some occasions. 

[PCGuy_5960]

12 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

The only way that would be possible is if they're  doing more processing but faster. I suspect they’re avoiding using standard mouse drivers and specialty wireless dongles.  So no longer apples to apples.  The speed improvement would not be in the mouse but in the way it’s data is handled.  Could be in computer or in dongle.

Doesnt matter I guess if such specialty stuff is unavailable for wired mice.  It would be a gimp of wired mice.  Possibly deliberate if they use outside software for both. Possibly not deliberate if software improvement is done in dongle.  Logitech has been using software apps for mice for a long time now.

Dude there isn't some big conspiracy to make wireless mice appear faster or anything, I don't know anyone who uses custom mouse drivers (edit: and CSGO uses raw input so custom mouse drivers make no difference) and I haven't heard anyone complain that their mouse isn't working properly when they don't have G-hub or LGS installed. Yes, Logitech is using custom dongles for each mouse, I think that was obvious, we aren't talking about $5 wireless mice, we are talking about mice that often cost upwards of $100. Doesn't matter how it's done, what matters is that the difference in latency between wired and wireless is pretty much 0.

[Bombastinator]

10 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Dude there isn't some big conspiracy to make wireless mice appear faster or anything, I don't know anyone who uses custom mouse drivers and I haven't heard anyone complain that their mouse isn't working properly when they don't have G-hub or LGS installed. Yes, Logitech is using custom dongles for each mouse, I think that was obvious, we aren't talking about $5 wireless mice, we are talking about mice that often cost upwards of $100. Doesn't matter how it's done, what matters is that the difference in latency between wired and wireless is pretty much 0.

If you’ve got a Logitech mouse you’ve got custom software.  It’s the only way they do it.  Been that way for a very very long time.  You’re Making a distinction between custom software and custom drivers.  The driver is already in the computer.  The software talks to the driver. The issue is the port.  There was a USB 1ms bottleneck mentioned. It’s not in the metal of the port. Those are just metal pins.  It has to be in the way the data is being handled.  There is just more data and cleaning of signal required for wireless signals.  That can’t magically go away.  I could be done quickly though.  That would have to be done somewhere, and it would have to be done before getting to the usb system or instead of it. 

Edited August 11, 2020 by Bombastinator

[PCGuy_5960]

14 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

If you’ve got a Logitech mouse you’ve got custom software.  It’s the only way they do it.  Been that way for a very very long time.  You’re Making a distinction between custom software and custom drivers.  The driver is already in the computer.  The software talks to the driver. The issue is the port.  There was a USB 1ms bottleneck mentioned. It’s not in the metal of the port. Those are just metal pins.  It has to be in the way the data is being handled.  There is just more data and cleaning of signal required for wireless signals.  That can’t magically go away.  I could be done quickly though.  That would have to be done somewhere, and it would have to be done before getting to the usb system or instead of it. 

I'm a bit confused, are you saying that G-Hub or LGS are boosting the mouse's performance? Because there is no evidence of that being the case. (also, see the edit, CS uses raw input, so no piece of software should affect mouse input) They are probably using some advanced firmware or something like that to achieve such low latency, sure, no one other than logitech engineers can really tell you how they are making wireless mice as fast as wired, what I can tell you is that they are somehow doing it

[Lord Vile]

4 hours ago, Oswin said:

how much interference do you have?

sent this video 3 times, have you watched it?

*mind you this video was made 4 years ago.

Wouldn’t say they’re realistic of typical home use, at a lan you’re not using a lot of different frequency’s and it also depends on how they’re sending data  (I’m guessing it’s digital not a continuous wave) and how they’re encoding and decoding that. 

[Oswin]

4 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

Wouldn’t say they’re realistic of typical home use, at a lan you’re not using a lot of different frequency’s and it also depends on how they’re sending data  (I’m guessing it’s digital not a continuous wave) and how they’re encoding and decoding that. 

how can it be digital if they literally put an antenna in front of the mouse?

 

also this room is to test the worse possible scenario of interference

Edited August 11, 2020 by Oswin

[Bombastinator]

5 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

I'm a bit confused, are you saying that G-Hub or LGS are boosting the mouse's performance? Because there is no evidence of that being the case. (also, see the edit, CS uses raw input, so no piece of software should affect mouse input) They are probably using some advanced firmware or something like that to achieve such low latency, sure, no one other than logitech engineers can really tell you how they are making wireless mice as fast as wired, what I can tell you is that they are somehow doing it

I’m merely saying that the signal of a wired mouse needs less processing to go the same speed as a wireless signal.  Therefore more processing has to be done somewhere.  I don’t know where that somewhere is.  There are several options. 

 

For a wireless mouse to go as fast or faster it would have to have a lot more attention paid to its signal processing.  That has to be done somewhere.  There are bottlenecks at likely several places.  One of them that seems to matter for wired mice seems to be the generic USB driver.  That doesn’t happen at the port though, it happens inside the machine. There are a several points where this processing might be done.  In the puck(? for want of a better term to describe the lumpy bit you hold in your had),  In the dongle while signals are being processed inside the mouse before the connection, or in the part after the mouse sends the signal from it to the puck(?) through the signal carrier (wired or wireless) and through the chip on the motherboard that takes the signal and sends it to the cpu. Inside the cpu before all or part of the driver software, instead of the driver soft ware, or after the driver software (again unlikely, much like the puck option)  Or possibly any or all.  In the puck means wireless mice are getting better sensors and processing than wired mice are. So a gimp.  This strikes me as doubtful.  In the dongle, which can be thought of sort of as the wire, the signal carrier perhaps (which would be a no gimp) or after the signal has gone through the hardwired USB controller. (So gimp again) notable is Logitech has only used GUI mouse software that runs after the hardwired usb controller for some time for both wired and wireless mice.

[Bombastinator]

9 minutes ago, Oswin said:

how can it be digital if they literally put an antenna in front of the mouse?

 

also this room is to test the worse possible scenario of interference

Location of antenna doesn’t affect whether it is using a digital signal or an analog signal.  

 

ruminations  on laser vs roller ball mice:

Spoiler

I don’t think a laser receptor even puts out an analog signal in the first place.  A roller ball would but roller ball mice haven’t existed for a long time.  The only thing I know of that uses a ball at all are a few remaining trackballs and those are laser based. Pots are just gone.

 

[PCGuy_5960]

4 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

One of them that seems to matter for wired mice seems to be the generic USB driver

Again, as I said before, CS uses raw input so drivers shouldn't make any difference. And even if logitech did use custom drivers that reduced latency, why on earth would all their other mice not have it too? If all it took to improve latency was good drivers, they could literally have released a wired mouse instead that's cheaper to make and charged a huge premium for the "esports drivers" or something. Again, why does it matter how they do it? If the end result is as good as their wired mice, then it is as good as their wired mice.

[Oswin]

1 minute ago, Bombastinator said:

Location of antenna doesn’t affect whether it is using a digital signal or an analog signal.  

 

ruminations  on laser vs roller ball mice:

  Hide contents

I don’t think a laser receptor even puts out an analog signal in the first place.  A roller ball would but roller ball mice haven’t existed for a long time.  The only thing I know of that uses a ball at all are a few remaining trackballs and those are laser based. Pots are just gone.

 

wait i don't quite understand, are you referring to the signal of the mouse? because afaik that antenna produces radio signals

[Bombastinator]

10 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

 And even if logitech did use custom drivers that reduced latency, why on earth would all their other mice not have it too?

Why indeed.  Do they if they exist? I don’t know.  I’m not even sure what you are referring to by CS.

 

13 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Again, why does it matter how they do it? If the end result is as good as their wired mice, then it is as good as their wired mice.

Their wired mice.  The could be choosing not to increase the speed of their wired mice even though they could simply because they’re competitive with wired mice by other companies.  What is available to the consumer is what is available to the consumer though. 
 

It matters how they do it because physics.  They’re not breaking the laws of physics, so they’re doing something different. A wired connection is slower than a wireless connection because physics ergo they are making the speed loss up somewhere.  This speed loss recoupment is not available to wired mice for some reason.  What that reason is is unknown.  

[Bombastinator]

28 minutes ago, Oswin said:

wait i don't quite understand, are you referring to the signal of the mouse? because afaik that antenna produces radio signals

Radio is analog but can be used digitally.  Digital (or digitalized) radio signal can (but doesn’t always) have a longer useful maximum range than analog.  Placing the antenna in front of the Device could mean something but doesn’t automatically do so. It merely means the range is below maximum in either instance.

[Oswin]

3 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Radio is analog but can be used digitally.  Digital (or digitalized) radio signal can (but doesn’t always) have a longer useful maximum range than analog.  Placing the antenna in front of the Device could mean something but doesn’t automatically do so. It merely means the range is below maximum in either instance.

i see, i still dont get how this ties up with the arguments above, is there something that i am missing?

[PCGuy_5960]

4 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Why indeed.  Do they if they exist? I don’t know.  I’m not even sure what you are referring to by CS.

Counterstrike, the game they used to test.

4 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Their wired mice.  The could be choosing not to increase the speed of their wired mice even though they could simply because they’re competitive with wired mice by other companies.  What is available to the consumer is what is available to the consumer though. 

Sorry, but this is some anti-vaxx level conspiracy theory. They are a business, if they could sell less for more, they absolutely would. Wired mice are simpler and cheaper to produce, so if this magic driver existed, they would absolutely sell wired "esports ready" mice with 0 latency for like $200 each and make way more profit than they ever could from wireless.

9 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

It matters how they do it because physics.  They’re not breaking the laws of physics, so they’re doing something different. A wired connection is slower than a wireless connection because physics ergo they are making the speed loss up somewhere.  This speed loss recoupment is not available to wired mice for some reason.  What that reason is is unknown.  

Or maybe, the speed loss is just minimized through clever optimization of all the parts involved in the wireless connection. And this signal processing delay is so little that it isn't even noticeable and can't accurately be measured since it is within the margin of error. That seems a bit more likely than some super secret conspiracy mouse driver that makes wired mice slower, no? 

[Bombastinator]

4 minutes ago, Oswin said:

i see, i still dont get how this ties up with the arguments above, is there something that i am missing?

I am merely explaining why I made the statement I did.  This statement was about your reply. A clarification. It seemed to me you felt the location mattered and proved something.  I was pointing out that because it is close, it might not.

[Oswin]

2 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

I am merely explaining why I made the statement I did.  This statement was about your reply. A clarification. It seemed to me you felt the location mattered and proved something.  I was pointing out that because it is close, it might not.

i see, just to clarify i wasn't referring to the location.

[Bombastinator]

8 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Counterstrike, the game they used to test.

Sorry, but this is some anti-vaxx level conspiracy theory. They are a business, if they could sell less for more, they absolutely would. Wired mice are simpler and cheaper to produce, so if this magic driver existed, they would absolutely sell wired "esports ready" mice with 0 latency for like $200 each and make way more profit than they ever could from wireless.

Or maybe, the speed loss is just minimized through clever optimization of all the parts involved in the wireless connection. And this signal processing delay is so little that it isn't even noticeable and can't accurately be measured since it is within the margin of error. That seems a bit more likely than some super secret conspiracy mouse driver that makes wired mice slower, no? 

Definition of where the game is pulling “raw” data from remains vague. So the game is end running the driver and grabbing the data directly from the usb box on the motherboard? From the pins in the port? recoupment could have been done before the raw data was pulled or there was special stuff specifically for counter strike already in place. Aissues is where the bottleneck is.  If it’s the USB chip on the motherboard and it pulls from the pins it’s helping not hindering.  Makes gimping less likely but not impossible.  Would also require counter strike to do all the stuff the Logitech software does itself.  Logitech would have to be able to put its own stuff into counter strike code

[Bombastinator]

10 minutes ago, Oswin said:

i see, just to clarify i wasn't referring to the location.

Ah.

[PCGuy_5960]

12 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Definition of where the game is pulling “raw” data from remains vague. So the game is end running the driver and grabbing the data directly from the usb box on the motherboard? From the pins in the port?

USB directly AFAIK, there are a lot of mouse drivers out there and none of them work when raw input is enabled.

12 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Would also require counter strike to do all the stuff the Logitech software does itself.  Logitech would have to be able to put its own stuff into counter strike code

Sorry, just no. Is Razer doing the same too? Corsair? How many others are in on it too? There are way too many almost 0 latency wireless mice out there for it to be some huge conspiracy or some secret driver. It's just good signal processing. 

 

And this is getting way too off topic, op didn't ask how recent wireless mice have such low latency, he asked if wired and wireless are equally good and right now, they are. That's all that really matters here.

[Bombastinator]

12 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

USB directly AFAIK, there are a lot of mouse drivers out there and none of them work when raw input is enabled.

Sorry, just no. Is Razer doing the same too? Corsair? How many others are in on it too? There are way too many almost 0 latency wireless mice out there for it to be some huge conspiracy or some secret driver. It's just good signal processing. 

 

And this is getting way too off topic, op didn't ask how recent wireless mice have such low latency, he asked if wired and wireless are equally good and right now, they are. That's all that really matters here.

Re raw:

so CS basically has its own mouse driver in it that works with all brands and all types of mouse.  Probably imperfectly.  More implication that the recoupment is in the dongle.  Also implies that this good signal processing may not be being applied evenly.  If it’s not an available commercially option though it isn’t. 
 

re: off topic.  
Sort of.  He asked which type he should buy at a specific (high but not unlimited) price point. Is there less performance difference between wireless and wired mice at this price point? Yes.   None? Value judgements need to be made. Depends on instance and use case and the needs of the user. Use case and needs are not stated.

[soldier_ph]

Best Gaming Mouse: Cooler Master MM710

 

 

Best Mulitmedia and Work Mouse: Logitech MX Master 3

 

 

My primary Mouse right now is the MM710 and I will be writing a review about it once I've got my new Gaming Notebook and I can Game again. So far I have owned every MX Master: The OG first Gen and Second Gen and I want the 3 or newest Gen too once I've got a good amount of cash again to spend on Hardware. So for me there is no Mouse that does it all. And because of that I'm one of the few people who use two Mice at the same time: MX Master for Browsing, Work, Spreadsheets, Coding and when I wanna jump into a game I just lift my Hand over from the MX Master onto my Cooler Master MM710.

 

 

 

#IMO #ComeAtMeBro

[VSTOLL]

Looks like someone is forgetting that a wire is not a perfect transfer thing. It's also susceptible to interference and there's resistence of the wire itself, so it's very possible that the wireless technology is as fast as the wire or faster on ideal conditions. The processing it requires is basically meaningless at this point, as it's so fast and so power efficient to be done quickly enough so it doesn't increase the latency.

 

Interference is not a problem in good mices. I live in a building with 23 apartments and all of them have at least a 2.4 and a 5ghz wifi, I also live in Downtown, so a lot of antenna going on and I NEVER had any problems with my G305 or G502. 

 

It reached a point, as Linus pointed in the video, that if you claim to notice a difference between a wireless and a wired mouse, you are full of shit. The only thing to consider today is only if you really want to be wire free to pay the premium for it, there are no performance loss whatsoever and you pay for it, there's no magic or corporation conspiracy.

[KieranTHeBesT]

4 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

So Goes to perception. No perceptible difference.  Same issue as with SATA SSDs for gaming.  Nvme is lots faster than sata it just doesn’t matter in most or almost all situations. Saturate the port and things become equal if the same port is used. 

 

4 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

Re #1
so yes.  

I would also say that a mouse can be too light.  People have actually put weights in light mice to make them heavier. 

 

re: #2 speed

not sure how it is possible physics wise to do that. Might be possible that wired development totally stopped but wireless development kept going.  A wireless literally mouse requires more processing.  In apples to apples a wireless signal is just going to be slower than a wired one.  Might not be apples to apples anymore.

 

re: #4 reliability

same point as @Oswin then.  Reduce/near eliminated in some mice.  Draws same question: are they in budget?

 

re: end note (not 5)

I do game with my now 5 year old $5 mouse.  Thing is still sold but it’s a $20 mouse now.   I actually find it too sensitive, because it tends to jump around making aiming difficult.  I attribute that to my essential tremor issues and not the fault of the mouse.   Not a problem I expect other to have.

 

 

4 hours ago, Doobeedoo said:

Personally I don't mind wire, with good quality cable, bungee, I don't think about it. But wireless mice from Logitech and Razer are top notch, better than some wired, anyone following mice tech or play competitive know this. 

 

4 hours ago, Oswin said:

you do mean the G305?

 

6 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

shit, i forgot r6s existed. Valorant too, not to mention the huge number of non pros, but very high level players that use it. 

should i get razer viper mini, g305 or g703?

[Oswin]

Just now, KieranTHeBesT said:

 

 

 

 

should i get razer viper mini, g305 or g703?

do you have a preferred grip style? measurements? 

the viper mini is not a wireless mouse btw.