5GHz mouse and keyboard annyone?

[Caveman0407]

Hi, I had a shower thought on what if you were able to use that 5GHz spectrum for wireless mouse and keyboards since the 2.4GHz spectrum is full of wifi routers and bletooth devices and it will lower your latency. There is also potential for beter mics on wireless headphones since the 5GHz spectrum  can carry more data, making it use less comprestion. 

[WereCatf]

5 minutes ago, Caveman0407 said:

Hi, I had a shower thought on what if you were able to use that 5GHz spectrum for wireless mouse and keyboards since the 2.4GHz spectrum is full of wifi routers and bletooth devices and it will lower your latency.

Not quite. The higher the frequency, the more bandwidth you have. Alas, it doesn't actually do that much for latency and there wouldn't be much -- if any -- benefit there.

10 minutes ago, Caveman0407 said:

There is also potential for beter mics on wireless headphones since the 5GHz spectrum  can carry more data, making it use less comprestion

Compression isn't the problem, the problem is construction. It's perfectly possible to achieve excellent microphone-audio wirelessly on 2.4GHz, but it just simply requires a better setup than what you see in headsets.

[Levent]

21 minutes ago, Caveman0407 said:

if you were able to use that 5GHz spectrum for wireless mouse and keyboards since the 2.4GHz spectrum is full of wifi routers and bletooth devices and it will lower your latency. There is also potential for beter mics on wireless headphones since the 5GHz spectrum  can carry more data, making it use less comprestion. 

I am not an expert on radio communication but I dont think you can magically carry more data over 5ghz bands just buy using higher frequency radio signals. 5Ghz offers more bands to be used resulting in less frequency sharing and resulting in higher speeds. Pretty sure latency is because the way data is processed in bluetooth stack, not just radio frequency because if wifi can have few miliseconds of communication delay between routers, there is no reason for bluetooth to have 100 to 200ms delay besides than protocol itself being the issue.

Edited November 30, 2020 by Levent
Too much caffeine to spellcheck.

[Arika]

With the distances we're talking about for wireless peripherals, the latency difference would be tiny if not completely unnoticeable.

 

2.4Ghz has a max theoretical speed of 450mbps (56MB/s) i can't imagine any "streaming" peripheral data that needs more than that. When talking about audio, the high end of audiophile music files top at 9mbps (correct me if i'm wrong), more bandwidth doesn't really change much if it's not being used.

[WereCatf]

9 minutes ago, Levent said:

I am not an expert on radio communication but I dont think you can magically carry more data over 5ghz bands just buy using higher frequency radio signals. 5Ghz offers more bands to be used resulting in less frequency sharing and resulting in higher speeds.

That's not quite correct. A "band" wrt. radio-signals, is just simply some area between two frequencies someone has defined. It's not a physical thing and thus you can perfectly well have just as many bands around 5GHz as you can have around 2.4GHz. The number of bands doesn't translate into more bandwidth or lower latency, either, in and of itself -- that applies only if the bands are congested. If there is no congestion, there is also no benefit, no matter how many bands you specify. Higher frequency does translate into higher theoretical bandwidth, however.

 

Latency comes mostly from the medium, ie. wired or wireless, the necessary electronics to make use of the medium and the protocol in use and does not directly correlate with bandwidth.

[Ankh Tech]

21 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

That's not quite correct. A "band" wrt. radio-signals, is just simply some area between two frequencies someone has defined. It's not a physical thing and thus you can perfectly well have just as many bands around 5GHz as you can have around 2.4GHz. The number of bands doesn't translate into more bandwidth or lower latency, either, in and of itself -- that applies only if the bands are congested. If there is no congestion, there is also no benefit, no matter how many bands you specify. Higher frequency does translate into higher theoretical bandwidth, however.

 

Latency comes mostly from the medium, ie. wired or wireless, the necessary electronics to make use of the medium and the protocol in use and does not directly correlate with bandwidth.

what is odd is how li-fi hasn't become famous yet, li-fi headsets will be instant theoretically

[WereCatf]

1 minute ago, Ankh Tech said:

what is odd is how li-fi hasn't become famous yet, li-fi headsets will be instant theoretically

The exact same things I mentioned apply with LiFi as well; you still need electronics to produce the signal, to receive the signal and to decode the signal, plus you still need the protocol, all of which are the primary reason for the latency. Whether you use photons or electrons and whether you use copper, air or fiber -- none of those matter that much wrt. latency.

[Ankh Tech]

2 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

The exact same things I mentioned apply with LiFi as well; you still need electronics to produce the signal, to receive the signal and to decode the signal, plus you still need the protocol, all of which are the primary reason for the latency. Whether you use photons or electrons and whether you use copper, air or fiber -- none of those matter that much wrt. latency.

so latency is how long it takes for the signal to translate to something useful? Thought it is how long the signal needs to travel. Then how do some corsair mice be branded as sub 1ms wireless?

[WereCatf]

Just now, Ankh Tech said:

so latency is how long it takes for the signal to translate to something useful? Thought it is how long the signal needs to travel. Then how do some corsair mice be branded as sub 1ms wireless?

They don't use WiFi, they use electronics and a protocol that have been designed all the way from the start just for low latency and low bandwidth and the typical use-patterns that a mouse would see. It's far easier to get lower latency, when you have such a very narrow scope. WiFi, for example, isn't designed for a single, specific use-case: WiFi is supposed to work for all general networking-needs, be backwards-compatible, hugely-configurable and work with lots of different hardware, so its scope of implementation is several orders of magnitude larger.

[Ankh Tech]

2 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

They don't use WiFi, they use electronics and a protocol that have been designed all the way from the start just for low latency and low bandwidth and the typical use-patterns that a mouse would see. It's far easier to get lower latency, when you have such a very narrow scope. WiFi, for example, isn't designed for a single, specific use-case: WiFi is supposed to work for all general networking-needs, be backwards-compatible, hugely-configurable and work with lots of different hardware, so its scope of implementation is several orders of magnitude larger.

so they optimized it to have just enough bandwidth for the lowest latency, so you can't connect more than one mouse, for example to one usb dongle. Interesting. So lower bandwidth means lower latency

[WereCatf]

Just now, Ankh Tech said:

so they optimized it to have just enough bandwidth for the lowest latency, so you can't connect more than one mouse, for example to one usb dongle. Interesting. So lower bandwidth means lower latency

No, I already said several times above that latency does not directly correlate with bandwidth. Bandwidth is only relevant wrt. Corsair's wireless mice in the sense that the protocol has zero need for lots of bandwidth and thus has not been designed to be able to use lots of it.

[Ankh Tech]

4 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

No, I already said several times above that latency does not directly correlate with bandwidth. Bandwidth is only relevant wrt. Corsair's wireless mice in the sense that the protocol has zero need for lots of bandwidth and thus has not been designed to be able to use lots of it.

so they just decreased the latency as much as possible. Okay now I get it