Author Topic: Intellimouse 1.1 vs. 3.0 (Read 41332 times)

vun · « **on:** Fri, 01 April 2011, 02:48:26 »

I picked up a MS IntelliMouse 3.0 the other day on a rather silly impulse because I've heard great things about the older models, but you can't find them in stores and I don't do silly impulse purchases online.

When I tried it out I was pleasantly surprised; the shape is great and it glides nicely on my pad.
My only issue is the quality; all the buttons feel shambly and low quality, especially the thumb buttons, though I don't use them as I can't program them due to IntelliPoint not being friends with SetPoint. They still annoy me, though.

Has anyone here tried both the 1.1 and the 3.0? I'd like to know if the 1.1 has a better build quality but the same shape, because the build quality of the 3.0 annoys me somewhat.

And if anyone knows where I can find the even older version online that would also be great, as a friend has it and says it's amazing. When I get the chance to try his I might end up wanting one in my collection, but I don't really know where to find one.

neverlast74 · « **Reply #1 on:** Fri, 01 April 2011, 06:55:46 »

try "x-mouse button control" to program the thumb buttons - helped me as well. http://www.highrez.co.uk/downloads/XMouseButtonControl.htm

vun · « **Reply #2 on:** Fri, 01 April 2011, 09:34:31 »

Thanks, I'll look into it as the buttons are nice to have, though not necessary.

patmok · « **Reply #3 on:** Fri, 01 April 2011, 11:00:31 »

1.1 and 3.0 have the same scroll wheel - so both suffer from "intelli jump" where it sometimes scroll on its own. 1.1's thumb buttons are less loose but they are quite different in shape. Search online for some guide to mod the thumb buttons to make them less loose if you want.

vun · « **Reply #4 on:** Fri, 01 April 2011, 12:52:39 »

Quote from: patmok;322758

1.1 and 3.0 have the same scroll wheel - so both suffer from "intelli jump" where it sometimes scroll on its own. 1.1's thumb buttons are less loose but they are quite different in shape. Search online for some guide to mod the thumb buttons to make them less loose if you want.

Alright, thanks. Wheel hasn't been an issue so far and the shape of the thumb buttons doesn't concern me much. If the left and right mouse buttons are firmer on the 1.1 I might get that and donate my 3.0 to someone else.

patmok · « **Reply #5 on:** Fri, 01 April 2011, 14:37:28 »

Oops I meant the shape of the mouse, but the button are definately firmer. I end up switching from 1.1 to 3.0 as I kept pressing MOUSE5 accidentally.

sethstorm · « **Reply #6 on:** Fri, 01 April 2011, 16:46:52 »

Quote from: vun;322564

I picked up a MS IntelliMouse 3.0 the other day on a rather silly impulse because I've heard great things about the older models, but you can't find them in stores and I don't do silly impulse purchases online.

When I tried it out I was pleasantly surprised; the shape is great and it glides nicely on my pad.
My only issue is the quality; all the buttons feel shambly and low quality, especially the thumb buttons, though I don't use them as I can't program them due to IntelliPoint not being friends with SetPoint. They still annoy me, though.

Has anyone here tried both the 1.1 and the 3.0? I'd like to know if the 1.1 has a better build quality but the same shape, because the build quality of the 3.0 annoys me somewhat.

And if anyone knows where I can find the even older version online that would also be great, as a friend has it and says it's amazing. When I get the chance to try his I might end up wanting one in my collection, but I don't really know where to find one.

I'd pass on all of them until they make buttons that can hold up to extended use. The same use that I've had on my Logitech mice resulted in plenty of snapped plastic on these mice.

vun · « **Reply #7 on:** Sat, 02 April 2011, 04:49:52 »

Looks like I'll get the 1.1 sometime then.

Quote from: sethstorm;322968

I'd pass on all of them until they make buttons that can hold up to extended use. The same use that I've had on my Logitech mice resulted in plenty of snapped plastic on these mice.

This won't really be an issue for me; I've got a decent collection of mice so i doubt it'll see 'extended use' as it won't be my main mouse.
It's not expensive either, so getting a replacement won't hurt much.

Shuki · « **Reply #8 on:** Sat, 02 April 2011, 09:31:29 »

The 1.1 is a similar shape to the Wheel Mouse Optical, alot smaller than the 3.0 and symmetrical. There is only one button on either side and they feel a bit more solid than the 3.0. The Wheel Mouse Optical has no side buttons, but at least that means not crappy side buttons! However some have scroll wheel issues, so whatever microsoft mice you get.. it seem there build quality isn't top notch.

Daniel Beaver · « **Reply #9 on:** Sat, 02 April 2011, 09:34:39 »

The 1.1 and 3.0 are similar in all respects except for shape. The side buttons were never their strong point, and the scroll wheel does jump occasionally.

British · « **Reply #10 on:** Wed, 06 April 2011, 07:49:20 »

I've been using a 3.0 for almost a year, and it's still in good shape (playing mostly FPS' and MMOs).
Nothing broken so far, and I don't think I ever experienced a scroll wheel jump...
YMMV, I guess.

MissileMike · « **Reply #11 on:** Wed, 06 April 2011, 08:57:29 »

I have both, but always use the 1.1.... I love how light it is and how it never skips. Here in the states you can still get them, but not so sure about Norway. I bought 10 of them at Microcenter to have a lifetime supply- they have the OEM black version for cheap.

vun · « **Reply #12 on:** Wed, 06 April 2011, 09:06:18 »

Quote from: MissileMike;325534

I have both, but always use the 1.1.... I love how light it is and how it never skips. Here in the states you can still get them, but not so sure about Norway. I bought 10 of them at Microcenter to have a lifetime supply- they have the OEM black version for cheap.

They're easily available from the online store I usually buy from, so getting one isn't an issue. I just don't like buying things online unless I'm sure it's worth the hassle. I prefer going into a store and simply buying what I'm after.

escargot · « **Reply #13 on:** Wed, 13 April 2011, 01:10:30 »

I use a 3.0 and am fairly happy with it. Although the thumb buttons are utter crap and feel real cheap, but I barely use them and I already got used of letting my thumb rest below them. And that's a very good thing about it, my hand sits really good on it, my pinky doesn't slide off the mouse and drags on the mat and I've never accidentally clicked left or right click. You have the wheel problem, and that's a real shame, since it happens quite often if you are not paying attention to not leaving the wheel halfway scrolled.

I got the IntelliMouse after trying a Razer Diamondback, that started to fail after a year or so, and the Razer support wouldn't help me in any way. Before that I had standard mouse and a double optical from Logitech that worked pretty good until it died on me after years of use. The 3.0 works perfectly (in its imperfection) after 3 years I guess, so I can't really complain about its electronic and mechanical quality.
The painting is another story though, it wears off after a while and rather fast. I could take a picture of it if you are interested. It's not that terrible, but it doesn't look good either.
The feet are really durable, I haven't had the need to change them or anything in all this time, and I doubt I'll ever do.

About the 1.1, I used one a couple of times and it just felt small. Maybe if your hand isn't that big it might suit you well, but it wasn't my case. I like bigger mice and I'm also fond of ergonomic shapes.

Hope that helps.

flyinout · « **Reply #14 on:** Wed, 13 April 2011, 09:14:33 »

well, actually the older version is not better than the new version. The sellers just want to misleading consumers and driving up the price. If you play FPS games ,they are both good mice. but they are not suitable for rts games. If you have a big screen monitor, the low dpi will also drive you crazy. I recommend you buy a Razer deathadd which I feel pretty good or a logitech G9x if you are willing to pay that much. I just bought a 3.0 only for collection.
btw, both IE3.0 and IO1.1 may have problem with the left button after using several years or even several month. Many users repoted that the left button may double click. So if you really want to stick with them, good luck!

flyinout · « **Reply #15 on:** Wed, 13 April 2011, 09:44:16 »

Quote from: ripster;329972

You're saying sellers have a vested interest in continuing the myth that old technology stuff is better?

I'm shocked.

SHOCKED!

right, many people who used both the older and the new version said that there is not that much difference. Ok, lets assume the older version is better, A new IE3.0 on taobao only costs 150RMB, but a NIB older version even can go to 2000RMB. do you think the "better" worth 1850RMB?.

vun · « **Reply #16 on:** Thu, 14 April 2011, 01:35:09 »

Quote from: flyinout;329970

well, actually the older version is not better than the new version. The sellers just want to misleading consumers and driving up the price. If you play FPS games ,they are both good mice. but they are not suitable for rts games. If you have a big screen monitor, the low dpi will also drive you crazy. I recommend you buy a Razer deathadd which I feel pretty good or a logitech G9x if you are willing to pay that much. I just bought a 3.0 only for collection.
btw, both IE3.0 and IO1.1 may have problem with the left button after using several years or even several month. Many users repoted that the left button may double click. So if you really want to stick with them, good luck!

I already have a Mamba, which is basically a flashy DeathAdder, and a G9x.

As I've mentioned before, it's not supposed to be a primary mouse. The reason I want it is because I like variety and I'd like it in my collection if there's a notable difference. Also, the talk about driving up the price sounds a bit off, the 1.1 sells for about half of the 3.0 so it's not really expensive.

Also, as for the wheel problem I believe I get the same with my G5 but I haven't experienced it on my 3.0 yet.

Although it looks like there's no real reason to get the 1.1 so far. Will have to find another mouse to add to my collection then.

escargot · « **Reply #17 on:** Thu, 14 April 2011, 13:18:45 »

Totally collection worthy:

The one I mentioned before, the Logitech Dual Optical MouseMan. It was awesome, although I doubt the second optical sensor was really that useful.

kill will · « **Reply #18 on:** Thu, 14 April 2011, 15:36:00 »

i used ms intellimouse for 10 years + ... now i switched to logitech marathon mouse and i feel it is a VERY similar, but better mouse.

Bilbin · « **Reply #19 on:** Thu, 14 April 2011, 21:14:25 »

The 1.1 versions are a lot more claw grip suited while the 3.0 is palm grip.

I did a little mod a while ago on my 3.0 to make my scroll wheel more rigid and stop it from randomly registering scrolls, just folding a little piece of paper under it to make it sit up tautly. You could also block out the light but I took it off when replacing my mouse feet again.
http://i54.tinypic.com/1j93pv.jpg

You know why 40 - 60% of pro gamers still use WMO 1.1/IMO 1.1/IME 3.0?
Because it's such a great mouse, they all use the same sensor.

Optical mice will be better than laser for a while now, for gaming anyway, the laser mice coming out recently have improved drastically from the pitiful days of the dreaded Logitech G5.

escargot · « **Reply #20 on:** Thu, 14 April 2011, 23:12:38 »

Yeh, I thought about opening it and trying to do something to the wheel, but I don't really want to remove the feet and I'm not really thrilled by the replacements available for sale.

I thought most of pro gamers used these because a) they didn't have sponsors or b) they couldn't care less. I dunno, I suppose there are really bad mice around, but it's a matter of getting used to it and everything should work good enough. I prefer reliability over the million DPI, adjustable weight, on-the-fly coffeemaker and what not.

vun · « **Reply #21 on:** Fri, 15 April 2011, 05:15:01 »

Quote from: Bilbin;331097

Optical mice will be better than laser for a while now, for gaming anyway, the laser mice coming out recently have improved drastically from the pitiful days of the dreaded Logitech G5.

What's so bad about the G5? I've used a first gen G5 for years and it's never given me any trouble at all, I'd even say it's one of the best mice I've ever used.

Quote from: escargot;331157

I prefer reliability over the million DPI, adjustable weight, on-the-fly coffeemaker and what not.

At first I never bothered going above 800dpi but recently I tried lowering the sense in Windows and in games while cranking the dpi up to the 3200-5600 range, feels a lot smoother. Not sure if there really is a difference or if it's just the placebo effect, but I like it.

Bilbin · « **Reply #22 on:** Fri, 15 April 2011, 05:30:50 »

Most pro gamers use them because they are great mice, the sensors are amazing. Same with the Logitech MX518 and Razer DeathAdder

The MX518 is vastly superior and there is no point in spending more money on a poor laser mouse like the G5 when you can have an amazing optical mouse for a fraction of the price.

You should leave windows sensitivity on default which is 6 otherwise you will experience pixel skipping, the smoothness would probably be pixel skipping.

vun · « **Reply #23 on:** Fri, 15 April 2011, 05:37:08 »

Quote from: Bilbin;331240

Most pro gamers use them because they are great mice, the sensors are amazing. Same with the Logitech MX518 and Razer DeathAdder

The MX518 is vastly superior and there is no point in spending more money on a poor laser mouse like the G5 when you can have an amazing optical mouse for a fraction of the price.

You should leave windows sensitivity on default which is 6 otherwise you will experience pixel skipping, the smoothness would probably be pixel skipping.

From what I read in another thread all this about pixels doesn't really matter with the resolutions we have today. And I still don't see why the G5 is a poor mouse, never given me any trouble at all.

Arc'xer · « **Reply #24 on:** Fri, 15 April 2011, 17:24:02 »

Quote from: vun;331243

And I still don't see why the G5 is a poor mouse, never given me any trouble at all.

Because it's not a mouse meant for low sensitivity gaming. It's an okay mouse but mostly for medium and high sensitivity. The G5 is actually kinda popular in a few Asian teams but mostly for said medium/high sensitivity. MX-518 tracking.

And the Japanese mouse test. Which shows it compared to other mice. I think they are using the G5v2 but either way it barely tracks to 2m/s and some of the lower sensitivities can hit past 2m/s. But it can depend on either how much physical movement based on low sensitivity and low DPI or causing negative acceleration through high dpi and low sensitivity.

Quote from: vun;331243

From what I read in another thread all this about pixels doesn't really matter with the resolutions we have today.

There's different schools of thoughts regarding DPI. http://geekhack.org/showpost.php?p=295696&postcount=59.

daerid · « **Reply #25 on:** Mon, 18 April 2011, 00:59:12 »

DeathAdder is win. Scientific tests prove it.

Scarzy · « **Reply #26 on:** Fri, 13 May 2011, 05:23:55 »

Sorry to relight the fire.

Quote from: daerid;332576

DeathAdder is win. Scientific tests prove it.

Although it is very true that the Deathadder sports a fantastic sensor and the fact that it gives the user the option to choose if they want to use prediction (DC/NDC) - I find the mouse very hard to use. I used it for a period of about 9 months at a time and I just cant find the shape comfortable. The weight is good, but the shape is just digusting, I hate my fingers hanging over the edge of the Mouse 1/2. I also found the buttons wore quite badly.

OP:

The microsoft mice are my preferred mice, I own 2 WMOs, 1IME3 and 1 1.1. I love the shape of all three mice, but build quality could be much better. For a medium sensitivity player, the sensor works fine but when I used to user much lower I found it hard to comfortably track (not that I would ever switch back, encourging RSI is something that I do not wish for, anymore).

I do like not using prediction better, but for the main game I play I find that due to knockback, having a mouse with prediction is sometimes a benefit, allowing stable and smooth tracking even when being pelted is something I see as a slight advantage (currently using the 518). For comfort, I would also use my intellimouse 3.0, although I know it needs a little work, or perhaps even a new one. I also find they wear quite badly, in the sense that the rubber on the side is rubbing off now.

J888www · « **Reply #27 on:** Fri, 13 May 2011, 06:19:58 »

Rather than going through "My mouse is better than your mouse. your mouse is not as big as mine" scenario as it had been posted on countless Forums, would someone start (if there isn't one already) a Poll on their "Choice of One Mouse", not necessary their current everyday Use, also maybe from out of production makes & models.
I for one would be interested in the results of the consensus.

curzen · « **Reply #28 on:** Fri, 13 May 2011, 07:20:56 »

http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Comfort-Mouse-6000-S7J-00001/dp/B004RPSGIC

will most likely pick up one of these the coming weeks. kinda looks like an updated intellimouse

Arc'xer · « **Reply #29 on:** Fri, 13 May 2011, 07:31:25 »

Quote from: curzen;345697

http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Comfort-Mouse-6000-S7J-00001/dp/B004RPSGIC

will most likely pick up one of these the coming weeks. kinda looks like an updated intellimouse

Except you shouldn't really jump into the Bluetrack Intelli-clones just yet; IE 3.0 = (B-CM 6K), IO 1.1 = (B-CM 4.5K), WMO 1.1 = (B-CM 3K).

http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=2040960

If the polling rate can't be updated and it really is locked at 125hz your not going to see a good gaming mouse. Unless you do some sort of franken-mouse and install a different sensor; they did say the mouse doesn't feel as cheap as the intelli-version so it does make a good franken body. Wait for them to see if the mouse can have it's polling rate increased.

curzen · « **Reply #30 on:** Fri, 13 May 2011, 18:08:19 »

*shrug* polling rates have never been a noticeable issue for me.

Arc'xer · « **Reply #31 on:** Fri, 13 May 2011, 18:20:10 »

Quote from: curzen;345922

*shrug* polling rates have never been a noticeable issue for me.

Maybe there's enough latency or input lag on your computer, monitor, or both that you don't notice the difference. Or you never really gave it enough time to settle in and you didn't bother.

Polling rate is very important for providing more input(updates), providing smoother better movement. And in the case of the intelli-mice as well as other mice improving the tracking of the engine specifications avoiding a lot of low sens tracking issues.

daerid · « **Reply #32 on:** Fri, 13 May 2011, 22:00:59 »

I actually game better at 125hz/400dpi than anything else.

vun · « **Reply #33 on:** Sat, 14 May 2011, 04:31:10 »

The next time I play an FPS online I'm going to play with 125hz and mouse accel. I don't think I'll do any worse than I usually do.

J888www · « **Reply #34 on:** Tue, 17 May 2011, 09:45:45 »

Most Gamers optimize their mouse, firstly by turning off Acceleration..........

In reply to the OP, all three choices are good as they all use the "flawless" STMicroelectronics OS MLT 04 sensors. So the preference depends on your options/opinions of each model. I personally prefer the even older version as I rarely use the side buttons.

Quote from: daerid;332576

DeathAdder is win. Scientific tests prove it.

Scientific tests also prove many other mouses are "wins".
Unlike the WMO 1.1, IMO 1.1 or IME 3.0, the DeathAdder may need to have their firmware implemented with updates to solve the issue of prediction.

vun · « **Reply #35 on:** Tue, 17 May 2011, 10:39:14 »

Quote from: J888www;347488

Most Gamers optimize their mouse, firstly by turning off Acceleration..........

What I'm trying to say is that most mouse settings will generally come down to preference. What gives the most accurate results on paper and in controlled scientific environments isn't necessarily what works best for everyone.
I personally don't like playing with acceleration on, but I'm not going to say that using it is wrong if someone else say they use it.

Regarding what I originally asked; it's not really relevant any longer as the difference between them isn't enough to justify a purchase as I'm trying to cut down on my expenses.

daerid · « **Reply #36 on:** Tue, 17 May 2011, 17:22:35 »

Quote from: vun;346071

The next time I play an FPS online I'm going to play with 125hz and mouse accel. I don't think I'll do any worse than I usually do.

Eeeeek. That's the one thing I could never do; game with acceleration. Main reason I could never game on a Mac.

Quote from: J888www;347488

Unlike the WMO 1.1, IMO 1.1 or IME 3.0, the DeathAdder may need to have their firmware implemented with updates to solve the issue of prediction.

I didn't think that the DA had prediction, but it looks like it actually DOES need a FW update to fix. Good to know

Arc'xer · « **Reply #37 on:** Tue, 17 May 2011, 18:43:00 »

Quote from: vun;347504

What I'm trying to say is that most mouse settings will generally come down to preference. What gives the most accurate results on paper and in controlled scientific environments isn't necessarily what works best for everyone.
I personally don't like playing with acceleration on, but I'm not going to say that using it is wrong if someone else say they use it.

Regarding what I originally asked; it's not really relevant any longer as the difference between them isn't enough to justify a purchase as I'm trying to cut down on my expenses.

I responded on this thread you posted about acceleration. http://geekhack.org/showthread.php?14850-What-mice-do-you-use&p=344079&viewfull=1#post344079

Generally your not gonna see much acceleration outside past Quake, Unreal, Wolf:ET, and Warsow(GPL; open-sourced quake clone)(Or any other Quake/Unreal clones out there for that matter). In other words for most, if not all ground-based shooters you won't see it unless maybe it's one of those Asian clone shooters in the odd cases that there is acceleration. For the most part people go for consistent accurate movement due to the way games handle weapons, the deadlier and or more realistic they make the game the less acceleration is used. While the more unrealistic, more survivable jumpy style acceleration is more favorable due to having more time to deal with things.

Nothing wrong with acceleration in reality it was one of the ways early on that people could play low-sensitivity with due to the fact mice back in the early days couldn't handle the tracking needed for low sensitivity. It's why most early on were high-medium sens gamers and some of the lower sens used accel to accommodate tracking issues.

vun · « **Reply #38 on:** Wed, 18 May 2011, 09:02:20 »

Quote from: daerid;347684

Eeeeek. That's the one thing I could never do; game with acceleration. Main reason I could never game on a Mac.

I just did. Played parts of Blue-Shift and Opposing Force with 125hz and acceleration as well as a few rounds of CoD. I don't think I'd have done any better with my usual 1000hz and no accel. Feels a bit weird, but I also kind of like it.

And Arc'xer; I like you. You know stuff. I don't really have any other comments regarding your post because it seems like it's a bit deeper than my issue with this. I think, not really sure.
In short; I just want people to say that mouse accel and all kinds of other settings are outright wrong. It's a matter of personal preference usually and for most people it won't make much of a difference. It might for some people, I don't know as I'm not too into it.
I recently turned on prediction, or angle snapping as Logitech calls it, and I'm not noticing any difference whatsoever over the weeks I've used it. Yet a lot of people seem to hate it, not just dislike, but hate it. Same with acceleration.

I'm a bit all over the place, so if something I said doesn't make sense please point it out so I can do something about it.

daerid · « **Reply #39 on:** Wed, 18 May 2011, 10:55:58 »

Of course it's a matter of personal preference. We're talking about the way a human being performs in regards to a specific activity. Since everybody's unique, what's "right" or "wrong" to achieve optimum performance is going to be subjective. To claim otherwise is just ridiculous.

Skylit · « **Reply #40 on:** Wed, 18 May 2011, 16:26:38 »

Stuff like polling rate, prediction, and acceleration is matter of sheer preference or playing style. Nothing is right or wrong, but it can be highly noticeable to some people.

Call me crazy, but I can easily tell the difference between 125/250 and 500hz. 500-1000 isn't much of a jump in latency to effect gaming performance (IMO), but then again, I could slightly notice a small difference when I was playing 1.6 hardcore/no lyfe. Motherboard polling rate stability can also play a factor, but thats another topic

curzen · « **Reply #41 on:** Wed, 18 May 2011, 16:46:08 »

isn't it just a change of single digit milliseconds? I have trouble believing that anyone can actually notice that difference.

Bilbin · « **Reply #42 on:** Thu, 19 May 2011, 01:44:25 »

It just 'feels' different, a lot smoother on 500Hz. I can tell the difference between 1KHz and 500Hz easy enough, since I'm low sens. High sens players probably would not.

Positive/negative acceleration in a mouse is not wanted be the majority of people, you have the option to add acceleration in games, being affected by the mouse's random positive acceleration is not the desired outcome.

You mean the WMO 1.0 J888www? Didn't that have a REALLY early optical sensor that tracked horribly?

J888www · « **Reply #43 on:** Thu, 19 May 2011, 06:07:59 »

Quote from: vun;347504

.......I'm trying to cut down on my expenses.

In which case and if you still need a new mouse, the Logitech MX518 (1800 DPI) would be an excellent option, you maybe pleasantly surprised and can also be found at under US $30. In another thread, summarising that I wholeheartedly believe the MX518 1800 DPI to be the best gaming mouse produced to date........
NB: The MX518 1800 DPI (recent new version) have 3 skates, the MX518 1600 DPI (older version with issues) have 5 small skates & transparent base, if you receive the old version then quickly RMA the item without opening the package.

ATM, I'm think of trying to find an old version and exchange the base as I prefer the 5 little skates and the transparency.

Quote from: Bilbin;348356

You mean the WMO 1.0 J888www? Didn't that have a REALLY early optical sensor that tracked horribly?

Nope, I meant the WMO 1.1
Yes the WMO had prediction issues although many argued to the contrary, so Microsoft re-released it as WMO 1.1 with a new flawless sensor (as did Logitech with their MX518 [2 versions] recently). The new WMO sensor was at a later stage, used in the IMO 1.1 and IME 3.0

vun · « **Reply #44 on:** Thu, 19 May 2011, 06:43:32 »

Quote from: J888www;348420

In which case and if you still need a new mouse, the Logitech MX518 (1800 DPI) would be an excellent option, you maybe pleasantly surprised and can also be found at under US $30. In another thread, summarising that I wholeheartedly believe the MX518 1800 DPI to be the best gaming mouse produced to date........
NB: The MX518 1800 DPI (recent new version) have 3 skates, the MX518 1600 DPI (older version with issues) have 5 small skates & transparent base, if you receive the old version then quickly RMA the item without opening the package.

ATM, I'm think of trying to find an old version and exchange the base as I prefer the 5 little skates and the transparency.

Not sure if I've mentioned it in this thread, but I don't really need a new mouse. I have a G5, G9x, Mamba, Habu, Krait and a IME 3.0. The MX518 is too similar to the G5 to justify a purchase. Besides, while I've heard a lot of bad things about the G5 it's worked perfectly fine for me for the past 5 years or so. If I didn't like variation I'd still be using it. For some reason I also like the Habu a lot, despite feeling very cheap I had periods where I'd perform better with that than the G5, but the wiring went a bit off so I stopped using it for a while. Recently I fixed the wires but it won't track properly on my current pad nor can I find the replacement feet that came with it, so it'll stay in the drawer for now.

Philth · « **Reply #45 on:** Fri, 20 May 2011, 20:31:37 »

I loved the IMO 1.1 and I can't find a "modern" mouse equivalent that can compete with the shape/simplicity.

elbowglue · « **Reply #46 on:** Sat, 21 May 2011, 12:45:29 »

Hey does anyone know if the Mx518 1800dpi has prediction still? this would be the best mouse in the world if it did not..

Quote from: J888www;348420

In which case and if you still need a new mouse, the Logitech MX518 (1800 DPI) would be an excellent option, you maybe pleasantly surprised and can also be found at under US $30. In another thread, summarising that I wholeheartedly believe the MX518 1800 DPI to be the best gaming mouse produced to date........
NB: The MX518 1800 DPI (recent new version) have 3 skates, the MX518 1600 DPI (older version with issues) have 5 small skates & transparent base, if you receive the old version then quickly RMA the item without opening the package.

ATM, I'm think of trying to find an old version and exchange the base as I prefer the 5 little skates and the transparency.

Nope, I meant the WMO 1.1
Yes the WMO had prediction issues although many argued to the contrary, so Microsoft re-released it as WMO 1.1 with a new flawless sensor (as did Logitech with their MX518 [2 versions] recently). The new WMO sensor was at a later stage, used in the IMO 1.1 and IME 3.0

Arc'xer · « **Reply #47 on:** Sat, 21 May 2011, 14:18:55 »

Quote from: elbowglue;349486

Hey does anyone know if the Mx518 1800dpi has prediction still? this would be the best mouse in the world if it did not..

Always had prediction. I seem to recall a few mentioning some of the earlier optical came with prediction to support the higher DPI or something to that area. They never removed it and probably won't especially with the 518 being so old.

Bilbin · « **Reply #48 on:** Sun, 22 May 2011, 03:09:36 »

It's personal preference, as with all things. With tracking aim (see: LG in quake) it's not that big of a deal, pinpoint (see: RG in quake) it COULD 'cause some misses if you're not used to it.

News:

Author Topic: Intellimouse 1.1 vs. 3.0 (Read 41332 times)