geekhack Community > Input Devices

Mouse Guide 2.0: A list of mice with superior sensors and more.

(1/108) > >>

Grim Fandango:
Updated: August 2016. Most recent mouse added: Logitech G Pro

About the mice in this overview
The mice in this overview were selected based on their performance on a number of criteria. While they do not perform equally well in each individual aspect, as a whole they outperform most other mice on the market. Specifically, none of the mice on the list suffer from acceleration or prediction within their max perfect tracking speeds. One thing you might notice is the lack of flagship model mice in the list. This is not a mistake, and largely explained by their use of laser sensors (particularly the Avago ADNS 9500, the Avago ADNS 9800 and the Philips Twin Eye sensor). These sensors typically perform well on most criteria, but are flawed in ways that make people avoid them.

1 Criteria
- 1.a Acceleration
- 1.b Prediction
- 1.c Lift off distance
- 1.d Max perfect tracking speed
- 1.e Malfunction/ Skipping speed
- 1.f Lag/Delay
- 1.g Jitter
- 1.h Smoothing
- 1.i Pixel walk
- 1.j Pixel skipping

2 Common terms
- 2.1 CPI/DPI
- 2.2 Polling rate
- 2.3 laser and optical sensor
- 2.4 Sensitivity

3 List of mice without acceleration and prediction
- Microsoft WMO 1.1
- Microsoft IMO 1.1
- Microsoft IME 3.0
- Zowie FK
- Zowie AM
- Zowie FK1
- Zowie EC1 CL
- Zowie EC1 eVo
- Zowie EC2 CL
- Zowie EC2 eVo
- Zowie EC1-A
- Zowie EC2-A
- Zowie ZA 11
- Zowie ZA 12
- Zowie ZA 13
- Razer Deathadder 3G
- Razer Deathadder 3.5G
- Razer Deathadder 2013
- Razer Deathadder Chroma
- Razer Abyssus
- Logitech G400
- Logitech G400s
- Logitech G303
- Logitech G502
- Logitech G Pro
- Steelseries Kana V2
- Steelseries Rival
- Mionix Avoir 7000
- Mionix Castor
- Cooler Master Storm Spawn
- Cooler master Storm Alcor
- Roccat Savu
- Roccat Kone Pure Optical
- Roccat Kone Pure Military
- Mad Catz R.A.T. 3
- Corsair M45
- Final Mouse 2015


4 Discussion: Mouse characteristics
- 4.1 Sensor positioning
- 4.2 Mouse feet
- 4.3 Scroll wheel
- 4.4 Cord
- 4.5 Weight
- 4.6 Coating
- 4.7 Side-buttons

5 Software

6 References

1 Criteria
So what makes a good mouse? A lot of things are obviously subjective. Everyone has a different grip, playstyle and particular anatomy, so naturally different people like different mice. However, there are some more or less objective criteria we can use to rate the performance of mice. By doing this, we can create a list of mice with superior sensor performance that span a variety of different shapes and sizes, so that it becomes possible for anyone to find something within the list that works for them both from an ergonomic and a sensor-performance standpoint. While individual skill remains the most important factor for ingame success, it is good to have some knowledge of mice, their sensors, and the way in which they can be lacking.

Mice listed here score well on most of the following criteria (when they do not perform well on one or more of the criteria in this list, it will be pointed out)

1.a Acceleration
Both distance traveled and speed with which the mouse is moved affect the distance the cross-hair on the screen moves. It occurs due to a misinterpretation of the sensor with respect to the speed. Basically, a sensor with acceleration is not able to see the same count when you move it fast and when you move it slow (for an idea of what this count is , see the CPI section).

We can use an example to illustrate what acceleration is:
-No acceleration: A person moves his mouse 5 inches slow, he turns 90 degrees in-game. He moves his mouse 5 inches fast, he turns 90 degrees in-game.
-Positive acceleration: A person moves his mouse 5 inches slow, he turns 90 degrees in game. He moves his mouse 5 inches fast, he turns 110 degrees in-game. (increased movement speed increases cursor movement, hence positive)
-Negative acceleration: A person moves his mouse 5 inches slow, he turns 90 degrees in game. He moves his mouse 5 inches fast, he turns 70 degrees in-game.  (increased movement speed decreases cursor movement, hence negative)

While not always a bad thing, most people like to have a one to one relationship between movement by the mouse and movement on the screen. However, some people like to use acceleration because it offers them some sort of built in sensitivity adjustment. For example, when acceleration is positive, it allows the user to move the mouse slow to make the cursor or crosshair move slow so that they can be accurate. At the same time, the user can move the mouse fast to do a fast 180 degree turn, as fast mouse movement results in faster cursor movement. It is easy to see how acceleration can provide a unique benefit.

However, even for those who like to use acceleration, it is preferable to use the known and stable software acceleration available in games and within their operating system. The problem with hardware acceleration caused by the sensor in the mouse is that it can be both positive and negative, can be affected by the surface the sensor is used on, and can be unstable/inconsistent.

Acceleration is generally more noticeable to low sensitivity players who make long sweeps at varying speeds.

1.b Prediction
Also known as "angle snapping" and "mouse correction". The sensor removes very small movements from the tracking, ignoring small deviations from a mostly straight line. When you come close to moving in a vertical or horizontal line with the mouse, cursor-movement will be straight rather than follow your exact movement. Not everyone minds prediction , but generally most people want whatever happens on screen to mimic movement of the mouse, and prediction creates an inaccuracy in that regard.

1.c Lift off distance
This is the distance the mouse needs to be lifted from the mousepad to make the sensor stop tracking. Generally it is better to have a lower lift of distance, so that the sensor stops tracking the moment the mouse is lifted from the surface. People who have developed a habit of sometimes lifting the mouse 1 or 2 millimeter without the intention to make it stop tracking can have trouble adapting to mice with a very low lift off distance.

1.d Max perfect tracking speed
The maximum speed with which the mouse can be used where the tracking still stays perfectly accurate. Usually lower than malfunction/skipping speed. These tracking speeds are important for all players, but when the tracking speed is not up to par, it is most noticeable by low sensitivity players, who tend to use long sweeps at high speeds.

1.e Malfunction/ Skipping speed
The maximum speed with which the mouse can be used where the sensor does not stop tracking. When you hit the malfunction speed, what typically happens is that it appears that your mouse just stops tracking for an instant the moment you hit that speed. This is called "skipping".

1.f Lag/delay
A slight delay between mouse input and movement of the cursor/cross-hair on the screen. Sometimes it can be hard to spot, and fairly hard to capture and replicate. Especially when it happens inconsistently.

1.g Jitter
Also known as "ripple". The cursor does not follow mouse-movement exactly, but slightly moves in directions away from where it is supposed to go, making it "jittery" or "shaky". This is a problem often associated with using high (non-native) DPI settings (for more information see the CPI section).

1.h Smoothing
Sometimes, people mistake smoothing for prediction since that is what the word "smoothing" seems to describe. The problem of "noticeable smoothing" falls in the category of lag/delay (which can be caused by a number of things, "smoothing" being one of them), but I decided to add it separately to address some of the confusion surrounding it. The thing people notice when they complain about "smoothing" is actually a delayed response when moving the mouse. Every mouse has smoothing and in itself it is not a bad thing. It just describes part of the process of how mouse tracking is translated to cursor movement.  Where smoothing starts to become an issue is when this process noticeably affects sensor performance in the form delay. I should note that the delay associated with smoothing is not something that will be a problem for everyone, or not even something everyone will be able to notice.

1.i Pixel Walk
Pixel walk describes a sensor's inability to pick up slow mouse movement. At some very low speeds the sensor hesitates between motion and no motion. Every sensor has a certain speed threshold that needs to be passed for tracking to start. For some sensors, this "starting speed" is fairly high. Often, this is reported as lag/delay, because in addition to not following small slow movements, it feels as though there is a delay between when the mouse starts moving and when the cursor responds. This is due to the speed treshold not being reached immediately when the mouse starts moving. It also needs to be pointed out that the term "pixel walk" is sometimes used in a wrong context, describing issues with unintended cursor movement.

1.j Pixel Skipping
When tracking, a count from the sensor is translated to several pixels of cursor movement on the screen. This means that there is a loss in accuracy. It is not possible to manipulate the cursor with precision, and move it one pixel at a time, or land on one specific pixel on the screen. This problem is commonly, but not exclusively, associated with having a high windows sensitivity setting (>6/11).

2 Common terms
Here I explain some of the common terms that are used in relation to mice. (more are planned to be included)

2.1 CPI (better known as DPI)
"Raising the DPI is completely against the logic of performance"
"DPI... is a translation of how many pixels I travel when I move my hand by one inch. It is only this."
~ François Morier, Senior Engineer at Logitech.

Video:
The reason why I added those two quotes and the video is to address a common misconception about DPI. Somehow, people associate higher levels of DPI with higher levels of accuracy. This is not correct. A higher DPI does not mean that the sensor is more accurate, and on many occasions there is even a trade off in terms of performance to attain those higher levels of DPI.  You will notice that on the list of mice that are in this topic/guide, few of the the higher DPI mice/sensors currently available make the cut.

DPI itself is nothing more than a certain "count" per inch traveled. A higher DPI means a higher count for any distance the sensor travels across a surface which leads to the cursor (or reticle) on the screen traveling a larger distance. For example, when you are using a DPI of 400. That means that when you move the sensor an inch it will cover 400 pixels (not taking into account any ingame or OS sensitivity settings). This means that on a 1920x1080 resolution screen, it will take 1920/400=4.8 inches of mouse-movement to travel across the entire length of the screen. Note that this also means that in some (but not all) applications perceived sensitivity by the user is lower for higher resolution screens.

In some cases, the addition of a wider variety of DPI steps can come at a cost in the sense that those DPI steps reduce the performance of the sensor. Especially when it comes to optical sensors, high DPI settings are typically not native to the sensor. Instead, the higher DPI settings are attained through a technique known as interpolation (more accurately, there are different techniques through which interpolation is attained). This does not necessarily cause an issue, but there are common problems with several firmware and implementations of this technique by manufacturers. An in depth description of the interpolation process is both beyond my knowledge and the scope of this topic. If you want to know more about interpolation, you could watch the video above, and I highly suggest you check out the overview of mouse-technology by wo1fwood linked in the bottom under references. 

2.2 Polling rate
This is the frequency with which data is being sent to the operating system. The default polling rate on USB is lower than what most mice are capable of (every 8 miliseconds, or 125Hz), which is the reason why people sometimes "overclock" the polling /sampling rate (for more information see: Morehttp://www.ngohq.com/news/15043-how-to-increase-usb-sample-rate-in-windows-vista-7-a.html). Practically all modern gaming mice standard have a higher polling rate enabled. A polling rate of 500Hz or 1000Hz represents information being sent with a frequency of 2ms and 1 ms respctively. Typically you will not notice a difference between the two, but some mice that have an option to change polling rates do not behave exactly the same on both settings.

2.3 Laser and optical sensor
You will find that many mice are being advertized as being either laser or optical sensor mice. Obviously, this refers to the way the sensor detects movement of the mouse. Essentially, both laser and optical mice work very similarly. The main difference is the method that is used to illuminate the area under the sensor. With optical mice, this is done through the use of a light emitting diode (LED). Laser mice instead use an infrared laser diode to illuminate the surface under the sensor. The more interesting thing is the difference between the performance of laser and optical mice. Laser mice use a newer technology and are typically capable of attaining a higher DPI. For these two reasons people often incorrectly assume that laser sensors are superior.

When it comes to the sensor being able to track well on a surface, there are differences between the two, but one is not strictly better than the other. Laser sensors track better on some surfaces (like glass) while optical sensors track better on others (typically, cloth mousepads). Where the laser sensors lose out to the optical sensors is when it comes to accuracy and reliability. While the newer laser sensors manage to avoid prediction, the popular Avago laser sensors (9500, 9800) found in many modern mice all suffer from acceleration issues. Furthermore, while these sensor have a very high malfunction speed, their maximum perfect tracking speed is actually lower than that of the typical optical sensor. Another frequently used laser sensor, the Philips twin eye sensor, uses a different method to register mouse-movement. It actually does not have any acceleration issues, but introduces a problem when lifting the mouse, commonly referred to as a z-axis problem. The cursor moves when the mouse is lifted, which creates a problem for people who lift the mouse frequently with the intention of having the sensor stop its tracking.

One thing that is worth pointing out is that even when mice use the same sensor, that does not mean they have identical tracking characteristics. Different manufacturers implement sensors in a different way. Take the Avago 3090 sensor for example. Due to the specific implementation of it, we see it in mice that have some of the lowest lift of distances, and in mice that have some of the highest lift of distances on the market. Additionally, we see that the max perfect tracking speed differs across mice using this same sensor.

2.4 Sensitivity
Sensitivity describes the speed and distance of cursor movement that happens as a result of moving the sensor across a surface.  A higher sensitivity means that for any sensor /mouse movement, the cursor moves faster and travels a greater distance than for a lower sensitivity.

The sensitivity that you experience in-game is usually dependent on 3 settings:
-The sensitivity setting within in the operating syste (windows sensitivity slider)
-DPI setting on the mouse
-Ingame sensitivity setting
Ingame  sensitivity = [OS sensitivity setting] * [DPI setting on the mouse] * [Ingame sensitivity setting]

Many games give an option to use “raw input”. By turning this on, the OS sensitivity setting will be ignored for your ingame sensitivity. Your ingame sensitivity will then be described by: [DPI setting on the mouse] * [Ingame sensitivity setting]. However, it is not uncommon for issues to be reported with the “raw input” setting of some games. This is why people often choose the windows 6/11 setting instead without using raw input, making sure they are not exposing themselves to any specific issue the raw input setting of a particular game might cause.
 
A windows setting of 6/11 is the best setting, as it gives a 1 to 1 relationship between mouse and cursor movement that is not altered through software. In practice, using a windows setting below 6/11 is not too harmful. Certain minimal amounts of movement are thrown out (counts ignored), but minimal mouse movement remains 1 pixel, so there is no “skipping pixels”. Depending on the choice of windows setting, sensitivity is multiplied in the following way:

Setting 1/11 = 0.0625
Setting 2/11 = 0.0125
Setting 3/11 = 0.25
Setting 4/11 = 0.5
Setting 5/11 = 0.75
Setting 6/11 = 1
Setting 7/11 = 1.5
Setting 8/11 = 2
Setting 9/11 = 2.5
Setting 10/11 = 3
Setting 11/11 = 3.5

Where things start going wrong in a more noticeable and harmful way is when you choose a windows sensitivity above 6/11. This will result in skipped pixels. For example, if you wanted to do something with precision and move the cursor with one pixel, this might not be possible with a windows sensitivity setting larger than 6/11. The higher the windows sensitivity past 6/11, the more pixels are skipped. Minimal mouse-movement is no longer 1 pixel, but instead several pixels.

One thing that is annoying about sensitivity is that there is no unified measure for it in games. Additionally, different games deal with field of view settings in different ways, sometimes making it impossible to play on the exact same sensitivity settings. However, given a certain DPI and windows sensitivity setting, you can tweak the ingame sensitivity setting to get close to a sensitivity setting that you find comfortable to use. One method that is used to get a similar sensitivity across different games is measuring the number of inches you have to move the mouse horizontally across the mouse pad to make a 180 degree turn.  After measuring this, you can finetune the ingame sensitivity settings in other games to give you the same number of inches for a 180 degree turn. It should be pointed out that this method is more useful for arena-style and non-military shooters without aim-down-sight (ADS) mechanics. This is because in most games, sensitivity is changed when ADS, and the extent to which sensitivity changes when ADS differs from one game to the next (and can even be dependent on FOV settings and so forth).  In those situations, I recommend fine-tuning your settings through playing the game.


Grim Fandango:
3 List of mice without acceleration and prediction
Microsoft WMO 1.1
-Sensor: STMicroelectronics OS MLT 04
-Weight: 72 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ambidextrous
-Coating: Standard plastic. Versions with matte or glossy aftermarket coating available for purchase.
-Buttons: 3
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Slightly mushy in actuation. Does not feel as crisp as the standard omron switches found in most modern gaming mice. Some people mention that later versions have slightly better feeling switches. I myself have used many WMO 1.1 for a long time and never noticed a difference.
-Quality/ Design issues: The stock cord on the WMO is thick, heavy, and not very flexible. There can be "phantom scolling"/"scroll jump" where the mouse scrolls one click when moving it (typically WMO users unbind scroll). Often, when you slam the mouse down too hard on the mousepad after picking it up, the LMB or RMB might actuate.
-Picture: More
The original Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical, a mouse that was produced without the intention of it being a gaming mouse. However, it has become somewhat of a classic gaming mouse. This is both due to the sensor performance, and it having no acceleration or prediction, but also because a lot of tournaments were won by well-known players with this mouse. In Quake, players like Cypher and Rapha have used it, and still used it recently to dominate Dreamhack winter 2013. In Counter Strike, a lot of players, (for example, Spawn, though not anymore) use the mouse. Another reason why people love this mouse is its extremely low weight

The downside to this mouse is that the max perfect tracking speed is rather low at only 1.0 m/s. However, it can be "overclocked" by increasing the USB sample rate, and the max perfect tracking speed increases to around 1.5 m/s when overclocked to 500Hz or more. You can find more info on how to do this here Morehttp://www.ngohq.com/news/15043-how-to-increase-usb-sample-rate-in-windows-vista-7-a.html . While the mouse is discontinued, original and re-coated *(but legitimate) versions continue to be available, mostly from China.

Microsoft IMO 1.1
-Sensor: STMicroelectronics OS MLT 04
-Weight: 82 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ambidextrous
-Coating: Standard plastic. Versions with matte or glossy aftermarket coating available for purchase.
-Buttons: 5 (one extra thumb button on each side)
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Different switches have been used for the IMO 1.1. Before 2005 they used the d2f-01f-t. After 2005 they used the D2FC-F-7N. Both have a fairly low actuation force and soft feedback, with a subtle difference in feel.
-Quality/ Design issues: The stock cord on the IMO is thick, heavy, and not very flexible. There can be "phantom scolling"/"scroll jump" where the mouse scrolls one click when moving it (typically IMO users unbind scroll).
-Picture: More
In many regards very similar to the WMO (same sensor, same flaws), though with side-buttons.

Microsoft IME 3.0
-Sensor: STMicroelectronics OS MLT 04
-Weight: Around 110 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Standard plastic. Versions with matte or glossy aftermarket coating available for purchase.
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Different switches have been used for the IMO 1.1. Before 2005 they used the d2f-01f-t. After 2005 they used the D2FC-F-7N. Both have a fairly low actuation force and soft feedback, with a subtle difference in feel.
-Quality/ Design issues: The stock cord on the IME is thick, heavy, and not very flexible. There can be "phantom scolling"/"scroll jump" where the mouse scrolls one click when moving it (typically IME users unbind scroll).
-Picture: More
In many regards very similar to the WMO (same sensor, same flaws), though with side-buttons, and a very different more ergonomic form factor.

Zowie FK, AM
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3090
-Weight: AM 88 grams (without the cord). FK 85 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ambidextrous
-Coating: AM glossy, rubberized, and rubberized with glossy sides. Glossy sides may no longer be available. FK rubberized coating.
-Buttons: 7. Only 5 available at the same time depending on which side you use.
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Huano. Need slightly more actuation force than most common switches. Give a distinct tactile feedback.
-Quality/ Design issues: The AM does not have a stress relief on the cord. While I have not seen any complaints about it yet, typically, after years of use, this leads to damage to the cord. It is not yet confirmed that this is really a problem. There was a problem with the coating of the 2014 version Zowie FK peeling off over time. However, Zowie claims these issues have been addressed  Morehttp://www.zowiegear.com/index.php?i=news&p=57
-Picture: AM More. FK More
These are mentioned together since they are the same sensor in a very similar shell. Zowie's implementation of the Avago ADNS 3090 gives these mice a very low lift off distance. Possibly the lowest of any mouse on the market. There has been mention of a noticeable delay on the 450 DPI setting. While some confirm the issues, others say they do not perceive anything wrong on this setting. At this moment this is still not entirely clear.  MoreTo those who have experienced lag on the 450 DPI setting, an alternative would be using the 2300 DPI setting with windows setting 3/11, or the 1150 DPI setting at 4/11 which will both get you to that lower DPI (you can do further tweaking in the ingame sensitivity setting). Using a windows setting below 6/11 does not do much harm and does not cause the count skipping that you see when going  higher than 6/11. Reviews and tests show that the 2300 DPI step does come with more jitter than the other two steps, but it is not horrendous (it seems to be worse as you use a higher polling rate). Takasta's review on OCN shows the jitter at various settings in a lot of detail. It is worth pointing out that not everyone will perceive the delay on the 450 DPI step to be an issue.

Zowie FK1
-Sensor: Avago 3310
-Weight: 90 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ambidextrous
-Coating: Rubberized coating.
-Buttons: 7. Only 5 available at the same time depending on which side you use.
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Huano. Need slightly more actuation force than most common switches. Give a distinct tactile feedback.
-Quality/ Design issues: There have been complaints of some input latency occurring for clicks from the FK1. However, it is claimed this has since been fixed by Zowie.
-Picture: More

Zowie EC1/EC2 eVo & eVo CL
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3090
-Weight: EC1 97 grams (without the cord). EC2 93 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed). EC1 and EC2 have a similar overall shape but are different sizes (EC1 is larger)
-Coating: EC1&EC2 Evo glossy, rubberized, rubberized with glossy sides. Rubberized with glossy sides may no longer be available. EC1&EC2 CL rubberized.
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Huano. Need slightly more actuation force than most common switches. Give a distinct tactile feedback.
-Quality/ Design issues: People have complained about the scroll wheel on the EC1 and EC2. There is quite a lot of "play" for the wheel to move, and this can cause a problem with scrolling not registering. While replicating the problem is easy (pinch and slightly lift the wheel, and the scroll will not register), most people do not experience any problem with normal use of the scroll wheel. There was a problem with the coating of the EC eVo CL series peeling off over time. However, Zowie claims these issues have been addressed  Morehttp://www.zowiegear.com/index.php?i=news&p=57.

-Picture: EC1 & EC2 More
These use the same sensor as the FK and AM, have a similar implementation, but a very different (ergonomic) shape.

Zowie EC1-A & EC2-A
-Sensor: Avago 3310.
-Weight: EC1-A 97 grams (without the cord). EC2-A 93 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Same rubberized coating as the zowie FK
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Huano. Need slightly more actuation force than most common switches. Give a distinct tactile feedback.
-Quality/ Design issues: Earlier this mouse exhibited the same latency when it comes to clicks as the FK1, but this has since been addressed.
-Picture: More

Zowie ZA 11/12/13
-Sensor: Avago 3310.
-Weight: Without cord. 11: 90g, 12: 85g, 13: 80g
-Shape: Ambidextrous
-Coating: Same rubberized coating as the zowie FK
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Huano. Need slightly more actuation force than most common switches. Give a distinct tactile feedback.
-Quality/ Design issues: Earlier this mouse exhibited the same latency when it comes to clicks as the FK1, but this has since been addressed.
-Picture: More

Razer Deathadder 3G aka V1
-Sensor: Avago ADNS-S3668
-Weight: 105 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Matte textured surface, glossy sides.
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: The coating material used for the top of the mouse will eventually wear off. People frequently report that the side-buttons stop working (cave in) at some point, which is something that typically does not fail first on other mice.
-Picture: More
When it first came out it had prediction. This has been fixed by Razer in a firmware that was later released.

Razer Deathadder 3.5G aka V2
-Sensor: Avago ADNS S3888
-Weight: 112 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed and left-handed version available)
-Coating: Matte textured surface with glossy sides. Also available with matte textured surface and rubberized sided, and in full glossy coating.
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: The coating material used for the top of the mouse will eventually wear off. This is not an issue with the "glossy" special editions. People frequently report that the side-buttons stop working (cave in) at some point, which is something that typically does not fail first on other mice.
-Picture: More
When it was first released there was a jittering issue. This has been fixed by Razer in a firmware that was later released. The other main problem is that it has a fairly high lift off distance. This can however be addressed by the "tape fix". More information about this tape-fix can be found here
Morehttp://www.overclock.net/t/1211083/tape-trick-for-lower-liftoff-distance-lod-with-optical-mice and here Morehttp://www.esreality.com/index.php?a=post&id=2081569. Also check out the lift off distance section in the guide here Morehttp://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=333648

Razer Deathadder 2013 aka V3 / Deathadder Chroma
-Sensor: Avago ADNS s3988
-Weight: 105 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Slightly rough matte textured surface with glossy sides. Sides have a rubber grip.
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: While there are no specific issues that are often reported, it has to be said that when the deathadder 2013 came out, it was very common that people had to RMA it for different reasons. Like the mouse dying completely or developing a scroll-wheel problem. I do not know to what extent these issues have been addressed by the company, but after it had been out for a long time, complaints about the durability of the DA 2013 started to quiet down.
-Picture: More
Note that I added the Chroma and 2013 deathadder together even though they are two separate models. When it comes to the things listed here, the two are largely the same mouse, with the same weight, same sensor and so on. The main differences are that the Chroma adds a 10k DPI option (which does not perform that well due to additional jitter), the braided cable is a little bit thinner, and the surface is slightly smoother (but still a rough textured feel comparable to the 2013 version).


Razer Abyssus
-Sensor: Avago ADNS S3888
-Weight: 68 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ambidextrous
-Coating: Matte plastic and glossy version available
-Buttons: 3
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: The main problem with the abyssus concerns the sensor. It seems that some people get a good one without jitter while others do not. While it is not entirely clear how wide-spread the problem is, jitter is a frequent problem with this model.
-Picture: More
When it was first released there was a jittering issue. Firmware can't be updated, so you need to buy a recent model. However, people have been saying that some abyssus do still have jitter.

Logitech G400
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3095
-Weight: 104 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right handed)
-Coating: Regular/smooth plastic top with matte textured plastic sides
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: Many people have reported that the G400 has a common problem with the cord, where the mouse will sometimes completely stop working. The design is also without stress relief, which has caused cord problems for some, but the issue is way less common.
-Picture: More
First generation of the Logitech G400 had prediction and another sensor (the Avago 3080E sensor). You need a PID above LZ13333 for a G400 without this problem. Here is where you can find the information you need to see whether you have a "good" version: More

Logitech G400s
-Sensor: Avago ADNS S3095
-Weight: 109 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right handed)
-Coating: Regular/smooth plastic top with matte textured plastic sides
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: Currently there are no known frequently recurring problems with the G400s.
-Picture: More
There have been a number of people who claim that the tracking to the left and tracking to the right is slightly different for this mouse. Most G400s users seem to find that this problem is either not there, and even with careful testing they were not able to replicate it.

Logitech G303
-Sensor: Pixart PMW 3366
-Weight: 87 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ambidextrous shape, but right handed (buttons on one side)
-Coating: Regular/smooth plastic top with matte textured plastic sides
-Buttons: 6
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Metal spring button tensioning system that is both tactile and smooth according to users and have little travel.
-Quality/ Design issues: Many people have found that the mouse rattles when moved rapidly. Not all G303's have this problem.
-Picture: More

Logitech G502
-Sensor: Pixart PMW 3366.
-Weight: 121 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Smooth, matte plastic. Rubber grip on both sides. 
-Buttons: 11
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: There currently is a problem that the awkwardly shaped and placed mouse feet tend to come off when used on some surfaces (more likely on those surfaces where there is more resistance, and for low sensitivity players who do long sweeps). Some people seem to have a problem with their G502 where the tracking of the mouse sometimes completely fails. A recent firmware update did not solve the problem for everyone.
-Picture: More
Despite being an optical sensor, it has a max DPI of 12.000 and it is said that every DPI step is native (attained without interpolation). One thing that does need to be pointed out to anyone considering this mouse is that for the size of an optical mouse like this, it is quite a bit heavier than most other optical mice that it competes with.

Logitech G Pro
-Sensor: Pixart PMW 3366
-Weight: 83 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Symmetrical but not entirely ambidextrous due to the side-buttons being on the left.
-Coating: Hard plastic
-Buttons: 6
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N
-Quality/ Design issues: Currently there are no known frequently recurring problems with the Logitech G Pro
-Picture: More

Steelseries Kana V2
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3090
-Weight: 88 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ambidextrous
-Coating: Available in matte plastic, and with glossy top and matte sides
-Buttons: 5 (one extra thumb button on each side)
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: Currently there are no known frequently recurring problems with the Kana v2
-Picture: More
Very high lift off distance that can be addressed with the tape fix. For more info regarding the tape-fix, see: Deathadder 3.5G

Mionix Avior 7000
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3310
-Weight: 100 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ambidextrous
-Coating: Rubberized coating
-Buttons: 7 (two extra thumb buttons on each side)
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron switches. Not entirely sure which ones, I suspect the standard Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: Currently there are no known frequently recurring problems with the Mionix Avoir 7000
-Picture: More
Jitters at the higher DPI settings.

Mionix Castor
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3310
-Weight: 94 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Soft rubber coating with additional textured rubber grips on the sides
-Buttons: 6
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron switches. D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: Currently there are no known frequently recurring problems with the Mionix Castor
-Picture: More

Cooler Master Storm Spawn
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3090.
-Weight: 86 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Smooth plastic coating, rubber grips on the sides
-Buttons: 7
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: Compared to other gaming mice, the cable on the Spawn is relatively thick and inflexible.
-Picture: More
There are some firmware issues that impact performance. The original firmware had lag when using the buttons on the mouse. Other later firmware did not improve the mouse in every way, but instead removed some issues and introduced others. The firmware versions differ in lift off distance and tracking speed for example. Later versions of firmware addressed the button lag for example, but actually introduced a lower tracking speed, and a higher lift off distance, and some people claimed it also caused noticeable smoothing. This leads some people to intentionally keep using the old firmware. The mouse tape fix works for the high lift off distance (see: Deathadder 3.5G).

Cooler Master Storm Alcor
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3090
-Weight: 87 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Matte, slightly textured plastic UV-coating. Rubber grips on the sides
-Buttons: 7, but DPI buttons on the top are not programmable
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron switches *(not sure which model), actuation is slightly stiffer and requires a little more force than the typical Omron D2FC-F-7N switches
-Quality/ Design issues: This mouse has just been released and there has not been enough time for issues regarding durability to surface. Some things that have been mentioned but still not comfirmed are a rattling sound when moved rapidly and the scroll wheel has some play/wobble.
-Picture: More
Like many other mice that implement this particular sensor, it suffers from a high lift off distance. This can be addressed with the tape fix, but this has been shown to cause excessive jitter at the higher DPI settings. The mouse lacks a lower DPI step (starting at 800).

Steelseries Rival
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3310
-Weight: 129 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Rubberized coating on the top, rubber grips on the sides
-Buttons: 7
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Not entirely certain. It is rumored they are not omron switches and they feel different (TTC switches?). Actuation force remains light, but the feedback is not as crisp or clicky. Some describe them as slightly more mushy than the standard Omron D2FC-F-7N.
-Quality/ Design issues: On some of the Rivals, LMB and RMB touch when pressed at the same time. Many people report that the mouse-wheel rattles with rapid movements.
-Picture: More

Roccat Savu
-Sensor: Avago ADNS A3090
-Weight: 90 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Matte plastic top with very rough, grainy plastic sides.
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: The textured, grainy plastic coating on the sides scrubs off over time, leaving just smooth plastic.
-Picture: More
Reported low max tracking speed on some surfaces. High lift off distance that can be addressed with the tape fix (see: Deathadder 3.5G). Noticeable jitter at the higher DPI settings.

Roccat Kone Pure Optical
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3090
-Weight: 96 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Smooth plastic that has a slightly rubberized feel that fades over time.
-Buttons: 7
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: Currently there are no known frequently recurring problems with the Roccat Kone Pure Optical
-Picture: More
High lift off distance comparable to the Savu that can be addressed with the tape fix (see: Deathadder 3.5G)

Roccat Kone Pure Military
-Sensor: Avago 3310
-Weight: around 90 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Smooth plastic that has a slightly rubberized feel that fades over time.
-Buttons: 7
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N, very little actuation force necessary, soft feedback
-Quality/ Design issues: Currently there are no known frequently recurring problems with the Roccat Kone Pure Military
-Picture: More

Mad Catz R.A.T. 3 (limited information and testing available)
-Sensor: Avago ADNS 3090
-weight: 98 grams without the cord
-Shape: Ergonomic (right handed)
-Coating: Standard (slightly matte) plastic
-Buttons: 6 (including the programmable button on top)
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Unclear. Supposedly it is neither Omron nor Huano, but it has a slightly more tactile feel and is slightly harder to press than than the standard Omron D2FC-F-7N switches. More information necessary.
-Quality/ Design issues: Currently there are no known frequently recurring problems with the Mad Catz R.A.T. 3
-Picture: More
Originally this mouse was released with a laser sensor like the other mice in the RAT series. Somewhere halfway through 2012 however, the model was updated with the Avago ADNS 3090 sensor. Because this change in sensor went largely unnoticed, not enough information about the performance of this mouse is available. I feel like this was in part due to the poor reputation of the RAT series and the Mad Catz brand in the communities that would typically do these kind of tests. The reason why it is currently on the list is because of the sensor that is used, which usually does not have any prediction or acceleration. However, that is not guarantee that the RAT3 does not have it since there are mice that implement the 3090 sensor with acceleration (Puretrak Valor). This mouse has a very high lift off distance, which is a common problem for mice implementing this sensor. While not confirmed anywhere, I am fairly certain this can be addressed with the tape fix (see: Deathadder 3.5G). Another thing to notice is that while I can not find any tests of the tracking speed of the mouse anywhere, the company (Mad Catz) themselves state that the max tracking speed is only 1.5 m/s, which is surprisingly low for a mouse using this sensor. Various sources mention that the sensor has a max tracking speed of over 2 m/s. According to Woll3 (posted in this thread) 450 and 900 steps are very inconsistent and are suffering from Pixelwalk issues, general tracking at 1800 is fine. The mouse jitters alot on 3500cpi.

Corsair M45
-Sensor: Pixart PMW 3310 , this is the same as the Avago 3310 just under a different name .
-Weight: 90 grams (without the cord, without the optional weights)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: Rough textured plastic on the sides. Rubberized coating on the top 
-Buttons: 7, all programmable
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron switches *(not sure which model). Very likely Omron D2FC-F-7N switches since these were the one used in other mice in the Corsair lineup like the M65. But this has yet to be confirmed.
-Quality/ Design issues: This mouse has just been released and there has not been enough time for issues regarding durability to surface. However, the mouse wheel could have questionable durability if the implementation is the same as in other Corsair mice (this is not confirmed for this specific model). Apart from durability issues, the mouse-wheel in previous corsair mice that seem to be using the same mold had a lot of "play" and were fairly loose. This would result in some rattle when the mouse was moved rapidly, which annoyed some users.
-Picture: More
Noticeably more jitter at the higher DPI settings.

Finalmouse 2015
-Sensor: Pixart PMW 3310 , this is the same as the Avago 3310 just under a different name .
-Weight: 74 grams (without the cord)
-Shape: Ergonomic (right-handed)
-Coating: glossy plastic on the sides with a rubbery kind of foam where you place your thumb. Rubberized coating on the top 
-Buttons: 5
-Switches used for LMB and RMB: Omron D2FC-F-7N
-Quality/ Design issues: There are complaints from users criticizing the side buttons of the mouse. They are said to feel loose and rattle when the mouse is moved rapidly. Another thing frequently mentioned is that people do not like the way they are shaped. Many people feel like the overall build quality is not up to par when compared to the major brands.
-Picture: More


Grim Fandango:
4 Discussion : Mouse characteristics

4.1 Sensor positioning
Normally, the sensor of the mouse is positioned somewhere near the center. There are some mice however, where the sensor is not located in the center of the mouse. While not necessarily a bad thing, this could take some getting used to, as it affects how hand and wrist movement are translated to cursor movement. For example, when the cursor is placed further towards the front, this makes cursor movement feel more exaggerated. When rotating the wrist a sensor that is closer to the palm of the hand will travel a shorter distance than a sensor that is placed closer to the fingertips. While it is perfectly possible to adjust to a different sensor location and this happens largely intuitively, some people feel that they would rather use a peripheral that is compatible with the muscle memory they have built up over the years.

4.2 Mouse-feet
Generally, there are 3 types of mouse-feet that we commonly see: PTFE (Teflon), UHMWPE, and Regular plastic mouse feet. Most modern gaming mice come with Teflon mouse feet. This is generally regarded as the best material for mousefeet for having the best glide (causing the least amount of friction between the mouse and the mousepad), as well as having decent durability.
 
UHMWPE is a cheaper alternative to Teflon. It is not cheaper because of a shorter or simpler production process, but due to the cost of one of the main raw materials used to make PTFE. UHMWPE is a material that is almost as slick as PTFE. Theoretically, it is more durable than PTFE, and one of the most wear resistant materials in the plastic family.  UHMWPE is used by some popular mouse manufacturers such as Steelseries, who refer to it as UPE.

Outside of the material used there are other factors that can improve glide of the mouse. Shape, size and thickness of the mouse feet play a role. Any shape with sharp rather than soft rounded edges tends to cause more friction. When it comes to size, it is a trade off. Increasing the size of the mouse-feet improves the glide by distributing the weight over a larger area, but when the surface that is in contact with the mouse-pad is too large, the increased friction reduces the smoothness of the glide. In practice, mouse feet are often too small, and rarely too large. Thickness of the mousefeet plays a role because it creates clearance between the mouse and the mousepad, making sure that only the mouse-feet touch the pad. Some popular model mice do not have enough clearance with their stock feet, and friction is caused because part of the bottom of the mouse is constantly dragged across the surface. Thicker mouse-feet also last longer, and can take more wear before they have to be replaced. Additionally, thicker mouse-feet could help reduce the lift of distance of a mouse, as it increases the distance from the sensor to the surface (and therefore decreases the distance the mouse needs to be lifted to stop tracking).

There are aftermarket mouse-feet available for most popular models of mice. One inexpensive way people sometimes improve the glide with subpar stock mouse feet is to actually cover them with a strip of PTFE tape or UHMWPE tape. When applied properly, this can greatly reduce friction when stock feet do not provide the glide that the user requires.

4.3 Scroll-wheel
There are two types of scroll-wheels that are used: Optical and Mechanical.  The optical scroll-wheel uses an optical encoder. I believe there are several types available, but basically there is a LED that has its light pointed at a detector. Scrolling causes small pins to pass through the light from the LED. When they do, it gives a signal of both the direction and how many “steps” the wheel has been scrolled. A mechanical scroll wheel uses a mechanical encoder. Again, several different types, such as TTC and Alps encoders are available with slightly different properties. Scrolling the wheel triggers a mechanical switch registering both the steps and direction of the scroll.

There is no clear winner in terms of functionality between the mechanical and optical scroll wheel. They do however differ in feel. Some people prefer mechanical scroll wheels, which typically provide a little more resistance and almost tactile feel from one click to the next. Others prefer optical scroll wheels, which often have less resistance and provide a smoother scroll. It should be pointed out that when it comes to durability, the exact implementation and design of the mouse and mouse-wheel is usually more important than whether or not the wheel is optical or mechanical, and which specific encoder is used.

Other noticeable characteristics of a scroll-wheel are the number of steps that are on the wheel. Some wheels come with many steps, resulting in less travel of the wheel necessary to go from one step to the next. This makes using the wheel feel more fluid. Other wheels have fewer steps, and the wheel needs to travel further to go from one step to the next. Again, which one is best here is personal preference, and depending on how you intend to use the scroll wheel. Some people like having fewer steps, creating more distinct individual steps that can be used more accurately. Others like the smoothness of scrolling made available by having more steps, especially when used for common tasks outside of games.

Finally there is the shape and material of the scroll-wheel that could be taken into consideration.  Again, it is personal preference that is important here. However, in general people prefer wheels that provide some sort of grip (either through material used or some kind of indentations), to wheels that are completely slick.

4.4 Cord
A common trend in mice is the inclusion of a braided cord-sleeve. However, not everyone views the inclusion of a braided cord as a positive thing. In some cases the braided cord-sleeves are less flexible than cords that are only protected by a soft plastic. Additionally, some braided cord-sleeves cause more friction with the surface the mouse is used on, making the user experience more “drag”. It should be pointed out that this does not mean that plastic cables are always better. Not all plastic cables are flexible, nor all braided sleeves inflexible. Some braided sleeves have a finer pattern that creates less friction, and some plastic cables create a lot of friction when combined with specific surfaces.

Most manufacturers advertize that the inclusion of a braided cord is to increase durability. However, braided cord-sleeves that started to fray have become a common complaint  for some models of mice, leading some people to believe that at least some braided cord-sleeves are actually more susceptible to damage than plastic ones. Durability of cords can be, and has been, an issue with some mice before braided cord-sleeves came around. However, these issues were usually not related to how well the wires in the cord were protected by the cord-sleeve (even if they were, it was often due to a design mistake, such as the lack of a stress-relief on the cord). You can question whether an increase in cord-sleeve durability was ever something we really needed.

4.5 Weight
Mice come in many different shapes and sizes. But not only the shape, but also the weight of a mouse plays a large part in how the mouse feels. Some mice even come with “adjustable weights”, usually containing some sort of cartridge that can hold weights and that can be placed in the mouse.

Like most other characteristics of the mouse, personal preference plays a role here. Playstyle is also important. Someone with a low sensitivity typically lifts his mouse frequently, constantly sweeping it over large distances. It is no coincidence that such players often prefer lighter mice, as this makes these actions easier to perform.  Someone who plays at a higher sensitivity however, cares more about the accuracy of his small movements. A heavier mouse could provide a little more resistance, and needs more force to be moved, allowing the user to avoid any unintentional movement of the mouse. One alternative to this however, might be to use a surface that creates more friction with the mouse. This way it is possible to use a lighter mouse, maintaining the benefits of a light mouse, while keeping the kind of control that you associate with a heavier mouse. When it comes to weight, many people feel strongly that mice should be as light as possible.

But it is not only the number of grams that matters when it comes to weight. What also matters is how weight is distributed over the mouse.  This can drastically alter the feel of a mouse, especially for those who pick up the mouse a lot. For example, there are some models of mice where the bulk of the weight is located in the back of the mouse. People who tend to lift the mouse by putting pressure on the sides of the mouse near the front find such a weight distribution awkward to use, as it pulls the back of the mouse back to the surface. This is also where adjustable weights sometimes create a problem, as they can cause weight to become more clustered in one area of the mouse.

4.6 Coating
While there are many coatings available, they can be generally divided in 4 categories: Smooth plastic, Textured plastic, Rubberized, and Glossy coating.

There is no one best option here. Which coating works out for a user is dependent on number of things such as ambient temperature, perspiration, oiliness of the skin, grip style as well as individual preference. While most people can get used to Smooth and Textured plastic, experiences with Glossy and Rubberized coatings differ wildly. Overall, completely dry hands and very sweaty hands will both have trouble with any kind of coating, as both cause a lack of  friction between the skin and any surface material. However, glossy coatings are generally a very good option for hands that tend to be dry, while rubberized surfaces can work for both dry and wet hands depending on user preferences.

4.7 Side-Buttons
While companies usually advertize with the switches that are used in the main mouse button (LMB and RMB), it is often harder to figure out what kind of switches are used for the other buttons on the mouse.

Similar to switches in the LMB and RMB, Omron switches are generally considered the “golden standard” here as well. However, the majority of producers opt for cheaper alternatives when it comes to the side buttons and the scroll-wheel click. Typically they use a switch without the crisp distinct feel associated with the Omron switches. However, there is not always a trade-off in durability when the cheaper switches are used, as the modern cheaper switches are often rated for a similar number of clicks as the omrons (if the information given by the manufacturer is to be believed). An example and perhaps the most common among those cheaper alternatives are the TTC switches like the TTC 159. They are found in many modern mice, in many different brands.

Regardless of the switches used, even more so than for the LMB and RMB, the design of the mouse determines how they feel. Things that affect how pleasant they are to use are actuation force, size, location, travel and feedback. When it comes to side-buttons, people seem to pretty much universally agree that they prefer a light actuation. All mice that have a stiffness to their side-buttons are criticized for it. The amount of travel before actuation occurs seems to be less of an issue, as some very popular models have a relatively long travel and it seems to be rarely mentioned or changed in different iterations of the model.


5 Software
-Enotus mouse test: Allows you to check your mouse's max tracking speed, DPI as well as polling rate Morehttp://enotus.at.tut.by/Articles/MouseTest/index.html
-Mouse Rate: Allows you to accurately measure your mouse's polling rate Morehttp://www.pscheidl.cz/index.php/software/2-mouserate
-Mouse Movement Recorder: Displays movement registered by the mouse's sensor and movement of the cursor on the screen. Also gives an approximation of the polling rate Morehttp://smoothmouse.com/forum/topic/32-mouse-movement-recorder-records-mouse-pointer-movement/
-Outerspace's Max IPS logger: Allows you to see your max tracking speeds and detect acceleration Morehttp://www.sendspace.pl/file/1537a54bef4bf98d945f3c3/outerspaces-max-ips-logger-logerandconverter or Morehttps://mega.co.nz/#!pcpGkK6S!GZR5nXgySabz7YfnGekDSV8vH-0H2WAineYq3XZzj64. Please note that these two links have not yet been verified.
-Mouse Click Response Speed Testing Software: Allows you to test the response time of your mouse's LMB and RMB clicks Morehttp://www.bloody.tw/en/download.php
-microe1's MouseTester: Do not know too much about this software. Written by an OCN member Morehttps://github.com/microe1/MouseTester
- Microsoft Paint: Drawing lines in paint allows you to easily detect jitter and prediction MoreIt comes with windows dummy. Any alternative similarly functioning application will also work

6 References
- Overview of mouse technology by wo1fwood on the teamliquid.net forums http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=333648
- Overview of mice and their sensors, which was the starting point of this thread on ESreality by Wata, which you can find at http://www.esreality.com/index.php?a=post&id=2024663
- Gaming mouse sensor list by woll3 on OCN http://www.overclock.net/t/854100/gaming-mouse-sensor-list

Some of the information in the references will overlap with the information provided in this thread. More useful references will be added.

Please note
This is a work in progress, and therefore not all mice worthy of consideration are included in this list nor is the description of mice complete.

Things to be done:
-Update the information on some of the mice now that they have been out for a while and we know more about them.
-Add specific info for each mouse in the list, such as weight, number of buttons, ergonomic or not,  etc.
-Add information about the switches used in the mouse (omron, huano etc.)
-Add the1onewolf suggestion. Adding known and consistent quality and design issues for each mouse.
-Add information about the specific problems of popular laser sensors.
-Add general information about mice such as DPI/CPI, polling rate
-Add instructions for how to calculate sensitivity
-Add more information about whether a mouse has been used in competitive play (this will be limited to Counter Strike and Quake)
-Add graphical representations of described issues with mice
-Add information about software you can use to test your mouse on a number of the criteria
-Add discussion about physical mouse characteristics, such as the materials used for the feet, materials used for the coating (glossy, rubberized etc.) or the cable (braided/non-braided, thickness etc.)
-Add mice that should be included. (*this is ongoing. The list does not always contain all the mice that should be on there, but will eventually be updated to include them)

Acknowledgement
There have been a ton of contributors to this guide. So many in fact, that it would not be fair to include only a few of them. So I decided to make a general acknowledgement instead. The way you should view this guide, is really just as a compilation of information made available by many different individuals that share the same enthusiasm for mice and PC peripherals. Communities like Teamliquid, SK gaming, OCN, Geekhack and ESR provided a valuable resource that made it possible to "assemble" this guide.

Grim Fandango:
reserved

Grim Fandango:
reserved

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version