something to note here, accuracy on this task isnt necessarily related to performance due to misses not counting towards accuracy for up to 200(i think)ms after you get a kill, so how specifically you kill a target matters more than your ttk in this scenario for accuracy. just a minor thing and doesnt change your results though, interesting vid! i expected there to be a noticeable difference in performance tbh, might do some tests myself
@@jaykkng if you play on a 360hz you will notice it even on 240hz its barely noticeable it just takes just as equally overspecced a monitor on the right game (csgo, overwatch) it needs to be on powerful enough hardware to actually tell the difference, a 144 monitor definitely wont cut it and a 240 monitor will be barely noticeable
@@jaykkng boardzy has multiple videos discussing multiple 4khz capable mice and for 4khz polling rate, its only a deciding factor if you have a super high refresh monitor. even if you have a 240hz monitor you should be able to notice the polling difference just ever so slightly, with it actually being a real difference maker on 360hz where in slomo cams you can the 4khz polling rate visibly making a difference
In terms off accuracy, you shouldn't use that as a measurement in target switching scenarios on kovaaks. Kovaaks has a weird 200-250ms grace period after a successful kill where your weapon doesnt shoot until you reach the next target. So slower accurate flicks can provide higher accuracy but lower scores compared to fast shaky flicks that cause you to go on and off targets but result in higher kills. Which is the cause of the accuracy discrepancies you've experienced. Accuracy is only a consistent factor in tracking scenarios with invincible bots if you never let go of your shoot button during the whole run. Still doesnt interfere with your results, just wanted to share information incase you do future testing so you dont get skewed results by chance. Fun watch tho!
Doesn't a 4KHz polling rate translate to a signal every 0.25ms and not every 0.125? It send every quater of a millisecond a signal (1/4th = 0.25) and not every eighth (1/8=0.125). Sorry, I had to write it, as I have been using reddit way too much in recent weeks.
Ive been telling this to people a lot, 1000 and 4000 there are no difference, its best to find what mouse shape is best, and that is what you will aim better with...
Yeah 1000hz polling rate just adds 1ms input delay and it's definitely smooth enough. 500hz has 2ms delay. It's the smallest detail and 2000hz is not even necessary. 500hz actually could make your mouse movement more consistent and less erratic. I'm gonna give 5oohz a try and see the difference between 1000
@@CraftyyFruit the thing is 1ms is virtually immeasurable for any person on this planet, and the 1ms figure would be the max possible delay on a 1000hz mouse (bar any wireless/cable latency), the fact that people still unironically believe they can feel the difference is baffling to me
@@dinisssousa well I can put it like this, I can't tell the difference between 144hz and 140hz. But I would always set my monitor to 144hz because just because you can't notice the difference doesn't mean it's not helping. I also can't tell the difference between 136hz and 140hz. And 132hz and 136hz. Keep going down... I cant tell the difference between 56hz and 60hz. But can I tell the difference between 56hz and 144hz? Yeah. So with polling rate I can tell the difference between 500hz and 4000hz because it's that big jump like 56hz to 144hz. But if u can't tell the difference between 2000hz and 4000hz polling rate, you would still pick the higher value. Because you may not be able to notice the small incremental changes like how you can't with 140hz and 144hz. I would obviously pick the 144hz monitor.
I know, it's not the same, but when I went from 250Hz to 500Hz, I could easily tell a difference even on 60 Hz display. For highest polling rates, you might need faster monitor, really high skill level. Also mouse might feel smoother when flicking, more confident.
I See, I currenty have a 1000hz glorious model o- with a 144hz monitor, gonna get the razer viper v2 pro hyperspeed wireless, originally its 1000hz polling but with the purchase of an additional dongle you can unlock 4000hz, but I personally dont think it would be worth dishing an extra 40$ (considering shipping) for that.
Theoretically speaking, polling rate does not really affect mouse movement on the monitor because it can only be as fast as the refresh rate, however in terms of the cpu registering commands such as clicks then it matter because a 4000 polling date would send a “packet” to the cpu telling what it’s doing at a faster rate than the 1000 polling rate mouse. So within the same spans of time, 4000 sends more packets and therefore leaves less time in between each packet sent, so basically means there is a higher “chance” that your response will be sent to the cpu at a faster rate. If I use an analogy, say company A and company B ships it’s orders at different increments, A ships every 30 minutes and B ships at every 1 hour. Say they all start at the same starting point which is 0 minutes, I place a order at 25 minutes then Company A will ship faster because it’s only 5 minutes between each package sent, that’s the same with 4000hz it will send packages more frequently and most likely your command will be sent quicker too. But company B would have you wait 35 more minutes. Obviously there’s a chance for it to be the same if you send it between 30-60 minutes then the wait is the same, but overall A is still more responsive in that it sends faster.
Different polling rates don't have that much of an effect on how it looks or feels. I'm pretty sure the higher polling rate mice being something that matters is because older mice even at the same polling rate as new ones were just bad and people assume it's because the polling rate is higher that it feels and looks idk more smooth but that is not the reason. The refresh rate on your monitor would have to be unreasonably high to notice the difference between 1000 and 4000hz like upwards of 5000+hz because it is not exactly the same as refresh rate on a monitor and even on a 4000hz monitor you wouldn't be able to tell which mouse was 1000 and 4000hz and maybe even 125 to 4000.
This is not true. Even if you only have a 60hz monitor you can feel a difference with higher polling rate for the same reason you can feel a difference of higher frame rates on a 60hz display.
@@OrganicGreens The only difference between lets say 250hz to 1000hz on the same mouse will be that the 250hz feels like the dpi is set slightly lower like lets say the 1000hz feels like 800dpi the 250hz feels like 750dpi. And besides if you use a program that shows the hz of your mouse, when it's set to 1000hz+ it will still be averaging around 550 to 600hz even though it's set higher with most mice
I think you might be right on the money. Several 4k mice have been shown to perform worse than the G pro superlight. There's far more elements at play that contribute to quick accurate input. As per usual reality is probably far more nuanced than simply focusing on big numbers.
Its not going to be night and day. But it is a difference. Dpi is a huge factor here. If you are running lower than 1600dpi you cant even saturate a 2000 or 4000hz polling rate. There simply isnt enough data being created. So 1600dpi or higher and at say 500 fps, there are times when your 1000hz mouse wont quite hit as fast as actually possible. Basically i think of it as 2000hz plus polling is ensuring that there are virtually no scenarios in a game scenario where your mouse is limiting you in any way. Maybe 1/4 or even 1/16 of those polls will be getting through a little bit faster than it would at 1000hz. Also i havent seen anyone mention this yet but some games can actually saturate your cpu with evwn a 4000hz polling rate and cause you to lose some frames. I have seen a test in warzone that showed that. Although jokes on me i think im the only person still playing warzone on mouse and keyboard haha
but what if you're just less precise because you're used to it being less responsive and doing Corrections a fraction of a fraction of a second before?
Had a lamzu maya and ran 1khz for like 6 months. just switched to a superlight 2, 4khz and i broke my aim trainer tiles record in literally the first try with no warm up or anything. Im going with 4k
Personally (and i notice really small things like debounce time settings, etc along with being high ranked in games i play top 500 ow immortal valorant) i noticed nearly no difference. Yes, there was a small difference but its so small it would never be able to be noticed in a blind test, honestly its so small i kind of question if its anything at all. All i can notice is the mouse is a little “snappier” considering it technically has lower input lag that’s probably exactly how its suppose to be, but its so small its really whatever. Not worth a 40$ dongle at all. Was on 240hz btw. Its worth it if it comes with the mouse better is better right? But we should treat it like a newer sensor, great but not so great we inflate prices for it.
@@ArceusX300 probs would be but, 360 hz will have to wait for a bit. All the good 360hz are expensive af and im never making the mistake of buying a high hz monitor with horrible motion clarity again. I was expecting something like 500hz vs 1000hz when i got the 4k dongle but was let down, if it becomes closer to that on 360hz cool but for now, its not worth for most people. + It still causes problems in some games
@@WorldKeepsSpinnin I have a starlight 12 phantom small swapped with viper v2 pro internals, I use fingertip grip, 360hz with dyac+ and I have no problems, I have 70% weapon accuracy with tracer tracking. I am aim training 4.5 hours a day to become the world's best tracking main, after 75 days I will begin streaming Fortnite and Overwatch to make a return on my investment. :) You might hear my name in the eSports media by a different name that begins with V ✌️
@@ArceusX300 LOL good luck. Dont only train tracking though, make sure you are well rounded. You might not think so right now but all types of aim (flicking, static, dynamic etc) factor into how well you track. Especially in a game like overwatch it’s important. I’ll be waiting for you in top 500 buddy, names greed.
@@WorldKeepsSpinnin I'm starting with clicking extremely tiny dots for click timing, as well as smoothness with VT's precise benchmarks. Working nearly 5 hours a day to get #1 on both precision Voltaic advanced benchmarks, on a more thin version of the official benchmark. My click timing is my biggest weakness, but working on your weaknesses helps a lot. I'm going to main zero build Fortnite until I begin reactive tracking, quake LG movement tracking, and dynamic clicking.
Yes 4000hz is worthless unless the operating system / generic mouse driver and application level API to see and be concerned about mouse update that fast AND the game itself actually runs an input polling loop fast enough for it to matter. As far as I know, neither are happening and the latter is the most critically important and least like to happen. Unless something else radically changes with software/kernel efficiency around input devices, likely through something new being done in hardware (motherboards and chipsets), 4000hz, even 1000hz and 500hz is thrown away data. Shy of that, your game almost certainly handles the mouse by polling on it's "main thread" (and most games do 90% of work on a main thread) and that is running at your framerate. It gets the data by observing what the net position change along X and Y axes are (arbitrary units to scale by sensitivity) since the last time it asked. It can ask as many times as it wants, and behind that API, it doesn't matter if the device reported 3 times, of 500 times, went to the moon and back, if the net change was 1 pixel X and 1 pixel Y, that's all your application sees. There may be a benefit to having information at twice the framerate...possibly. But faster than that is a lot of throwaway data. If anyone does videography (content creators with nice games most certainly have a concept), they would know that the best motion for video is when you set the shutter speed to twice the framerate you are recording at. This has a motion smoothing effective benefit, but anything substantially higher or lower is immedialy worse. So yeah, if your framerate is actually 220-270, then a 500hz mouse is the limit to benefit. Don't let silly graphs that show you "more points of data matter" fool you -- like the thumbnail here properly pokes fun of. Gaming/tech channels testing things is always amusing to me too. When you're a programmer yourself who has written code against the raw (DirectX) libraries, have dabbled in some hobby game engines, graphics rendering and monitor presenting, and made actual games as well, also understands hardware/sensors and how such hardware reports to your PC to bubble up the game API....you realize how the sauce is made 99% of the time. If tests produce surprising results, then what's happening is someone has a tool/library/access to something that is new or uncommon that they are unaware of. Gamer joes "who know tech," can keep up and follow 95% but sometimes need to take a step back when things really do evolve and they are out of their league but they keep talking about it as if they know (Vulkan/D3D12 vs DX11 for example). I see too many gaming channels reporting on hardware/software latency on input device peripherals that are slices of actual framerates difference that DO NOT MATTER (yes, you optimumtech). If even your monitor even is displaying 500fps, from a PC CPU/GPU that can drive a game that fast for you, AND the monitor latency itself is actually < 15ms -- I mean both monitor getting the new frame data AND the pixel light to have actually changed, you're still dealing with a baseline of around 15ms-20ms hardware input (submitted by firmware running on device) before an action translates to an observable change. My friends, that's 60fps. When you introduce actual HUMAN time, and I'm not even talking "reaction speed" which is .2seconds. Even your brain has observed some light, done its processing and decision over what to do and commits to that action, your fingers take time to move. It takes time for that key to physically go down and that stuff is happening on the order of 1/10ths and 1/100ths of a second as well; that is 100ms and 10ms latency. My point is, you want to be good at a game? Learn the game itself, player reads, strategy, map knowledge, commit control muscle memory so you don't mess up execution and chain executions faster. Maybe you need to notice how to "hear" like others do -- small tip I learned recently is Windows has a sound feature called Loudness EQ which literally takes sounds it knows it's playing that are quite, and it just say "OK make all of this stuff louder." Basically any game that has scaling footstep audio to play faintly at larger distance, players are now hearing you far easier that other players need a far closer distance to unambiguosly notice and track. Save your money people, get mid range and affordable gaming hardware that isn't trash tier but mostly fits your ergonomics (your play and focus time), and enjoyment (because you should be having fun). Don't let anyone convince you otherwise. I know this is long, but I just enjoy typing (and thinking somewhat) -- the one thing to validate gamers who are/have been using low latency / high refresh products, particularly high refresh in terms of display, are correct in is that they may have a "feel" for it. If you've been playing on a 60hz monitor and switch to a 120hz monitor, you won't be blown away. However, if you're used to 120hz monitor, and suddenly experience a 60hz monitor, you will instantly notice and it will bother you. It is diminishing returns so those at a super high end suggesting they are all bent out of shape dropping from 480hz to 360hz either are special neurologically, or trying to be elite/snobbish.
The main result from this research is that bottom of the barrel spec (125hz office mouse + 60hz monitor) lowers your accuracy by like 2% compared to best "gaming" tier setup, lol. Not that I am surprised though.
I've noticed that when you were playing kovaaks, u had around 180fps. I would assume the polling rate would have a greater effect the higher your frame rate and monitor refresh rate is. It would be better to do the test with the frame rate uncapped in kovaaks. I don't see why this simple fact wasn't mentioned at any point in the video.
@@zetyoo3613 Not the case majority of the time, as long as you have decent hardware. Only really applies to games that weren't designed with high polling rate in mind (e.g Apex)
There are some factors that can make you perform worse at higher polling rates. You need to get used to the lower input lag for it to be beneficial. Also higher polling rates can cause games to stutter. If your fps still stays over your monitors refresh rate these stutters may be hard to notice but still can affect your aim because of the larger variance in input lag. With frametime graphs from RTSS you can make sure that no such stutters are happening. You should eliminate these factors before testing if you want an accurate representation of how different polling rates compare. I made sure to use only polling rates than the game and my system can handle and after i got used to higher polling rates I do absolutely perform much better on them than at 1khz and they feel much more responsive. Whenever i switch from 8khz from to 1khz crosshair movements feel super sluggish. It feels like my crosshair always lags behind from where i want it to be. But getting used to 1khz again is still easy, it just takes a couple minutes.
oh and i think kovaak's also doesn't support framerate independent inputs. So there the difference there will be a lot less noticeable than in games that do. But that alone wouldn't explain how you performed worse with higher polling rates.
It's always the same story with these type of new features in peripherals. Whenever someone comes up with some type of testing method to determine how much of a performance difference said feature actually makes, the results all fall within the margin of error and the conclusion is that there is no discernible difference. But then after these finding are published, a horde of TH-cam commenters appear that can clearly "feel" the difference of the new feature that they themselves happen to have already invested their money in, and insist that the testing methodology must be incorrect.
"Also higher polling rates can cause games to stutter. If your fps still stays over your monitors refresh rate these stutters may be hard to notice but still can affect your aim because of the larger variance in input lag." - Why this ? Does this mean 500hz is less Input Lag and stuttering too even if you have 240fps with 1000hz ?
@@ilikehikingyou actually have it backwards dude. All these “scientists” come out and say there is no real difference and you wont be able to tell and its all marketing bs. But the real people who are using it can tell. If you main one game and play it alot and play it at a high level, you will absolutely notice the difference in something like this. Just think of all those geniuses who said that “the human eye cant even see more than 60hz lol you guys cant tell, its placebo to justify your purchases of 120hz monitors lol” how do those brainiacs look now years later? YOU are actually the one with confirmation bias, saying that you can never tell the difference but you have never tried the thing you are criticizing. Every comment i have seen says they cant tell between fullscreen borderless and fullscreen exclusive. Basically im an idiot and there is absolutely zero reason to ever run fullscreen exclusive because the input lag is imperceptible. Well its not. And i know when it got changed and i perform worse when im not in fullscreen exclusive. Its not even a debate im willing to have anymore because some random person online told me their uninformed opinion. It has absolutely zero effect on my experience if you believe your own lie. Videos like this should be taken for what they are. An unscientific test of a subjective feel for one person. I mean the amount of variables here that are unaccounted for mean this isnt really a scientific test anyhow. I havent even finished the video yet. Just because YOU cant tell and just because some numbers in a super unscientific test say so, doesnt mean there is not a difference
The most noticeable difference was in cs go 4K hz 800 dpi mouse viper v2 pro . Cs go running at more then 240 fps & combined With a 240 hz monitor made my aim quite crisp clean . And also I wanna add that in apex legends my tracking was way better on 2000 hz rather 4000 hz and my fps was locked at 200 . I dunno plocebo effect or not but the battery is draining quite fast on higher pooling rates . Just stick to 1000 hz and u don’t have to charge your mouse that often .
@Valeriy Borov Well .. when I was turning and shooting someone that was behind me like 180 degrees turn I felt that I was hitting those shots way more often and the small adjustments to the enemy heads also way more often . The only reason I’m not using for 4K hz is because of the battery ,I hate to charge it every day and playing with the cable sucks when u got used to wireless :)
Im gona buy atlantis mini wireless 4k polling 240hz monitor I only play csgo i9 12900k 3080ti 100up/down saturn mouse pad A good office chair u think atlantis mouse gona help me much ? Ty sry for band english
@@SkyyKeirondude dont be sorry, your english is fine. How did it go? A good mouse is important, but if you are a bad player it will not make you a good player. If its a good mouse it will not get in the way of you improving. But a mouse that fits and is comfortable and lets you aim without much thought is always a good thing
To me, the difference is how smooth my monitor and mouse movements feel like. With 500 Hz suddenly my game feels laggy. With 2000 Hz it's super smooth.
i mean polling rate is always depending on how fast you move your mouse. if it says 1000hz you most likely have 800-900hz most of the time if you tracking something and probably even just 400-500hz if your more of a slower aimer (what a lot of people are). if you can profit from the 4000hz polling rate then probably if you have aim skills on lvl Voltaic Astra. probably ist just making all worse because 4k zould be more instable then 1k and consitency is key in aiming
It isn't input latency as in network latency, it is how much faster the CPU and GPU get the position of the mouse which allows for a quicker rendering of your actual input. You can't feel it, but for your system it matters, since the network packets don't always match your display output, nevertheless your CPU calculates and sends data to the server as fast as it can, and if it has access to a more accurate reading of your position it translates into a smoother gameplay overall. Everyone saying it is a scam doesn't get it.
Good video. I thought you would be biased as a mouse reviewer because the new trend is 4k. A good way to get lower latency is a higher DPI but even then, that's not necessary and not going to matter in 99% of scenarios. Hell, some of the best pros still use wired Zowie EC2-CW with very low sens.
I think we are just at the point where not the technik is the bottleneck, but our body, so maybe a 16k pollingrate mouse could be usefull, once we reach the point, where we can add brainchips that make us react faster or sth.
A jump from 1kHz to 2kHz to 4kHz is noticeable even with 144Hz monitor especially in CSGO and CS2 (need to have really high skill to notice it) and not so much in game like Apex and Overwatch.
Noticeable how? Your monitor bottlenecks your motion lag. There is no difference in motion whatsoever. Polling rate only matters for click latency so in terms of corner peeking like cs or valorant or a game that spams buttons.
Did you use a USB 3.0 port, with no other USB device plugged into that controller? Did you use mouse tester to very you have a smooth .25 ms polling rate on the mouse? Did you try playing with 4k for an extended period of time before doing your testing?
Because you tested with only 800 dpi you were actually probably only using 1000-2000hz because 800 dpi doesn't fully saturate the 4000hz the razer polling rate tester is an easy way to visualize this.
Great video, underrated channel ! i found my scores to be the best at 125hz, on a 165hz monitor. i strongly believe it makes the movement less jittery. i'm in the 90th percentile for many disciplines
I noticed the same, especially during very precise smoothness scenarios. With 125hz refreshrate, 250fps cap and 1000hz polling rate my aim was noticably smoother than with a bit higher refreshrates. I think it's because 125hz syncs up perfectly with the 1000hz polling rate. I got the new 8khz wired deathadder recently and at higher polling rates this effect is much less noticeable. Its always smooth no matter what refresh rate i use.
Great video, man. Mouse manufacturers had to move from DPI to another marketable number -> hence polling rate. 4000 hz is a gimmick; marketing bullshit. Going from 1 ms latency to 0.250 ms isn't noticeable; all placebo. From a good night sleep and a good diet you can reduce your reaction time by 10-20ms. Maybe even more. Don't waste your money on this bs. You are just wasting priceless CPU cicles and battery life.
I use 8khz Viper mouse on Siege and I swear to god it has a massive difference your aiming is a lot smoother plus I got a 360hz monitor so I will prob def see a lot more also when micro adjusting for tight angles I will notice hitching with any mouse at 1khz but 8khz you get extremely smooth target tracking
Is there no point in 4k on any mouse? because I bought myself a 4k mouse but it hasn’t arrived yet, I bought it because they were praising the 4000 polling rate on ru TH-cam
as far as i understand (and i could be wrong) is that there's a benefit when you combine it with a high refresh rate monitor (I think its 240hz+?). But there's a lot of diminishing returns when you go for a higher polling rate. Some games even go a bit wonky when using higher polling rates. In terms of a pure benchmark angle higher polling rates do perform better, in terms of in game use I think there isn't that much benefit to it.
@@SamsFPS yep, personally (and i notice really small things like debounce time settings, etc) i noticed nearly no difference. Yes, there was a small difference but its so small it would never be able to be noticed in a blind test, honestly its so small i kind of question if its anything at all. All i can notice is the mouse is a little “snappier” considering it technically has lower input lag that’s probably exactly how its suppose to be, but its so small its really whatever. Not worth a 40$ dongle at all.
well you need time to adapt to the new pooling rate i think that's why the score was low but also high and why it was so consistant on 1khz polling rate you are already used to 1khz
its a nice to have. I wouldn't recommend anyone buy a mouse that doesn't give you the OPTION to have it or not. Especially at a price point similar to the new EC wireless mice.
The problem here is that in your second set, you were already warmed up and more trained, from when you were doing the first set. But yeah 4khz is probably a gimmick
4000hz polling rate is the most pointless feature because of how good 1000hz already is. High refresh rates on a monitor is way more important with how bad our eyes are.
tracking isnt the best play to try up polling rate,, u need a fast flicking targets, idk kovax, but u can see a lot of these or even create urs in aimlap, a very fast flick and click might change due to mouse polling rate
the methodology used only measures your performance in those sets, and considering that average reaction time around 250ms (gamers frequently present reaction times of 180~150ms) theres a whole plethora of other impactful variables to ones performance. Your mouse "reaction time" being 1ms or 0.125ms is not where you should be looking to improve your performance, people should try to move faster, earlier and more precisely. literally just get good mate, practice a lot and you gonna get out of bronze disclaimer: the people mentioned on this comment are undefined subject and i do not hate the creator nor his methodology
Everyone in the comments saying its the same, be it you play on 500 or 4k polling rate. So just go for a 500 poling rate mouse and enjoy it fellas, leave us money wasters to delude ourselves with4k mouses :)
HUH? Like what is this supposed to mean? Nobody believes that this will make you “aim” (if you can even call TS360 aim) better. It’s just about smoothness ans combating studder on high refresh rate monitors. The “nerd stuff” is the only aspect that means anything. The perceivable difference.
it does have a big difference i went from logitech superlight to 8k hz polling rate razer viper8k i leave it at 4k so its constant 4k my pc cant do constant 8k but its a big difference if u use the mouse the viper 8khz one just get a bungee cord feels wireless cable light W mouse its so cheap too 80 bungee 20
Well it makes a different, its a difference you need to get used to becasue your accuracy is being altered forsure. So it would make a difference in your game if you take the time to get used to the sens change. You will be a better shooter with an 8k mouse as long a the video games engine is updated to support 4k or 8k.
@@DiamondLobbyReviews yeah....good thinking, maybe next time, learn SI, International System of Units, and use it, it would trick people into thinking you actually know aht you're talking about ;)
@@AlfaRomeoVolantewhere is your video? I dont see you putting out content for people. I just see you criticizing others and offering nothing to the conversation
yea no one mentioned 4k hz would tank your fps if you arent on a high end pc. i upgraded my cpu because i would go down like 50 fps when i swiped my mouse, made my shit look like a slideshow
@@Mouthbreather777 what cpu did you have? I have a 9th gen i3 and I easily get 200+ FPS in valorant and 250+ in CSGO. I'm wondering how hard the 4k polling rate would tank my frames.
@@siuinji3259 i had a 12th gen i5 and just went up a gen to 13th gen i5. it works way better and my frames are stable but it may have been an unnecessary expensive fix. for valorant look into turning on rawinputbuffer in settings but for cs idk, maybe cs2 will handle higher mouse hz better
Because its very CPU demanding so it probably caused you to drop frames which actually increases your input lag and causes worse aim. A weird situation for sure. Thats why i plan on running 2000hz when i get mine soon
There is slight difference between 500-1000hz. But do use 500hz only. It feels better and ez to control. But 4k? Pffff even if its there it doesnt mean better. Just dont get fooled by marketing shit young people
Just so you know, 400dpi is not enough data to saturate a 4000 polling rate. In fact optimum tech had to go up to 1600dpi to fully saturate the 4000hz polling rate. So there is a good chance your 400dpi is not even fully using 1000hz
Fck man, i shouldve watched this video before i bought a razer mouse, theres literally not a single distinction between a 4000 hz mouse qnd a 1000 hz mouse. I got a good 144 hz monitor and its still imperceptible
ur not accounting for human error. u just are slower than a 4k polling rate mouse so ur missing due to skill not the mouse so idk if this test is valid at all
something to note here, accuracy on this task isnt necessarily related to performance due to misses not counting towards accuracy for up to 200(i think)ms after you get a kill, so how specifically you kill a target matters more than your ttk in this scenario for accuracy. just a minor thing and doesnt change your results though, interesting vid! i expected there to be a noticeable difference in performance tbh, might do some tests myself
Goated Viscose Comment
waiting..
I got 4khz and now i'm a pro, the mouse reporting 1000 times a second instead of 4000 was really holding me back
REAL
@@jaykkng if you have a proper monitor to compliment it definitely does
@@jaykkng if you play on a 360hz you will notice it even on 240hz its barely noticeable it just takes just as equally overspecced a monitor on the right game (csgo, overwatch) it needs to be on powerful enough hardware to actually tell the difference, a 144 monitor definitely wont cut it and a 240 monitor will be barely noticeable
@@jaykkng boardzy has multiple videos discussing multiple 4khz capable mice and for 4khz polling rate, its only a deciding factor if you have a super high refresh monitor. even if you have a 240hz monitor you should be able to notice the polling difference just ever so slightly, with it actually being a real difference maker on 360hz where in slomo cams you can the 4khz polling rate visibly making a difference
Me with my 125Hz mouse
: yeah your right 🙂
still remember coldzera 2015-2017 dropping 30 bombs every match with zowie za11 with 500hz on it.
In terms off accuracy, you shouldn't use that as a measurement in target switching scenarios on kovaaks. Kovaaks has a weird 200-250ms grace period after a successful kill where your weapon doesnt shoot until you reach the next target. So slower accurate flicks can provide higher accuracy but lower scores compared to fast shaky flicks that cause you to go on and off targets but result in higher kills. Which is the cause of the accuracy discrepancies you've experienced. Accuracy is only a consistent factor in tracking scenarios with invincible bots if you never let go of your shoot button during the whole run. Still doesnt interfere with your results, just wanted to share information incase you do future testing so you dont get skewed results by chance. Fun watch tho!
Doesn't a 4KHz polling rate translate to a signal every 0.25ms and not every 0.125? It send every quater of a millisecond a signal (1/4th = 0.25) and not every eighth (1/8=0.125).
Sorry, I had to write it, as I have been using reddit way too much in recent weeks.
Yes it does I did a boo boo in my script
yes it does. wanted to point this out too :D
came here to say this but take my comment anyways for the algorithm bc i liked the "DATA" & the snort.
Ive been telling this to people a lot, 1000 and 4000 there are no difference, its best to find what mouse shape is best, and that is what you will aim better with...
Haven't tested it but completely agree 👍 hahaha
Shape>sensor>polling rate
Yeah 1000hz polling rate just adds 1ms input delay and it's definitely smooth enough. 500hz has 2ms delay. It's the smallest detail and 2000hz is not even necessary. 500hz actually could make your mouse movement more consistent and less erratic. I'm gonna give 5oohz a try and see the difference between 1000
@@CraftyyFruit the thing is 1ms is virtually immeasurable for any person on this planet, and the 1ms figure would be the max possible delay on a 1000hz mouse (bar any wireless/cable latency), the fact that people still unironically believe they can feel the difference is baffling to me
@@dinisssousa well I can put it like this, I can't tell the difference between 144hz and 140hz. But I would always set my monitor to 144hz because just because you can't notice the difference doesn't mean it's not helping. I also can't tell the difference between 136hz and 140hz. And 132hz and 136hz. Keep going down... I cant tell the difference between 56hz and 60hz. But can I tell the difference between 56hz and 144hz? Yeah. So with polling rate I can tell the difference between 500hz and 4000hz because it's that big jump like 56hz to 144hz. But if u can't tell the difference between 2000hz and 4000hz polling rate, you would still pick the higher value. Because you may not be able to notice the small incremental changes like how you can't with 140hz and 144hz. I would obviously pick the 144hz monitor.
I know, it's not the same, but when I went from 250Hz to 500Hz, I could easily tell a difference even on 60 Hz display. For highest polling rates, you might need faster monitor, really high skill level. Also mouse might feel smoother when flicking, more confident.
I See, I currenty have a 1000hz glorious model o- with a 144hz monitor, gonna get the razer viper v2 pro hyperspeed wireless, originally its 1000hz polling but with the purchase of an additional dongle you can unlock 4000hz, but I personally dont think it would be worth dishing an extra 40$ (considering shipping) for that.
Did you buy the 4k dongle?
@@kyaaskadi1062 don't buy it wate of money lol
Theoretically speaking, polling rate does not really affect mouse movement on the monitor because it can only be as fast as the refresh rate, however in terms of the cpu registering commands such as clicks then it matter because a 4000 polling date would send a “packet” to the cpu telling what it’s doing at a faster rate than the 1000 polling rate mouse. So within the same spans of time, 4000 sends more packets and therefore leaves less time in between each packet sent, so basically means there is a higher “chance” that your response will be sent to the cpu at a faster rate. If I use an analogy, say company A and company B ships it’s orders at different increments, A ships every 30 minutes and B ships at every 1 hour. Say they all start at the same starting point which is 0 minutes, I place a order at 25 minutes then Company A will ship faster because it’s only 5 minutes between each package sent, that’s the same with 4000hz it will send packages more frequently and most likely your command will be sent quicker too. But company B would have you wait 35 more minutes. Obviously there’s a chance for it to be the same if you send it between 30-60 minutes then the wait is the same, but overall A is still more responsive in that it sends faster.
Please do a test on the deathadder v3 wired 8k polling rate
Different polling rates don't have that much of an effect on how it looks or feels. I'm pretty sure the higher polling rate mice being something that matters is because older mice even at the same polling rate as new ones were just bad and people assume it's because the polling rate is higher that it feels and looks idk more smooth but that is not the reason. The refresh rate on your monitor would have to be unreasonably high to notice the difference between 1000 and 4000hz like upwards of 5000+hz because it is not exactly the same as refresh rate on a monitor and even on a 4000hz monitor you wouldn't be able to tell which mouse was 1000 and 4000hz and maybe even 125 to 4000.
This is not true. Even if you only have a 60hz monitor you can feel a difference with higher polling rate for the same reason you can feel a difference of higher frame rates on a 60hz display.
@@OrganicGreens The only difference between lets say 250hz to 1000hz on the same mouse will be that the 250hz feels like the dpi is set slightly lower like lets say the 1000hz feels like 800dpi the 250hz feels like 750dpi. And besides if you use a program that shows the hz of your mouse, when it's set to 1000hz+ it will still be averaging around 550 to 600hz even though it's set higher with most mice
I think you might be right on the money. Several 4k mice have been shown to perform worse than the G pro superlight. There's far more elements at play that contribute to quick accurate input. As per usual reality is probably far more nuanced than simply focusing on big numbers.
@OrganicGreens high frames is way more noticable than polling rate 💀 optimium did a test and theres basically no difference between 1000hz and 4000hz
Its not going to be night and day. But it is a difference. Dpi is a huge factor here. If you are running lower than 1600dpi you cant even saturate a 2000 or 4000hz polling rate. There simply isnt enough data being created. So 1600dpi or higher and at say 500 fps, there are times when your 1000hz mouse wont quite hit as fast as actually possible. Basically i think of it as 2000hz plus polling is ensuring that there are virtually no scenarios in a game scenario where your mouse is limiting you in any way. Maybe 1/4 or even 1/16 of those polls will be getting through a little bit faster than it would at 1000hz. Also i havent seen anyone mention this yet but some games can actually saturate your cpu with evwn a 4000hz polling rate and cause you to lose some frames. I have seen a test in warzone that showed that. Although jokes on me i think im the only person still playing warzone on mouse and keyboard haha
With 4k polling I can now be an Apex Radiant Elite gamer
think big with 8Khz you can be apex prededator elite gamer
@@ozkancagatay And when they finally release 16k you could be as big as a predator as Watergothim
@@0451arthur no thanks i will be waiting for 128khz. And with it i can be an Apex Radiant Elite Master of universe gamer.
but what if you're just less precise because you're used to it being less responsive and doing Corrections a fraction of a fraction of a second before?
Had a lamzu maya and ran 1khz for like 6 months. just switched to a superlight 2,
4khz and i broke my aim trainer tiles record in literally the first try with no warm up or anything. Im going with 4k
Personally (and i notice really small things like debounce time settings, etc along with being high ranked in games i play top 500 ow immortal valorant) i noticed nearly no difference. Yes, there was a small difference but its so small it would never be able to be noticed in a blind test, honestly its so small i kind of question if its anything at all. All i can notice is the mouse is a little “snappier” considering it technically has lower input lag that’s probably exactly how its suppose to be, but its so small its really whatever. Not worth a 40$ dongle at all. Was on 240hz btw.
Its worth it if it comes with the mouse better is better right? But we should treat it like a newer sensor, great but not so great we inflate prices for it.
Try it with 360hz and 3200 dpi, it is actually noticeable, even more noticeable on 500hz apparently.
@@ArceusX300 probs would be but, 360 hz will have to wait for a bit. All the good 360hz are expensive af and im never making the mistake of buying a high hz monitor with horrible motion clarity again. I was expecting something like 500hz vs 1000hz when i got the 4k dongle but was let down, if it becomes closer to that on 360hz cool but for now, its not worth for most people. + It still causes problems in some games
@@WorldKeepsSpinnin I have a starlight 12 phantom small swapped with viper v2 pro internals, I use fingertip grip, 360hz with dyac+ and I have no problems, I have 70% weapon accuracy with tracer tracking. I am aim training 4.5 hours a day to become the world's best tracking main, after 75 days I will begin streaming Fortnite and Overwatch to make a return on my investment. :) You might hear my name in the eSports media by a different name that begins with V ✌️
@@ArceusX300 LOL good luck. Dont only train tracking though, make sure you are well rounded. You might not think so right now but all types of aim (flicking, static, dynamic etc) factor into how well you track. Especially in a game like overwatch it’s important. I’ll be waiting for you in top 500 buddy, names greed.
@@WorldKeepsSpinnin I'm starting with clicking extremely tiny dots for click timing, as well as smoothness with VT's precise benchmarks. Working nearly 5 hours a day to get #1 on both precision Voltaic advanced benchmarks, on a more thin version of the official benchmark. My click timing is my biggest weakness, but working on your weaknesses helps a lot. I'm going to main zero build Fortnite until I begin reactive tracking, quake LG movement tracking, and dynamic clicking.
The glasses push with the snort really got me 🤣
Yes 4000hz is worthless unless the operating system / generic mouse driver and application level API to see and be concerned about mouse update that fast AND the game itself actually runs an input polling loop fast enough for it to matter. As far as I know, neither are happening and the latter is the most critically important and least like to happen. Unless something else radically changes with software/kernel efficiency around input devices, likely through something new being done in hardware (motherboards and chipsets), 4000hz, even 1000hz and 500hz is thrown away data. Shy of that, your game almost certainly handles the mouse by polling on it's "main thread" (and most games do 90% of work on a main thread) and that is running at your framerate. It gets the data by observing what the net position change along X and Y axes are (arbitrary units to scale by sensitivity) since the last time it asked. It can ask as many times as it wants, and behind that API, it doesn't matter if the device reported 3 times, of 500 times, went to the moon and back, if the net change was 1 pixel X and 1 pixel Y, that's all your application sees. There may be a benefit to having information at twice the framerate...possibly. But faster than that is a lot of throwaway data. If anyone does videography (content creators with nice games most certainly have a concept), they would know that the best motion for video is when you set the shutter speed to twice the framerate you are recording at. This has a motion smoothing effective benefit, but anything substantially higher or lower is immedialy worse. So yeah, if your framerate is actually 220-270, then a 500hz mouse is the limit to benefit. Don't let silly graphs that show you "more points of data matter" fool you -- like the thumbnail here properly pokes fun of.
Gaming/tech channels testing things is always amusing to me too. When you're a programmer yourself who has written code against the raw (DirectX) libraries, have dabbled in some hobby game engines, graphics rendering and monitor presenting, and made actual games as well, also understands hardware/sensors and how such hardware reports to your PC to bubble up the game API....you realize how the sauce is made 99% of the time. If tests produce surprising results, then what's happening is someone has a tool/library/access to something that is new or uncommon that they are unaware of. Gamer joes "who know tech," can keep up and follow 95% but sometimes need to take a step back when things really do evolve and they are out of their league but they keep talking about it as if they know (Vulkan/D3D12 vs DX11 for example). I see too many gaming channels reporting on hardware/software latency on input device peripherals that are slices of actual framerates difference that DO NOT MATTER (yes, you optimumtech). If even your monitor even is displaying 500fps, from a PC CPU/GPU that can drive a game that fast for you, AND the monitor latency itself is actually < 15ms -- I mean both monitor getting the new frame data AND the pixel light to have actually changed, you're still dealing with a baseline of around 15ms-20ms hardware input (submitted by firmware running on device) before an action translates to an observable change. My friends, that's 60fps. When you introduce actual HUMAN time, and I'm not even talking "reaction speed" which is .2seconds. Even your brain has observed some light, done its processing and decision over what to do and commits to that action, your fingers take time to move. It takes time for that key to physically go down and that stuff is happening on the order of 1/10ths and 1/100ths of a second as well; that is 100ms and 10ms latency. My point is, you want to be good at a game? Learn the game itself, player reads, strategy, map knowledge, commit control muscle memory so you don't mess up execution and chain executions faster. Maybe you need to notice how to "hear" like others do -- small tip I learned recently is Windows has a sound feature called Loudness EQ which literally takes sounds it knows it's playing that are quite, and it just say "OK make all of this stuff louder." Basically any game that has scaling footstep audio to play faintly at larger distance, players are now hearing you far easier that other players need a far closer distance to unambiguosly notice and track. Save your money people, get mid range and affordable gaming hardware that isn't trash tier but mostly fits your ergonomics (your play and focus time), and enjoyment (because you should be having fun). Don't let anyone convince you otherwise.
I know this is long, but I just enjoy typing (and thinking somewhat) -- the one thing to validate gamers who are/have been using low latency / high refresh products, particularly high refresh in terms of display, are correct in is that they may have a "feel" for it. If you've been playing on a 60hz monitor and switch to a 120hz monitor, you won't be blown away. However, if you're used to 120hz monitor, and suddenly experience a 60hz monitor, you will instantly notice and it will bother you. It is diminishing returns so those at a super high end suggesting they are all bent out of shape dropping from 480hz to 360hz either are special neurologically, or trying to be elite/snobbish.
@@EbonySeraphim buddy talks too much, don't waste me time... mate!!
@@EbonySeraphim this was very helpful man and very insightful, thanks for the info
i ain't reading allat
I dont feel like it makes aiming easier, but the Feeling is great
The main result from this research is that bottom of the barrel spec (125hz office mouse + 60hz monitor) lowers your accuracy by like 2% compared to best "gaming" tier setup, lol.
Not that I am surprised though.
The 4k hz mouse is actually .25 ms and the 8k hz mouse is .125!! (atleast that what google said but im not smart when it comes to tech 😅)
I've noticed that when you were playing kovaaks, u had around 180fps. I would assume the polling rate would have a greater effect the higher your frame rate and monitor refresh rate is. It would be better to do the test with the frame rate uncapped in kovaaks. I don't see why this simple fact wasn't mentioned at any point in the video.
If you flick with higher polling rate u will have fps drops
@@zetyoo3613 Not the case majority of the time, as long as you have decent hardware. Only really applies to games that weren't designed with high polling rate in mind (e.g Apex)
weren't both apex and kovaak having problems with stutters/lags on 4k polling rate?
last patch fixed it.
There are some factors that can make you perform worse at higher polling rates. You need to get used to the lower input lag for it to be beneficial. Also higher polling rates can cause games to stutter. If your fps still stays over your monitors refresh rate these stutters may be hard to notice but still can affect your aim because of the larger variance in input lag. With frametime graphs from RTSS you can make sure that no such stutters are happening. You should eliminate these factors before testing if you want an accurate representation of how different polling rates compare.
I made sure to use only polling rates than the game and my system can handle and after i got used to higher polling rates I do absolutely perform much better on them than at 1khz and they feel much more responsive. Whenever i switch from 8khz from to 1khz crosshair movements feel super sluggish. It feels like my crosshair always lags behind from where i want it to be. But getting used to 1khz again is still easy, it just takes a couple minutes.
oh and i think kovaak's also doesn't support framerate independent inputs. So there the difference there will be a lot less noticeable than in games that do. But that alone wouldn't explain how you performed worse with higher polling rates.
It's always the same story with these type of new features in peripherals. Whenever someone comes up with some type of testing method to determine how much of a performance difference said feature actually makes, the results all fall within the margin of error and the conclusion is that there is no discernible difference. But then after these finding are published, a horde of TH-cam commenters appear that can clearly "feel" the difference of the new feature that they themselves happen to have already invested their money in, and insist that the testing methodology must be incorrect.
@@ilikehiking it is incorrect
"Also higher polling rates can cause games to stutter. If your fps still stays over your monitors refresh rate these stutters may be hard to notice but still can affect your aim because of the larger variance in input lag."
-
Why this ? Does this mean 500hz is less Input Lag and stuttering too even if you have 240fps with 1000hz ?
@@ilikehikingyou actually have it backwards dude. All these “scientists” come out and say there is no real difference and you wont be able to tell and its all marketing bs. But the real people who are using it can tell. If you main one game and play it alot and play it at a high level, you will absolutely notice the difference in something like this. Just think of all those geniuses who said that “the human eye cant even see more than 60hz lol you guys cant tell, its placebo to justify your purchases of 120hz monitors lol” how do those brainiacs look now years later? YOU are actually the one with confirmation bias, saying that you can never tell the difference but you have never tried the thing you are criticizing. Every comment i have seen says they cant tell between fullscreen borderless and fullscreen exclusive. Basically im an idiot and there is absolutely zero reason to ever run fullscreen exclusive because the input lag is imperceptible. Well its not. And i know when it got changed and i perform worse when im not in fullscreen exclusive. Its not even a debate im willing to have anymore because some random person online told me their uninformed opinion. It has absolutely zero effect on my experience if you believe your own lie. Videos like this should be taken for what they are. An unscientific test of a subjective feel for one person. I mean the amount of variables here that are unaccounted for mean this isnt really a scientific test anyhow. I havent even finished the video yet. Just because YOU cant tell and just because some numbers in a super unscientific test say so, doesnt mean there is not a difference
The most noticeable difference was in cs go 4K hz 800 dpi mouse viper v2 pro . Cs go running at more then 240 fps & combined With a 240 hz monitor made my aim quite crisp clean . And also I wanna add that in apex legends my tracking was way better on 2000 hz rather 4000 hz and my fps was locked at 200 . I dunno plocebo effect or not but the battery is draining quite fast on higher pooling rates . Just stick to 1000 hz and u don’t have to charge your mouse that often .
@Valeriy Borov Well .. when I was turning and shooting someone that was behind me like 180 degrees turn I felt that I was hitting those shots way more often and the small adjustments to the enemy heads also way more often . The only reason I’m not using for 4K hz is because of the battery ,I hate to charge it every day and playing with the cable sucks when u got used to wireless :)
I honestly don't really mind battery life that much. I charge my phone every day, adding my mouse to that routine isn't really a big deal.
Im gona buy atlantis mini wireless 4k polling 240hz monitor I only play csgo i9 12900k 3080ti 100up/down saturn mouse pad A good office chair u think atlantis mouse gona help me much ? Ty sry for band english
@@SkyyKeirondude dont be sorry, your english is fine. How did it go? A good mouse is important, but if you are a bad player it will not make you a good player. If its a good mouse it will not get in the way of you improving. But a mouse that fits and is comfortable and lets you aim without much thought is always a good thing
To me, the difference is how smooth my monitor and mouse movements feel like. With 500 Hz suddenly my game feels laggy. With 2000 Hz it's super smooth.
Love the Q3 hitsound.
You remember on stream you said that the uk would win the world cup? What do you say now.
i mean polling rate is always depending on how fast you move your mouse. if it says 1000hz you most likely have 800-900hz most of the time if you tracking something and probably even just 400-500hz if your more of a slower aimer (what a lot of people are). if you can profit from the 4000hz polling rate then probably if you have aim skills on lvl Voltaic Astra. probably ist just making all worse because 4k zould be more instable then 1k and consitency is key in aiming
you know nothing about mice, please stop talking
@@whoisthatthingwhat just saying if your aim is iron lvl polling rate changes nothing on your skill lol
@@sheddz6662 imm 3
It isn't input latency as in network latency, it is how much faster the CPU and GPU get the position of the mouse which allows for a quicker rendering of your actual input. You can't feel it, but for your system it matters, since the network packets don't always match your display output, nevertheless your CPU calculates and sends data to the server as fast as it can, and if it has access to a more accurate reading of your position it translates into a smoother gameplay overall.
Everyone saying it is a scam doesn't get it.
Well said:“Have fun instead torture“ I never supported guys who run for last gen in everything or getting achievements. Just have fun and enjoy it 😊
ps> if ur dpi is low u wont notice a difference at all, u need to play on higher dpi to check for better results
Good video. I thought you would be biased as a mouse reviewer because the new trend is 4k. A good way to get lower latency is a higher DPI but even then, that's not necessary and not going to matter in 99% of scenarios. Hell, some of the best pros still use wired Zowie EC2-CW with very low sens.
I think we are just at the point where not the technik is the bottleneck, but our body, so maybe a 16k pollingrate mouse could be usefull, once we reach the point, where we can add brainchips that make us react faster or sth.
A jump from 1kHz to 2kHz to 4kHz is noticeable even with 144Hz monitor especially in CSGO and CS2 (need to have really high skill to notice it) and not so much in game like Apex and Overwatch.
Noticeable how? Your monitor bottlenecks your motion lag. There is no difference in motion whatsoever. Polling rate only matters for click latency so in terms of corner peeking like cs or valorant or a game that spams buttons.
You just gotta try the 2k/4k in person, on the desktop you can see how close the cursors are and its just snappier
@@davidfouche2392 placebo
Did you use a USB 3.0 port, with no other USB device plugged into that controller?
Did you use mouse tester to very you have a smooth .25 ms polling rate on the mouse?
Did you try playing with 4k for an extended period of time before doing your testing?
cope
Real good comparison. One question - did you know which polling rate you are using prior to starting each test?
Because you tested with only 800 dpi you were actually probably only using 1000-2000hz because 800 dpi doesn't fully saturate the 4000hz the razer polling rate tester is an easy way to visualize this.
I definitely noticed the bump from 1000 to 2000 Hz on my GPX2. Maybe it was just placebo effect but I swear it felt a lot smoother.
the optical sensor IPS is higher on the GPX2 toi
Great video, underrated channel ! i found my scores to be the best at 125hz, on a 165hz monitor. i strongly believe it makes the movement less jittery. i'm in the 90th percentile for many disciplines
I noticed the same, especially during very precise smoothness scenarios. With 125hz refreshrate, 250fps cap and 1000hz polling rate my aim was noticably smoother than with a bit higher refreshrates. I think it's because 125hz syncs up perfectly with the 1000hz polling rate.
I got the new 8khz wired deathadder recently and at higher polling rates this effect is much less noticeable. Its always smooth no matter what refresh rate i use.
@@Katze822228 i actually meant 125hz polling rate, not 1000
@@DomiDomi00LOVE00TeK correct, 1000hz causes stutter in some games when panning.
Great video, man.
Mouse manufacturers had to move from DPI to another marketable number -> hence polling rate. 4000 hz is a gimmick; marketing bullshit. Going from 1 ms latency to 0.250 ms isn't noticeable; all placebo. From a good night sleep and a good diet you can reduce your reaction time by 10-20ms. Maybe even more. Don't waste your money on this bs. You are just wasting priceless CPU cicles and battery life.
I use 8khz Viper mouse on Siege and I swear to god it has a massive difference your aiming is a lot smoother plus I got a 360hz monitor so I will prob def see a lot more also when micro adjusting for tight angles I will notice hitching with any mouse at 1khz but 8khz you get extremely smooth target tracking
but the question is if you can notice it at 120hz monitor, not in a 240 or 360 that almost nobody uses
@@gmgm2410 Every HZ you can feel
@@WyattChilson but can you in a 120 hz monitor? all the coments I read they say the can't
Is there no point in 4k on any mouse? because I bought myself a 4k mouse but it hasn’t arrived yet, I bought it because they were praising the 4000 polling rate on ru TH-cam
as far as i understand (and i could be wrong) is that there's a benefit when you combine it with a high refresh rate monitor (I think its 240hz+?). But there's a lot of diminishing returns when you go for a higher polling rate. Some games even go a bit wonky when using higher polling rates.
In terms of a pure benchmark angle higher polling rates do perform better, in terms of in game use I think there isn't that much benefit to it.
Isn’t 4000hz 0.25ms?
1000hz = 1ms report time
2000hz = 0.5ms report time
4000hz = 0.25ms report time
8000hz = 0.125ms report time
Changes absolutely nothing, but you are technically right though… so I guess there is that.
@@SamsFPS You know. Just minor math mistake 💀
@@SamsFPS yep, personally (and i notice really small things like debounce time settings, etc) i noticed nearly no difference. Yes, there was a small difference but its so small it would never be able to be noticed in a blind test, honestly its so small i kind of question if its anything at all. All i can notice is the mouse is a little “snappier” considering it technically has lower input lag that’s probably exactly how its suppose to be, but its so small its really whatever. Not worth a 40$ dongle at all.
U can definitely feel 4k is smoother for tracking, like day and night. 8k I can't tell
I find anything over 1,000hz feels inconsistent. I’m not sure all USB ports or CPUs can handle it.
I literally get 4 times more kills in valorant every round
4 times 0 is still 0
@@olsaaan it's the thought that counts!
Theres a error at 0:42, 4000hz is 0.25ms
well you need time to adapt to the new pooling rate i think that's why the score was low but also high and why it was so consistant on 1khz polling rate you are already used to 1khz
I’ve been using the Razer Viper V3 PRO for 3 months, can you tell me what the optimal frequency should be? for CS and fortnite
I have a problem with aria wireless at 1k poling rate mode it always disconnect why?
My god that monitor slap scared me xD
Did you noticed a diff between 144hz and 240hz? I noticed the best 4k score was actually on 144, a trend or just that one?
The difference feels pretty big but it's easy to go back to 144
its a nice to have. I wouldn't recommend anyone buy a mouse that doesn't give you the OPTION to have it or not. Especially at a price point similar to the new EC wireless mice.
I'm guessing 4k and now 8k puts extra load on your cpu and you actually perform worse do to lost fps (unless you have a god tier PC).
Did u test it out on current gen high end pc specs with a refresh rate over 240 ? 1ms to.5ms ?
People are so dumb, they think getting a less than 1ms difference will fix their SKILL ISSUE.
What if I get a mouse with 8k polling rate
A stroke
The problem here is that in your second set, you were already warmed up and more trained, from when you were doing the first set.
But yeah 4khz is probably a gimmick
4000hz polling rate is the most pointless feature because of how good 1000hz already is. High refresh rates on a monitor is way more important with how bad our eyes are.
tracking isnt the best play to try up polling rate,, u need a fast flicking targets, idk kovax, but u can see a lot of these or even create urs in aimlap, a very fast flick and click might change due to mouse polling rate
the methodology used only measures your performance in those sets, and considering that average reaction time around 250ms (gamers frequently present reaction times of 180~150ms) theres a whole plethora of other impactful variables to ones performance.
Your mouse "reaction time" being 1ms or 0.125ms is not where you should be looking to improve your performance, people should try to move faster, earlier and more precisely.
literally just get good mate, practice a lot and you gonna get out of bronze
disclaimer: the people mentioned on this comment are undefined subject and i do not hate the creator nor his methodology
kovaaks does not even support higher than 1000hz it starts to stutter above 1000hz.
Here I am using 500hz on purpose
are you telling that GPX is the best mouse ever created?
Yes
Everyone in the comments saying its the same, be it you play on 500 or 4k polling rate. So just go for a 500 poling rate mouse and enjoy it fellas, leave us money wasters to delude ourselves with4k mouses :)
Razer also use Motion Sync, which should pretty much eliminate the difference between 1k and 4k polling rate
And then they advertise 4k polling rate mouses lmfao
you should review the turtle mouse for april fools
I love your content, thank you so much
slapping that screen is pure pain
its a cheap monitor so its fine
HUH?
Like what is this supposed to mean?
Nobody believes that this will make you “aim” (if you can even call TS360 aim) better.
It’s just about smoothness ans combating studder on high refresh rate monitors.
The “nerd stuff” is the only aspect that means anything. The perceivable difference.
What about 8kHz?
it does have a big difference i went from logitech superlight to 8k hz polling rate razer viper8k i leave it at 4k so its constant 4k my pc cant do constant 8k but its a big difference if u use the mouse the viper 8khz one just get a bungee cord feels wireless cable light W mouse its so cheap too 80 bungee 20
I WANT THAT TURTLE MOUSE!!!!!
Well it makes a different, its a difference you need to get used to becasue your accuracy is being altered forsure. So it would make a difference in your game if you take the time to get used to the sens change. You will be a better shooter with an 8k mouse as long a the video games engine is updated to support 4k or 8k.
I am sure you failed at math, as 4000Hz is 0.250ms. Also, millisecond is ms and not MS.
ms stands for microsoft
@@DiamondLobbyReviews yeah....good thinking, maybe next time, learn SI, International System of Units, and use it, it would trick people into thinking you actually know aht you're talking about ;)
@@AlfaRomeoVolantewhere is your video? I dont see you putting out content for people. I just see you criticizing others and offering nothing to the conversation
@@absolutelysobeast so I need a video to show you how 1000/8 equals 125 and 1000/4=250 ? Wow, smart of you....
She: What size is he?
He: 4000Hz
please do not hold this micro in the hand...
Is 0.24 not 0.125
Anything over 2000hz stutters and drops frame rates in games tho.
Been using my dav3 at 2k hz bc my cpu is a potato at 4k hz while gaming. Oddly enough I still hit more shots on my 1k hz wired NP-01
yea no one mentioned 4k hz would tank your fps if you arent on a high end pc. i upgraded my cpu because i would go down like 50 fps when i swiped my mouse, made my shit look like a slideshow
@@Mouthbreather777 what cpu did you have? I have a 9th gen i3 and I easily get 200+ FPS in valorant and 250+ in CSGO. I'm wondering how hard the 4k polling rate would tank my frames.
@@siuinji3259 i had a 12th gen i5 and just went up a gen to 13th gen i5. it works way better and my frames are stable but it may have been an unnecessary expensive fix. for valorant look into turning on rawinputbuffer in settings but for cs idk, maybe cs2 will handle higher mouse hz better
@@siuinji3259i3 and 4khz you would prob tank like 50fps or slightly more than that. 4khz is cpu demanding
4khz made my aim worse in CSGO -_-
Because its very CPU demanding so it probably caused you to drop frames which actually increases your input lag and causes worse aim. A weird situation for sure. Thats why i plan on running 2000hz when i get mine soon
You forgot time since last nut - the post nut clarity does wonders for tense cs2 players!
There is slight difference between 500-1000hz. But do use 500hz only. It feels better and ez to control. But 4k? Pffff even if its there it doesnt mean better. Just dont get fooled by marketing shit young people
4k 8k and Motion sync i can't feel any diffrence
and 1k to 4k?
Don‘t tell anyone that 500hz is enough 😅
Anything above 1khz is a gimmick. I am clicking on "comment" now with a 8khz mouse.
0.125ms is 8k HZ
nice explained thanks for your help
i got 400hz and now, im special, but loose again hahahahha
0.25?
i wish you try 2k im now 2k it just feel beter maby its the system latency or what i play on 400 dpi combination with 2k just sweet spot
Just so you know, 400dpi is not enough data to saturate a 4000 polling rate. In fact optimum tech had to go up to 1600dpi to fully saturate the 4000hz polling rate. So there is a good chance your 400dpi is not even fully using 1000hz
Alfonzo Springs
Fck man, i shouldve watched this video before i bought a razer mouse, theres literally not a single distinction between a 4000 hz mouse qnd a 1000 hz mouse. I got a good 144 hz monitor and its still imperceptible
ur not accounting for human error. u just are slower than a 4k polling rate mouse so ur missing due to skill not the mouse so idk if this test is valid at all
Short answer, no.
4000hz or even 8000hz is a gimmick , it only helps to drain the battery faster
8k only ever been on a wired mouse, and it's been accepted that 8k feels like a real difference for years
the background music is very annoying
You spelt Data wrong smh
you're*
It was a joke. Because he’s british
@@absolutelysobeast Thanks I couldnt tell
I have the razer viper 8khz…
Diamon, very nice idea. But must match polling rate with dpi in 1:1, so 1000cpi/dpi to 1000hz and so on
What benefit does this have? Where did you learn this is beneficial?
@@Plexez techpower up and razer
@@manueladolfoholzmannillane3050 im 99% sure this is a myth. Generally, higher dpi gives better response times.
@@Plexez i will give you a chance, think twice. If you surrender, just tell me and i tell you.
@@manueladolfoholzmannillane3050 found this now, is this motion sync in general? they way it works
4000 Hz it's 1 in 0.25 ms or 0.00025 s 😐