# Competitive Gaming 1000 hz vs 500 hz polling rate



## jr92

Would like to hear some opinions preferably from players who have played games at a competitive level.

I'm currently using the Steelseries Sensei, in Mouse Movement recorder it seems to be fairly consistent at 1000 hz compared to other mice I've had in the past (Deathadder 3.5g, was completely unstable at 1000).

In terms of optimal settings and consistency what in your opinion is better, 1000 hz or 500? We made the move from 125 - 500, are we ready for 1000 yet?


----------



## immakulate

1000hz if it's stable.


----------



## jr92

Would you consider this to be "stable"?


----------



## immakulate

Yeah, that should be fine.


----------



## MacroZerg

Even with that one 471 Hz at the bottom? Its considered stable?


----------



## thorsteNN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MacroZerg*
> 
> Even with that one 471 Hz at the bottom? Its considered stable?


he propably stopped moving the mouse in this moment or at least slowed it down to take a screenshot


----------



## MacroZerg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thorsteNN*
> 
> he propably stopped moving the mouse in this moment or at least slowed it down to take a screenshot


Yea that could be the case, but i think ive read about unstable 1000 hz polling rates where precisely this happend, 1 odd low number here and there. The OP should say what the case is.


----------



## jr92

Yeah it was just from stopping the mouse. When I had my death adder the 1000 hz polling would just fluctuate from 1-1000 rarely even hitting 1000. It seems steelseries make better mice


----------



## Ino.

I use 500 Hz where it's possible as there is no need for 1000 Hz at all. 1000 Hz still puts higher stress on your CPU. It's not much, but why do that while 500 Hz is completely fine?


----------



## Blameless

I use 1000Hz cause it's 1ms less, and tracks just as well with my CM Spawn (firmware 61) as anything lower.

The CPU utilization is even more trivial than a 1ms response advantage.


----------



## bojinglebells

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> I use 500 Hz where it's possible as there is no need for 1000 Hz at all. 1000 Hz still puts higher stress on your CPU. It's not much, but why do that while 500 Hz is completely fine?


because a modern CPU will absolutely sneeze at the difference

as far as CPU stress goes, the choice between 1000Hz an 500Hz mattered 10 years ago and pretty much stopped mattering once dual core CPUs became the norm


----------



## Ino.

In my experience it made a difference of about 2-5 fps average. Also 1000 Hz had jitter on most mice I tried.

And please don't tell me you notice a difference of 1ms in update rates. There is no real advantage to it. So my conclusion is to go with the most stable polling rate with the best performance which is 500 Hz for all my mice.


----------



## Vikhr

Just pick whatever is stable, the difference between the two is negligible and it won't make you better.


----------



## CorruptBE

500 Mhz on XP, 1000 on 7 and 8. Why? XP felt smoother and starting from Windows 7 and upwards they changed the mouse ballistics code a tiny wee bit, it feels a tad more accurate but also less smooth. The end result: 1000 Hz to get the maximum possible responsiveness.


----------



## Skylit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> And please don't tell me you notice a difference of 1ms in update rates. There is no real advantage to it. So my conclusion is to go with the most stable polling rate with the best performance which is 500 Hz for all my mice.


I do. 1000hz tends to be a bit less restricted to hand movement. 500hz (or lower steps) will always hit a "barrier" as I like to call it. Even if you're not moving your mouse at max speed (1000hz) movement is still more "free" hovering in between.

Whether you notice in game depends on how you play. More so, a comfort factor and knowledge of personal hardware.. Not really one size fits all.

I could say 125hz is more stable and faster to hand response than any other setting, and while it may be true for me at a given time, it isn't the same case for others as input latency of lets say my monitor has impacted my overall experience giving me a different view point of perception. DPI "feel" takes a similar approach.

On topic of stability it isn't a case of whos products are better or worse, but rather hardware capabilities and fw. 

Edit: Many USB2.0 controllers default @ 1000hz


----------



## nlmiller0015

I have to say go with which one is stable i attend to use 1000hz because my mice run stable hz of pure 1000hz on mouse rate program


----------



## pruik6

It does not matter that much, you not gonna play better or worser with either setting.


----------



## ranseed

in terms of latency or response its the same thing youre not going to notice a difference. however, i feel more steady with 500hz so ive always kept it on that


----------



## splinterize

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jr92*
> 
> Would like to hear some opinions preferably from players who have played games at a competitive level.
> 
> I'm currently using the Steelseries Sensei, in Mouse Movement recorder it seems to be fairly consistent at 1000 hz compared to other mice I've had in the past (Deathadder 3.5g, was completely unstable at 1000).
> 
> In terms of optimal settings and consistency what in your opinion is better, 1000 hz or 500? We made the move from 125 - 500, are we ready for 1000 yet?


Depend on the mice that you are using. Some are better at 125, some at 500 and some at 1000.

According to some reviews, the G500 perform the best at 500hz. Since your Sensei use a similar sensor (A9800 AFAIK) it may apply to it too. You will have to test and see for yourself.


----------



## Skylit

Polling is not related to sensor.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skylit*
> 
> I do. 1000hz tends to be a bit less restricted to hand movement. 500hz (or lower steps) will always hit a "barrier" as I like to call it. Even if you're not moving your mouse at max speed (1000hz) movement is still more "free" hovering in between.
> 
> Whether you notice in game depends on how you play. More so, a comfort factor and knowledge of personal hardware.. Not really one size fits all.
> 
> I could say 125hz is more stable and faster to hand response than any other setting, and while it may be true for me at a given time, it isn't the same case for others as input latency of lets say my monitor has impacted my overall experience giving me a different view point of perception. DPI "feel" takes a similar approach.
> 
> On topic of stability it isn't a case of whos products are better or worse, but rather hardware capabilities and fw.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Many USB2.0 controllers default @ 1000hz


Ok, let me rephrase that: please don't tell me you notice 1ms update difference in an FPS game. I can't comment on 2D movement, but I know it makes a difference in paint that even I can tell ( which is explained in wolfwoods(?) awesome thread).

Or do you mean something different? I don't really know what you mean with "barrier"


----------



## Skylit

I do notice a difference in a FPS game. It isn't a question of 1ms vs 2ms but the ability to exceed a "set" hz cap. Whether it makes you a better or worse player is practically null, but I do feel less restricted when it comes to certain kinds of movement that would otherwise hit the "500hz barrier/wall" as I call it. Your mouse does not always poll at a set rate unless moved at max speed 

Like I mentioned it's going to depend on how you really play, but hardware difference can impact such perception.

PS: When I was still playing right handed low sens, the switch between 500hz and 1000hz didn't do much for me. Just had to spend a little time DMing and all was fine. Re learning how to play left handed has given me a much better understanding of little things.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skylit*
> 
> I do notice a difference in a FPS game. It isn't a question of 1ms vs 2ms but the ability to exceed a "set" hz cap. Whether it makes you a better or worse player is practically null, but I do feel less restricted when it comes to certain kinds of movement that would otherwise hit the "500hz barrier/wall" as I call it. Your mouse does not always poll at a set rate unless moved at max speed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like I mentioned it's going to depend on how you really play, but hardware difference can impact such perception.
> 
> PS: When I was still playing right handed low sens, the switch between 500hz and 1000hz didn't do much for me. Just had to spend a little time DMing and all was fine. Re learning how to play left handed has given me a much better understanding of little things.


Hm, interesting. Maybe I don't feel anything because I do play low sens









Not that I don't believe you, but can you try to explain which kind of movements you mean and what the effect is? Probably something that is hard to explain, I know, but I'm curious


----------



## meih

Not 100% related but I'm still going to ask. Why isn't there a usb hz force program that wouldn't require you to disable driver signature enforcement? Would a signed driver cost so much or is there another technical barrier? You can nowadays overclock pretty much everything straight from Windows but not force the usb polling rate. It would be still useful even though it's not as widely needed anymore as it used to be.


----------



## CaptainBlame

As a quake live player I can definitely notice the difference. I think you less likely to notice 1000 hz in slow paced realistic shooters where people play with ultra low sens and their cursor movement hardly exceeds 90 degrees.


----------



## ZareliMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *meih*
> 
> Not 100% related but I'm still going to ask. Why isn't there a usb hz force program that wouldn't require you to disable driver signature enforcement? Would a signed driver cost so much or is there another technical barrier? You can nowadays overclock pretty much everything straight from Windows but not force the usb polling rate. It would be still useful even though it's not as widely needed anymore as it used to be.


Maybe because there's people that charge extra for the native 1000 hz polling rate.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CaptainBlame*
> 
> As a quake live player I can definitely notice the difference. I think you less likely to notice 1000 hz in slow paced realistic shooters where people play with ultra low sens and their cursor movement hardly exceeds 90 degrees.


I played Quake 3 for years and TF2 competitive, and still play them from time to time. I never felt a difference. But I play Quake on lowsens (60cm/360°) too.


----------



## immakulate

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CaptainBlame*
> 
> As a quake live player I can definitely notice the difference. I think you less likely to notice 1000 hz in slow paced realistic shooters where people play with ultra low sens and their cursor movement hardly exceeds 90 degrees.


A difference in favor of 1000hz being better you are saying?


----------



## CaptainBlame

Well when I switched from 500 to 1000 it felt like it was moving slower (more control) even tho the sens was the same. As a result I could crank up my sens higher with 1000 then I could comfortably do with lower polling rates.

Also this is not just placebo, my brother who used a MX518 for years at 125hz. When I bought him an imperator he set the same DPI as the mx518 but the mouse shipped default at 500hz and he too felt he needed to increase his sens.

I play at 20 cm for a 360 degree turn plus I use acceleration in quake.


----------



## CaptainBlame

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *immakulate*
> 
> A difference in favor of 1000hz being better you are saying?


That entirely depends on your playing style, your mouse grip and sens.


----------



## Kainn

I've always read that you want it to be dividable by your refresh rate, i use 960 and i play with a 60 hz refresh. I've played cs1.6/css for a decent amount of time now, even a bit of bf3 competitively.


----------



## MrFerrari

I don't think that 500hz vs 1000hz means anything unless it restricts your hardware in a way that you can notice(lowered trackingspeed etc..).There are so many other factors that play a bigger part that I don't think it's worth spending a lot of time on this. I personally play just as good at 125hz as any other, but I would maybe feel limited by 125Hz if I got a faster monitor than my 60Hz.


----------



## Skpe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kainn*
> 
> I've always read that you want it to be dividable by your refresh rate, i use 960 and i play with a 60 hz refresh. I've played cs1.6/css for a decent amount of time now, even a bit of bf3 competitively.


You know, when I installed SS Xai and configured it, they bundled some 'pro tips' with the software. They said the same thing, use a hz divisible by your refresh. I was quite shocked! Just think a moment, what does your screen hz have anything to do with your mouse hz? 2 seperate entities. Now if it's the case that you want to have the USB reports at the same time your monitor chooses to update it's screen cycle, and by some miracle they managed to sync if that actually meant anything, what then? Your mouse is updating 16 times faster, but as long as the 16th time is in sync with the monitors new refresh for during the 16.6milliseconds, that 1/16th split mouse count is in line with your graphics output before it starts its next refresh update? Extreme precision yo.


----------



## CaptainBlame

Competitive gaming and 60hz monitors should not be put in the same sentence.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CaptainBlame*
> 
> Competitive gaming and 60hz monitors should not be put in the same sentence.


Why not, I do fine with it. I know 120 Hz is much better and the difference is obvious, but they are much more expensive too. Also: I know people who play competitive on a high level with hardware that hardly allows them to play above 30-40 FPS, still they do amazing.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> And please don't tell me you notice a difference of 1ms in update rates.


Consciously notice? No, almost certainly not.

However, even 1ms can still matter, especially when averaged out over time. 1ms faster or slower than someone else can be the difference between victory and defeat in an encounter.

Also, there are a lot of small tweaks that add up to a perceptible improvement. Shave off 1-2ms in ten different ways, and you certainly have a difference that some people are going to find perceptible.


----------



## Artifact

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CaptainBlame*
> 
> Competitive gaming and 60hz monitors should not be put in the same sentence.


Monitors with higher refresh rate will make the animation much smoother depending on the frame rate, thus more pleasant to look at, but they haven't been shown to increase gaming performance at all.


----------



## Skpe

The easier it is to see something, the easier it is to line it up in your crosshair. My accuracies definitely increased when I went from 85hz to 160hz CRT, by at least 5%. And no, that stat isn't an randomly made up.


----------



## duox

i use 500hz because I have since the first 500hz mice came out. I am not a fan of change so I will always use 500hz lol


----------



## AnDry115

Hi,

I am using my Logitech G400 for about 2months now.
What i've noticed is, that i use 125Hz, and when i read about it on google..its better to use 500/1000Hz for gaming, because 125Hz is a little bit jumpy..and it realy is..
But when i raise to 500Hz, i notice change a lot..

Now, i have a question about my sensitivity in a game ( Quake Live ).
Currently i use: 800dpi and 125Hz >>> and my sensitivity is 3.750 and mouse acceleration 0.48

So, my question is "How would i need to change my sens/acceleration, if i still used 800dpi but raised Hz to 500Hz or 1000Hz ?"
Thank you, greetz


----------



## Cancer

I've been wondering about polling rate since I got my new motherboard 1.5 years ago.
It has a "Fatal1ty" mouse port that allows you to turn it up to 1000hz.
Which caused my 9$ logitech mouse into a beast.....(after I turned off mouse smoothing that is).
Now I'm using a Steelseries Sensai Fnatic at 1000hz in a 1000hz Fatal1ty mouse port.
Feels good.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CaptainBlame*
> 
> Well when I switched from 500 to 1000 it felt like it was moving slower (more control) even tho the sens was the same. As a result I could crank up my sens higher with 1000 then I could comfortably do with lower polling rates.
> 
> Also this is not just placebo, my brother who used a MX518 for years at 125hz. When I bought him an imperator he set the same DPI as the mx518 but the mouse shipped default at 500hz and he too felt he needed to increase his sens.
> 
> I play at 20 cm for a 360 degree turn plus I use acceleration in quake.


That's typical if you have "mouse smoothing" turned on in windows.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AnDry115*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I am using my Logitech G400 for about 2months now.
> What i've noticed is, that i use 125Hz, and when i read about it on google..its better to use 500/1000Hz for gaming, because 125Hz is a little bit jumpy..and it realy is..
> But when i raise to 500Hz, i notice change a lot..
> 
> Now, i have a question about my sensitivity in a game ( Quake Live ).
> Currently i use: 800dpi and 125Hz >>> and my sensitivity is 3.750 and mouse acceleration 0.48
> 
> So, my question is "How would i need to change my sens/acceleration, if i still used 800dpi but raised Hz to 500Hz or 1000Hz ?"
> Thank you, greetz


Afaik polling rate does not influence sensitivity. It can affect sensor performance though.


----------



## Cancer

It affects sensitivity if you have "ENHANCE POINTER PRECISION" turned on.


----------



## CaptainBlame

By mouse smoothing are you referring to some reg patch? I don't have pointer precision enabled.


----------



## icolyze

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> Why not, I do fine with it. I know 120 Hz is much better and the difference is obvious, but they are much more expensive too. Also: I know people who play competitive on a high level with hardware that hardly allows them to play above 30-40 FPS, still they do amazing.


Perhaps in some joke game like World of Warcraft or Battlefield 3 where any brain dead person can be considered ''competitive'', but I doubt you'll ever find any Counter-Strike 1.6,Source or GO that play with that kind of FPS. Probably won't find any that regularly goes to lan that doesn't use 120hz.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *icolyze*
> 
> Perhaps in some joke game like World of Warcraft or Battlefield 3 where any brain dead person can be considered ''competitive'', but I doubt you'll ever find any Counter-Strike 1.6,Source or GO that play with that kind of FPS. Probably won't find any that regularly goes to lan that doesn't use 120hz.


I don't consider BF3 do be a competitive game at all. And I don't know about CS pros as that game has always been boring to somehow. But I know some TF2 pros that became good with very bad setups, just because their skill allowed them to. I think these days they have upgraded to 120 Hz and better hardware as well, but my point was that they were able to reach the top without it.


----------



## BIOHazard87

I can definitely agree with the people who claim they feel a difference 500hz vs 1000hz.

I do notice a difference, but its not much. From polling rate detection programs that I've seen, 500hz is more stable as it has trouble at staying above 500 when moving slowly. However if always moving quickly then 1000 is for sure beneficial. 500hz seems most stable in more circumstances.


----------



## boOzy

It's easy to feel the difference imo. 1000Hz feels less stable since it takes longer to "accelerate" up to 1000 from 0. To me it feels little like mouse accel in certain mid speed movements.


----------



## Jackolantern

500hz
have used it for years and years
only my g400 i use at 1000 because its default


----------



## illwill

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jackolantern*
> 
> 500hz
> have used it for years and years
> only my g400 i use at 1000 because its default


same here


----------



## r0ach

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boOzy*
> 
> It's easy to feel the difference imo. 1000Hz feels less stable since it takes longer to "accelerate" up to 1000 from 0. To me it feels little like mouse accel in certain mid speed movements.


That's a weird way of looking at it. I can't really comment since I've never used a mouse that was locked at 1000hz with no warmup. Has anyone ever created a windows hack to force a constant 1000hz while the mouse isn't moving? Wouldn't it give better performance that way? Is there even any downside to doing so?


----------



## superior

Have a question regarding 1000 hertz, would I be better off using 1000 hertz seeing as I have a BenQ 120 hertz, 1 ms monitor?


----------



## OCmember

Does the consistency of the polling rate effect the positioning of the cursor?

Would the North Bridge also effect the sustain of the polling rate?


----------



## hotwheels1997

Guys,i have a question.Sorry for using this thread but it's on the same topic. I bought a Perixx MX-3000 and it has 250/500/1000Hz polling rate.Which one should i use? When i use the mouse recorder,when i do fast movement ,that's what it looks:

But when i move the mouse slow,it looks like that:

This isn't considered stable,right?By slow,i mean 1 inch in 5sec.
I have 60hz 5ms monitor.


----------



## cuad

That's normal.


----------



## hotwheels1997

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cuad*
> 
> That's normal.


Thx for clearing it up for me,i was a bit worried my mouse isn't capable of it's rated specification,not that 500hz or 1000hz will make a difference with my 5ms monitor


----------



## jusk

Here's the thing- my cursor glitches when I move my mouse to fast especially at high dpi setting. Increased precision is off, speed adjusted to move pixel by pixel.
Shop owner told me the mouse model itself is flawed, but I found only good reviews.
My question is this- can overclocking it help the issue? should I overclock a USB port?(I'm on a laptop btw)
Don't wanna jack the thread, but please help if you can, I'm getting desperate. mouse: Arctic M551([email protected]); OS: W7; PC: Satellite l855.


----------



## mdrejhon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superior*
> 
> Have a question regarding 1000 hertz, would I be better off using 1000 hertz seeing as I have a BenQ 120 hertz, 1 ms monitor?


Yes, especially if you use LightBoost, as *LightBoost makes it easier to see mouse microstutters*.
It's important to note that strobe backlights such as LightBoost and ULMB, makes it much easier to tell apart 500Hz and 1000Hz microstuttering.
Microstutter occurs as an interplay between refresh rate timings and mouse poll timings.
Motion blur reduction amplifies visibility of microstutters, as they are no longer hidden by motion blur.

During fast-flick 180 degrees, panning is about 4000 pixels/second panning
1/500th error of 4000 pixels/second is a microstutter amplitude of 8 pixels.
1/1000th error of 4000 pixels/second is a microstutter amplitude of 4 pixels.

If you turn off mouse smoothing, and you are a very fast eye-tracker that can track objects during fast panning motion, the reduced microstutter is definitely noticeable.

Another good test is dragging a window full of text, in LightBoost mode when Aero is enabled. The text is not readable at 125Hz, the text is more readable at 500Hz, and the text is most readable at 1000Hz because the microstutters during dragging windows on a CRT-sharp-motion-clarity, the text is fully readable while the window is dragged without LCD motion blur (fixed by LightBoost) and the weak link to reading text while dragging windows, is the mouse microstutters. Also if you try to do the window-drag test on Windows 81, make sure you do the system-wide fix for Windows 8.1.


----------



## mdrejhon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> Also 1000 Hz had jitter on most mice I tried.


Try a better mouse, and a better mouse surface. Some mouse surfaces that feel good at 500Hz may not be accurate enough for jitter-free 1000Hz.


----------



## kazuyamishima

Following this topic. When it comes to polling rates, there seem to be a lot of myths, and it is still not entirely clear to me (and I get the sense not to most) whether there is any practical real world benefit is of having >500Hz


----------



## HAGGARD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r0ach*
> 
> That's a weird way of looking at it. I can't really comment since I've never used a mouse that was locked at 1000hz with no warmup. Has anyone ever created a windows hack to force a constant 1000hz while the mouse isn't moving? Wouldn't it give better performance that way? Is there even any downside to doing so?


No, it wouldn't yield any better performance that way. The mouse is polled only when there's data to be polled. As long as the report rate produced by your mouse movement stays below 1000 counts/s, it is polled exactly that amount of times, i. e. polling rate resembles count report rate and the latency on that input is not determined by polling rate. Only when the mouse is maneuvered in a fashion where it produces more than 1000 counts/s is when the maximum polling rate of 1000Hz starts to determine latency.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kazuyamishima*
> 
> Following this topic. When it comes to polling rates, there seem to be a lot of myths, and it is still not entirely clear to me (and I get the sense not to most) whether there is any practical real world benefit is of having >500Hz


There is, it's just hardly noticeable. The polling rate determines (if the mouse is producing enough data) how fast your mouse movements are registered by the PC to then be processed for further use. At 125Hz mouse data is delayed up to 8ms (but again - not every movement, only when you are moving your mouse fast enough for the report rate to hit >125 counts/s), meaning that you not only lose some fidelity with fast movements, since the jumps from one cursor or crosshair position to the next will then always be at least 8ms apart, leaving no room for the data produced inbetween to be displayed, but it can also happen that because of that latency, movement data doesn't make it in time for a frame rendering, meaning you will see input data 2 or more frames old, depending on your framerate and frquency. Refresh rate also plays a role of course. Generally, because of these timing issues, the higher the maximum polling rate, the better. The single milisecond of difference between 500Hz and 1kHz will only rarely make the difference between mouse data missing rendering time of a frame, and the fidelity between 1 and 2ms jumps is very hard to notice, especially considering that this latency only applies on fast mouse movements, where you can't really tell things apart on your screen anyways.
Couple that with the fact that not all boards/USB controllers and/or sensors are able to poll @ 1kHz consistently, and that professional players want to recreate their settings everywhere, and it is obvious why 500Hz is more commonly used. If you are a perfectionist though, and assuming your gear is able to poll 1kHz conistently, that's what you'd want to go for.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdrejhon*
> 
> Try a better mouse, and a better mouse surface. Some mouse surfaces that feel good at 500Hz may not be accurate enough for jitter-free 1000Hz.


Jitter is just more noticeable on 1000 Hz, whatever mouse or surface you use.

Also I choose my polling rate by how it affects the mouse's performance. If a mouse works well at 1000 Hz then that's what I use (like on the Savu or G400), but if it doesn't I opt for whatever gives me the highest tracking rates. In case of the Zowies that is 500 Hz.

With my 60 Hz screen the whole lightboost thing isn't really an issue, and even then I would care less about that than the max tracking rates.


----------



## thuNDa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> Jitter is just more noticeable on 1000 Hz, whatever mouse or surface you use.


jitter is more noticable with higher polling, because it updates what the sensor sees more often.
with lower polling, it just leaves out what the sensor actually saw at a given time, which might have been something that would draw a pixel where you wouldn't expected it(jitter).


----------



## metal571

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thuNDa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> Jitter is just more noticeable on 1000 Hz, whatever mouse or surface you use.
> 
> 
> 
> jitter is more noticable with higher polling, because it updates what the sensor sees more often.
> with lower polling, it just leaves out what the sensor actually saw at a given time, which might have been something that would draw a pixel where you wouldn't expected it(jitter).
Click to expand...

This.

I always use 1000 Hz. If jitter comes into play I lower the CPI to place an artifical filter, effectively, over mouse movement but not the polling rate unless in the case of an FK it actually affects PCS.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *metal571*
> 
> This.
> 
> I always use 1000 Hz. If jitter comes into play I lower the CPI to place an artifical filter, effectively, over mouse movement but not the polling rate unless in the case of an FK it actually affects PCS.
> 
> Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk


What you two said is exactly what I meant and also what I do


----------



## Thoth420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> I use 500 Hz where it's possible as there is no need for 1000 Hz at all. 1000 Hz still puts higher stress on your CPU. It's not much, but why do that while 500 Hz is completely fine?


Interesting I never considered that. Thank you for that interesting bit of info.


----------



## reddy89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Thoth420*
> 
> Interesting I never considered that. Thank you for that interesting bit of info.


Well, with today's processors it's negligible. My CPU doesn't budge from 0% when moving the mouse around on the desktop @ 1000Hz.


----------



## metal571

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reddy89*
> 
> Well, with today's processors it's negligible. My CPU doesn't budge from 0% when moving the mouse around on the desktop @ 1000Hz.


Seconding this...you have to be joking if you really think with modern processors that 1000 Hz actually causes any kind of appreciable CPU hit


----------



## mdrejhon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Thoth420*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> I use 500 Hz where it's possible as there is no need for 1000 Hz at all. 1000 Hz still puts higher stress on your CPU. It's not much, but why do that while 500 Hz is completely fine?
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting I never considered that. Thank you for that interesting bit of info.
Click to expand...

I beg to difffer from Ino.
*A powerful GPU, combined with GSYNC or LightBoost amplifies the difference between 500Hz and 1000Hz.*

It's also noticeable when doing certain things such as dragging a browser window while LightBoost/Turbo240/ULMB is enabled (while using Windows 8.1 mouse fix). A window dragging speed 2000 pixels/second during 500Hz, you got a microstutter amplitude of up to 4 pixels (sufficient to blur text). But at 1000Hz poll rate, the microstutter amplitude is only 2 pixels. With a strobe backlight such as LightBoost, Turbo240, ULMB, text is perfectly clear even when you drag the window really fast (CRT style). That's because at 500Hz, 1/500ths of 2000 pixels/second is equal to 4 pixels. So that's your rounding error.

With the CRT-motion clarity of the various brands of modern strobe backlights (e.g. LightBoost, Turbo240, ULMB, BENQ Blur Reduction), motion blur is no longer the weak link, mouse microstutters now become the weak link.

This is whereupon I notice a difference between 500Hz and 1000Hz. In this situation, dragging text-filled windows is noticeably clearer on strobe-backlight monitors at a mouse rate of 1000Hz than at 500Hz -- there is less microstutter. Especially when you're using a good mouse & a good mousepad, so that the only weak link becomes the pollrate itself aliasing against the motionspeed aliasing against the refresh rate.


----------



## Thoth420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdrejhon*
> 
> I beg to difffer from Ino.
> *A powerful GPU, combined with GSYNC or LightBoost amplifies the difference between 500Hz and 1000Hz.*
> 
> It's also noticeable when doing certain things such as dragging a browser window while LightBoost/Turbo240/ULMB is enabled (while using Windows 8.1 mouse fix). A window dragging speed 2000 pixels/second during 500Hz, you got a microstutter amplitude of up to 4 pixels (sufficient to blur text). But at 1000Hz poll rate, the microstutter amplitude is only 2 pixels. With a strobe backlight such as LightBoost, Turbo240, ULMB, text is perfectly clear even when you drag the window really fast (CRT style). That's because at 500Hz, 1/500ths of 2000 pixels/second is equal to 4 pixels. So that's your rounding error.
> 
> With the CRT-motion clarity of the various brands of modern strobe backlights (e.g. LightBoost, Turbo240, ULMB, BENQ Blur Reduction), motion blur is no longer the weak link, mouse microstutters now become the weak link.
> 
> This is whereupon I notice a difference between 500Hz and 1000Hz. In this situation, dragging text-filled windows is noticeably clearer on strobe-backlight monitors at a mouse rate of 1000Hz than at 500Hz -- there is less microstutter. Especially when you're using a good mouse & a good mousepad, so that the only weak link becomes the pollrate itself aliasing against the motionspeed aliasing against the refresh rate.


I haven't had a chance to mess around with Lightboost yet but thanks for the info sir.


----------



## metal571

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdrejhon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Thoth420*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> I use 500 Hz where it's possible as there is no need for 1000 Hz at all. 1000 Hz still puts higher stress on your CPU. It's not much, but why do that while 500 Hz is completely fine?
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting I never considered that. Thank you for that interesting bit of info.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I beg to difffer from Ino.
> *A powerful GPU, combined with GSYNC or LightBoost amplifies the difference between 500Hz and 1000Hz.*
> 
> It's also noticeable when doing certain things such as dragging a browser window while LightBoost/Turbo240/ULMB is enabled (while using Windows 8.1 mouse fix). A window dragging speed 2000 pixels/second during 500Hz, you got a microstutter amplitude of up to 4 pixels (sufficient to blur text). But at 1000Hz poll rate, the microstutter amplitude is only 2 pixels. With a strobe backlight such as LightBoost, Turbo240, ULMB, text is perfectly clear even when you drag the window really fast (CRT style). That's because at 500Hz, 1/500ths of 2000 pixels/second is equal to 4 pixels. So that's your rounding error.
> 
> With the CRT-motion clarity of the various brands of modern strobe backlights (e.g. LightBoost, Turbo240, ULMB, BENQ Blur Reduction), motion blur is no longer the weak link, mouse microstutters now become the weak link.
> 
> This is whereupon I notice a difference between 500Hz and 1000Hz. In this situation, dragging text-filled windows is noticeably clearer on strobe-backlight monitors at a mouse rate of 1000Hz than at 500Hz -- there is less microstutter. Especially when you're using a good mouse & a good mousepad, so that the only weak link becomes the pollrate itself aliasing against the motionspeed aliasing against the refresh rate.
Click to expand...

This. If your mouse supports 1000 Hz and is stable via DIMR, just use it. I have a VG248QE and trust me it's definitely a noticeable difference between 500 and 1000.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk


----------



## Thoth420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *metal571*
> 
> This. If your mouse supports 1000 Hz and is stable via DIMR, just use it. I have a VG248QE and trust me it's definitely a noticeable difference between 500 and 1000.
> 
> Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk


I am pretty sure the g700s is not stable at 1000 and it downscales to 500 when unplugged anyway so I would have to keep it in data over cable mode. The buttons have been acting up on me anyway so I ordered a Roccat Kone XTD. I think that has 1000 polling and its wired so I will give that a try.


----------



## Scorpion667

I use 500hz because my motherboard squeals like a fat hungry pig (inductor squealing as per [email protected]) every time I move my mouse. At 1000hz it is worse - higher pitched.
Obviously, the squealing goes away if I disable C states but I like having those on.

I can play just as well with 1000 or 500. Does not make a large difference to me, although I can perceive it.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdrejhon*
> 
> I beg to difffer from Ino.
> *A powerful GPU, combined with GSYNC or LightBoost amplifies the difference between 500Hz and 1000Hz.*
> 
> It's also noticeable when doing certain things such as dragging a browser window while LightBoost/Turbo240/ULMB is enabled (while using Windows 8.1 mouse fix). A window dragging speed 2000 pixels/second during 500Hz, you got a microstutter amplitude of up to 4 pixels (sufficient to blur text). But at 1000Hz poll rate, the microstutter amplitude is only 2 pixels. With a strobe backlight such as LightBoost, Turbo240, ULMB, text is perfectly clear even when you drag the window really fast (CRT style). That's because at 500Hz, 1/500ths of 2000 pixels/second is equal to 4 pixels. So that's your rounding error.
> 
> With the CRT-motion clarity of the various brands of modern strobe backlights (e.g. LightBoost, Turbo240, ULMB, BENQ Blur Reduction), motion blur is no longer the weak link, mouse microstutters now become the weak link.
> 
> This is whereupon I notice a difference between 500Hz and 1000Hz. In this situation, dragging text-filled windows is noticeably clearer on strobe-backlight monitors at a mouse rate of 1000Hz than at 500Hz -- there is less microstutter. Especially when you're using a good mouse & a good mousepad, so that the only weak link becomes the pollrate itself aliasing against the motionspeed aliasing against the refresh rate.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *metal571*
> 
> This.
> 
> I always use 1000 Hz. If jitter comes into play I lower the CPI to place an artifical filter, effectively, over mouse movement but not the polling rate unless in the case of an FK it actually affects PCS.
> 
> Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk


I didn't say that everyone should use 1000 Hz, it's just that I don't do, because a) I don't have that strong of a CPU or GPU, b) I only have a random Samsung 60 Hz TFT. There is no benefit for *me* at 1000 Hz. So I use 500 with the two benefits for me: lower stress on CPU (negligeble, but when you get less than 60 fps on some BF4 maps you try to reduce every clutter there is) and higher PCS on every dpi step.


----------



## superior

I use 500 because my monitor is 2 ms, if I had a 1 ms monitor I'd probably use 1000.


----------



## thuNDa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superior*
> 
> I use 500 because my monitor is 2 ms, if I had a 1 ms monitor I'd probably use 1000.


that's nonsense.


----------



## Sisaroth

Can you change polling rate without installing mouse software?


----------



## superior

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thuNDa*
> 
> that's nonsense.


Is it?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1428725/500-hertz-mouse-1-ms-gaming-monitor


----------



## thuNDa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superior*
> 
> Is it?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1428725/500-hertz-mouse-1-ms-gaming-monitor


it is, because it is not synced in anyway with you monitor.


----------



## superior

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thuNDa*
> 
> it is, because it is not synced in anyway with you monitor.


Its about the input latency of the display...


----------



## thuNDa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superior*
> 
> Its about the input latency of the display...


...which has nothing to do with the polling rate of the mouse.


----------



## XFighter899

speaking of polling rate this is normal on a Mionix Avior 7000 i see to much jitter on 1000Hz vs the 125Hz i think this is bad no ?
Tested on two mouse pads steelseries NAVI and a Qck Mass.


----------



## metal571

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superior*
> 
> Its about the input latency of the display...


Seriously, come on. It doesn't matter what the hell the input lag of the display is, the higher the mouse polling rate the lower the overall input latency.


----------



## metal571

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *XFighter899*
> 
> speaking of polling rate this is normal on a Mionix Avior 7000 i see to much jitter on 1000Hz vs the 125Hz i think this is bad no ?
> Tested on two mouse pads steelseries NAVI and a Qck Mass.


That isn't that bad at all. You should see a larger jump between low and high CPI than low and high polling rates. Max native on that mouse is 5000.


----------



## thuNDa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *XFighter899*
> 
> speaking of polling rate this is normal on a Mionix Avior 7000 i see to much jitter on 1000Hz vs the 125Hz i think this is bad no ?
> Tested on two mouse pads steelseries NAVI and a Qck Mass.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thuNDa*
> 
> jitter is more noticable with higher polling, because it updates what the sensor sees more often.
> with lower polling, it just leaves out what the sensor actually saw at a given time, which might have been something that would draw a pixel where you wouldn't expected it(jitter).


----------



## Bastard Wolf

I mainly use 500hz for CSGO and dota 2, 1000hz is a bit better for faster paced games.

Using zowie ec evo cl at 450 dpi.


----------



## XFighter899

Thanks.








So what are the best compromise polling rate & cpi (dpi) im at 1400 cpi 500hz polling rate now.


----------



## CorruptBE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *XFighter899*
> 
> So what are the best compromise polling rate & cpi (dpi) im at 1400 cpi 500hz polling rate now.


Personal imo, just test it out and see what u prefer.


----------



## wmoftw

1000hz is arguably useless since frame rates typically never hit 1000fps, especially monitor refresh rates. when we start averaging frame rates and monitor refresh rates over 500hz, then you can argue the validity of 1000hz for a mouse. until then, 500hz is just fine. of course if the mouse performs better at 1000hz then use it, but if there's little difference between them, 500 is fine.


----------



## MrFerrari

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wmoftw*
> 
> 1000hz is arguably useless since frame rates typically never hit 1000fps, especially monitor refresh rates. when we start averaging frame rates and monitor refresh rates over 500hz, then you can argue the validity of 1000hz for a mouse. until then, 500hz is just fine. of course if the mouse performs better at 1000hz then use it, but if there's little difference between them, 500 is fine.


But you can tell the difference between 125hz and 500hz on a 60hz monitor without and problems. So there will probably be a difference between 500hz and 1000hz way before the monitors hits 500hz.


----------



## LzbeL

Guys, how important is putting the WMO or IMO 1.1 to 500hz? With 200hz on PS / 2 is not enough?


----------



## metal571

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LzbeL*
> 
> Guys, how important is putting the WMO or IMO 1.1 to 500hz? With 200hz on PS / 2 is not enough?


Problem #1: YOU ARE USING THIS ON PS/2!?

Like I said, if you want much smoother movement and a higher PCS, switch to 500 or (I recommend) 1000 Hz on USB.


----------



## woll3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *metal571*
> 
> Problem #1: YOU ARE USING THIS ON PS/2!?


I´ll just quote "youknowwho".

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *youknowwho*
> Jake: lol
> Jake: 200hz ps2
> Jake: is actually really strong for data allocation
> Jake: not as smooth as can be though
> Jake: only issue
> ...
> Jake: 200hz+ is fine
> .....
> Jake: i mean ips wise


----------



## metal571

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woll3*
> 
> I´ll just quote "youknowho".


Ah, I meet the master again. Maybe you can actually clarify something for me real quick: PS/2 does NOT poll, correct? I hear from a number of keyboard manufacturers that not only is N key rollover only really possible with PS/2 but also that it does not actually poll, but I guess it would have a maximum number of reports per second. Therefore that would make it good for keyboards but not for mice I would conclude.


----------



## woll3

ps/2 works via Interrupt requests iirc, but i havent dug further into it.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woll3*
> 
> ps/2 works via Interrupt requests iirc, but i havent dug further into it.


Afaik PS/2 for mice is polled, only keyboard is interrupt. But standard polling rate is 80 or so.


----------



## LzbeL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> Afaik PS/2 for mice is polled, only keyboard is interrupt. But standard polling rate is 80 or so.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woll3*
> 
> I´ll just quote "youknowwho".


100 default, and 200 with OC.


----------



## hanzy

I searched all over but I cannot find a recent link--where can I get this mouse movement recorder exe?


----------



## metal571

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LzbeL*
> 
> 100 default, and 200 with OC.


This is what I've heard too. 100 stock. Don't use that for mice.


----------



## MrFerrari

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LzbeL*
> 
> Guys, how important is putting the WMO or IMO 1.1 to 500hz? With 200hz on PS / 2 is not enough?


Not really important at all. 500Hz will be smoother and you will have 50% higher PCS, but the question is: Will it make you play better?


----------



## LzbeL

Nobody knows how this OC USB in Windows 7? (edit hex usbport.sys)

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?281876-Win7-Polling-Rate-Mod-%28usbport-sys%29


----------



## metal571

This is the guide I followed.

http://www.ngohq.com/news/15043-how-to-increase-usb-sample-rate-in-windows-vista-7-a.html


----------



## XSAlliN

While comparing the CPU load, there's quite a difference between 125Hz - 500 Hz - 1000 Hz. Here, i made some screens while measuring the difference:



http://imgur.com/7zVeU

 (9 screens - while switching to a different rate every 3 pictures)

First 3 Pictures at 125 Hz

Next 3 Pictures at 500 Hz

Last 3 pictures at 1000 Hz

Or here's the compressional graph (basically it's picture 9 - with drawn graphs):



My CPU is a bit old, a 2x Core E2160 OC'ed at 3000 Mhz, so - the difference might be less apparent on a newer and more capable CPU. But still, for some of you might matter - and also, might explain the difference you felt between 500 Hz and 1000 Hz - since this measurement was done whit no other demanding application ON (not even a browser - if i didn't move the mouse, the CPU was idle at 0 Resources). So, with a game + the extra stress from the pooling rate - this difference might be noticeable on some CPU's (might lower the game performance).


----------



## Hasty

For the "there is no difference between 500Hz and 1000Hz" people:

_Originally created in a Blur Busters Forums thread, and now a part of the Mouse Guide, this is a photo comparision of 125Hz versus 500Hz versus 1000Hz mouse poll rates. The 500Hz versus 1000Hz is human-eye visible during motion blur reduction strobing (e.g. LightBoost) as well as G-SYNC where NVIDIA recommends a 1000Hz mouse._


_
You can see this by enabling motion blur reduction on your 120Hz monitor, and then drag a text window. Fewer microstutters makes text easier to read while dragging.

The gapping effect is caused by the harmonic frequency difference (beat frequency) between frame rate and mouse poll rate. It is clearly visible when no other sources of microstutters exist; e.g. fast GPU, fast CPU, low-latency USB. This mouse microstutter is clearly visible in Source Engine games on newer GPUs at synchronized framerates.

During 125Hz mouse poll rate versus 120fps frame rate (125 MOD 120 = 5), there are 5 microstutters per second. This results in 1 gap every 25 mouse arrow positions.

During 500Hz mouse poll rate versus 120fps frame rate (500 MOD 120 = 20), there are 20 microstutters per second. This results in 1 gap every 6 mouse arrow positions.

These mouse microstutters become especially visible on low-persistence displays such as strobed monitors or CRTs, during window-dragging. 500Hz vs 1000Hz difference is amplified during LightBoost, ULMB, Turbo240, and BENQ Blur Reduction._

source: http://www.blurbusters.com/mouse-125hz-vs-500hz-vs-1000hz/


----------



## kevinzone

Hi i was just wondering. If 1000hz wasnt stable , lets say on an older mouse and obviously 500hz was, what would be the drawbacks of having an unstable 1000hz


----------



## etplayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jr92*
> 
> Would like to hear some opinions preferably from players who have played games at a competitive level.
> 
> I'm currently using the Steelseries Sensei, in Mouse Movement recorder it seems to be fairly consistent at 1000 hz compared to other mice I've had in the past (Deathadder 3.5g, was completely unstable at 1000).
> 
> In terms of optimal settings and consistency what in your opinion is better, 1000 hz or 500? We made the move from 125 - 500, are we ready for 1000 yet?


My idea of stable is a lot stricter than most people, I don't like 1000Hz because on most mice it will be less stable than 500Hz. When 500Hz wasn't stable enough on my older FK, I put it down to 125Hz, it's bad to have to choose a 10ms mode but I was much better that way. Not all mice have that many problems at 500Hz as the FK though, and I use 500Hz on my FK1. For 1000Hz no, we're not quite there yet but sometimes it does get implemented well. Personally I think someone should just come out with a 500-1000Hz capable evolution of the PS/2 port (it won't happen but it would be ideal), as PS/2 was always perfectly stable but with a polling rate max of 200Hz. I also think the removal of the PS/2 option on gaming mice happened a little too soon, for reasons mentioned above where you get bad polling rates on every setting > 200Hz.


----------



## Nardykil

I don't really know about ms differences or barriers, but on my deathadder 3.5g, 1000 hz causes a really "soapy" feeling, while 500 hz feels a lot more precise. Both options don't cause any stuttering though. DPI is at 1600. Did anyone else experience this?


----------



## Wphantom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hasty*
> 
> For the "there is no difference between 500Hz and 1000Hz" people:
> 
> _Originally created in a Blur Busters Forums thread, and now a part of the Mouse Guide, this is a photo comparision of 125Hz versus 500Hz versus 1000Hz mouse poll rates. The 500Hz versus 1000Hz is human-eye visible during motion blur reduction strobing (e.g. LightBoost) as well as G-SYNC where NVIDIA recommends a 1000Hz mouse._
> 
> 
> _
> You can see this by enabling motion blur reduction on your 120Hz monitor, and then drag a text window. Fewer microstutters makes text easier to read while dragging.
> 
> The gapping effect is caused by the harmonic frequency difference (beat frequency) between frame rate and mouse poll rate. It is clearly visible when no other sources of microstutters exist; e.g. fast GPU, fast CPU, low-latency USB. This mouse microstutter is clearly visible in Source Engine games on newer GPUs at synchronized framerates.
> 
> During 125Hz mouse poll rate versus 120fps frame rate (125 MOD 120 = 5), there are 5 microstutters per second. This results in 1 gap every 25 mouse arrow positions.
> 
> During 500Hz mouse poll rate versus 120fps frame rate (500 MOD 120 = 20), there are 20 microstutters per second. This results in 1 gap every 6 mouse arrow positions.
> 
> These mouse microstutters become especially visible on low-persistence displays such as strobed monitors or CRTs, during window-dragging. 500Hz vs 1000Hz difference is amplified during LightBoost, ULMB, Turbo240, and BENQ Blur Reduction._
> 
> source: http://www.blurbusters.com/mouse-125hz-vs-500hz-vs-1000hz/


Yeah thats all very interesting, but, does it actually affect the gameplay? is it noticeable?


----------



## AlphaTay

from my experience, your mouse capable to run usb 1000hz or not depend on the mainboard chipset. it is not about mouse.

my sandy bridge CPU with Intel B65 (Cougar Point) [B3] capable to run 1000hz, while my older system only capable to provide stable rate at 500hz.


----------



## Thoth420

I have a proteus core g502 from Logitech and aside the depleted uranium mousewheel of cancer death I love it.

I have been reading through this thread for a while. First off kudos to the info on above 60hz panels should have the mouse set to 1000hz.

One personal caveat I have always found 500hz to be more accurate for me be it 60hz or 144hz.
DPI for 1080 I like 1200 to 1600 and still haven't found my sweet spots for 1440 yet.

My query is based on the fact that I use a ton of USB peripherals all at once. Orbweaver, G710+, g502 and a wired xbox one controller (until the wireless PC dongle comes out). For instance in a game like BF4, I use the orbweaver for game controls along with g502, the g710+ to type and enter console commands and the controller to "attempt to fly". The game as most do transition between inputs seemlessly which is great.

The problem: I feel I have crashed numerous systems (non overclocked and overclocked) while gaming and the only common denominators are 1000hz polling on the mouse and 144hz refresh rate.
Tems, driver issues and game issues have been mostly ruled out. Just wondering what affect 1000hz has on the usb bus. I tend to cluster all my usb peripherals into one area for cable management...I use the velcro straps to secure them all together near the I/O and then another were my cable channel pops out of my desk.

Never had this issue on my p67 sabretooth sandy bridge config but almost any other platform since. Z77, Z87 and Z97.

Also it could be the orbweaver..that was added post p67.


----------



## etplayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaTay*
> 
> from my experience, your mouse capable to run usb 1000hz or not depend on the mainboard chipset. it is not about mouse.
> 
> my sandy bridge CPU with Intel B65 (Cougar Point) [B3] capable to run 1000hz, while my older system only capable to provide stable rate at 500hz.


Two different mice will always perform differently on the same chipset. But yeah, I think you've got to have decent usb on your motherboard or the mouse will sink. When I bought my z97 motherboard I took USB speeds into account, I didn't expect to be able to gain some advantage there but I felt I wouldn't run into any problems if I got something with decent USB speeds.


----------



## ronaldoz

How coud you test 1000Hz stability? I just got a Logitech G502 and put the USB into the Logitech G710+ keyboard, so not directly to the PC. I do not notice any delay, but I would like to test if 1000Hz is stable and if the extra USB to USB is giving lag.


----------



## Thoth420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ronaldoz*
> 
> How coud you test 1000Hz stability? I just got a Logitech G502 and put the USB into the Logitech G710+ keyboard, so not directly to the PC. I do not notice any delay, but I would like to test if 1000Hz is stable and if the extra USB to USB is giving lag.


I have run mine that way in the past without any issues at 1000hz or 500hz (same mouse and keyboard) at all but now use that port for my the wireless dongle for my Xbox One controller because it is very big and blocks other ports on the back of a motherboard. I have hooked up my G13 through the keyboard as well and that worked fine too. The hub in the g710+ is solid.


----------



## ronaldoz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Thoth420*
> 
> I have run mine that way in the past without any issues at 1000hz or 500hz (same mouse and keyboard) at all but now use that port for my the wireless dongle for my Xbox One controller because it is very big and blocks other ports on the back of a motherboard. I have hooked up my G13 through the keyboard as well and that worked fine too. The hub in the g710+ is solid.


Thanks! Sounds great! Will let the setup how it is right now.


----------



## Thoth420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ronaldoz*
> 
> Thanks! Sounds great! Will let the setup how it is right now.


No worries and if it does act odd let me know. I had my g700s cable plugged into that keyboard alot longer than the g502 since it is fairly new.
Nice chassis! I have the exact same one(hard to see in my sig pic because the light is off) and you can imagine how dumb it would look with the USB dongle for the controller sticking out of the top usb ports. Mobo is a no go so the keyboard hub saves the day. I also love the g710+ it allowed me to readjust to non gameboard PC gaming again. (Rest in Peace Zboard Merc Stealth







)


----------



## Hasty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wphantom*
> 
> Yeah thats all very interesting, but, does it actually affect the gameplay? is it noticeable?


yes.

As written by Mark Rejhon:

_These mouse microstutters become especially visible on low-persistence displays such as strobed monitors or CRTs, during window-dragging. 500Hz vs 1000Hz difference is amplified during LightBoost, ULMB, Turbo240, and BENQ Blur Reduction._

Also note that even 1000hz is not perfect. We need more.


----------



## Gauanqh6764

..


----------



## x7007

So what do we do if Logitech G502 for example have higher than 1000 Hz randomly , it even reach to 10083


----------



## drewno

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> I use 500 Hz where it's possible as there is no need for 1000 Hz at all. 1000 Hz still puts higher stress on your CPU. It's not much, but why do that while 500 Hz is completely fine?


"2000 fps sent to mcu puts higher stress on it, it's not that much but why do that if 8 frames of smoothing is completly fine?"


----------



## ipkpjersi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ronaldoz*
> 
> How coud you test 1000Hz stability? I just got a Logitech G502 and put the USB into the Logitech G710+ keyboard, so not directly to the PC. I do not notice any delay, but I would like to test if 1000Hz is stable and if the extra USB to USB is giving lag.


Honestly, you don't really need to test stability of 1000Hz in 2016, most gaming mice produced in this day and age support 1000Hz without issue, and CPUs in this day and age can handle 1000Hz without issue as well. I've tried 9 different mice, each of them support 1000Hz with perfect stability.


----------



## Bucake

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drewno*
> 
> "2000 fps sent to mcu puts higher stress on it, it's not that much but why do that if 8 frames of smoothing is completly fine?"


quoting January 2013


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drewno*
> 
> "2000 fps sent to mcu puts higher stress on it, it's not that much but why do that if 8 frames of smoothing is completly fine?"


Not only January 2013, also a transitional period were I was either still using A3090 Zowies (which worked better on 500 Hz) or just switched away from it and was still used to 500 Hz. Also I was still using a 60 Hz display... :/

Other people still prefer 500 Hz these days, which just supports another statement that some smoothing might actually be preferred by people.


----------



## jayfkay

I used to play on 250hz because when I first read about "oc'ing" your mouse, I was fiddling around with it, reenacting moves I do ingame. To me the most important was tracking targets well, and at slow tracking (even with low sens) it never went above 250hz anyway. My consistency was higher than most people.


----------



## drewno

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> Not only January 2013, also a transitional period were I was either still using A3090 Zowies (which worked better on 500 Hz) or just switched away from it and was still used to 500 Hz. Also I was still using a 60 Hz display... :/
> 
> Other people still prefer 500 Hz these days, which just supports another statement that some smoothing might actually be preferred by people.


I've been only questioning your thought on higher stress on processor, better performance such as in case of older zowies is rather incontestable argument for 500 hz use. As far as i know processor life time is estimated at about 100 years, as long as 1000hz doesnt noticeably affect game performance it shouldnt matter at all imo.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drewno*
> 
> I've been only questioning your thought on higher stress on processor, better performance such as in case of older zowies is rather incontestable argument for 500 hz use. As far as i know processor life time is estimated at about 100 years, as long as 1000hz doesnt noticeably affect game performance it shouldnt matter at all imo.


Back then it felt like it did affect performance in some games, with emphasis on "felt". And as I didn't get any benefits from using 1000 Hz at my setup back then I stuck with 500 Hz. These days I mainly use 1000 Hz, unless there are issues etc


----------



## SIDWULF

http://www.blurbusters.com/faq/mouse-guide/


----------



## Bucake

i keep seeing that picture posted, but those "skips" are the system's fault, not the mouse's.
if your mouse is reporting at 8khz, then still those skips will be there, they will just be harder to perceive. check out the usb polling precision thread


----------



## Thoth420

All I know is regardless of 500hz or 1000hz (I leave it at 1000hz) I have absolutely zero issues with the g502. I came from the g700s so the sensor is so much better....never will I use a Razer product besides their mouse pad. In regard to my performance in gaming....no negligible difference at all to me. I have been on 144hz forever as well and certainly wasn't using 1000hz mice when I started using them so I have had plenty of experience with both.


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ipkpjersi*
> 
> Honestly, you don't really need to test stability of 1000Hz in 2016, most gaming mice produced in this day and age support 1000Hz without issue, and CPUs in this day and age can handle 1000Hz without issue as well. I've tried 9 different mice, each of them support 1000Hz with perfect stability.


There are rare instances where 1000hz+ will introduce quite a big cpu usage when moving mouse. I have personally observed this only when moving the cursor over my Windows 7 wallpaper, but not on other elements, which lead me to believe its a 'bug' in Windows or at least something dumb going on.

Otherwise with decent hardware there is no notable significance imho.


----------



## spin5000

Upping the polling as a weird side-effect of also making the mouse insanely sensitive.quick which I never understand. My G9X mouse has an up/down button on it to control the polling rate while playing but it also changes how sensitive the mouse runs. So using 1000 Hz makes the mouse so sensitive that moving it like 1 cm cause my player (1st person shooter) to spin around 360 degrees in a fraction of a fraction of a second, it's ridiculous.

I thought polling rate is supposed to just be the "refresh rate" of the communication of the mouse to cut input lag / latency...why it also affects the actual behavior of the mouse (at-least with the Logitech G9X) is beyond me and ruins the whole point of adjusting/increasing the polling rate.


----------



## Melan

I am quite certain +/- buttons control CPI steps as there's no possible reason to hotswap polling rate on the go.


----------



## spin5000

Oops, I think it's the DPI not the polling. My bad








It's still weird that the DPI makes the sensitivity insane. There should be some compensation so you get the same mouse behaviour but with increased DPI for more incrimints/resolution rather than the mouse just becoming an insanely sensitive mess. Doesn't make sense to me but I digress.


----------



## Melan

It isn't really. Someone else explain it. CBA writing this off my phone.


----------



## Bucake

you just gotta make your own profiles for the g9x, the default steps go up with big amounts. iirc you can have steps of +100.


----------



## M1st

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spin5000*
> 
> Oops, I think it's the DPI not the polling. My bad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's still weird that the DPI makes the sensitivity insane. There should be some compensation so you get the same mouse behaviour but with increased DPI for more incrimints/resolution rather than the mouse just becoming an insanely sensitive mess. Doesn't make sense to me but I digress.


DPI has nothing to do with accuracy or precision or whatnot. It IS measure of sensitivity only. Process of tracking doesn't become more accurate when you ramp up DPI, because sensors are able to detect movement in very small fractions of a pixel.

People are confusing DPI on the mouse, which affects only sensitivity, with DPI in graphics, which indeed means higher quality image.


----------



## Ino.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> There are rare instances where 1000hz+ will introduce quite a big cpu usage when moving mouse. I have personally observed this only when moving the cursor over my Windows 7 wallpaper, but not on other elements, which lead me to believe its a 'bug' in Windows or at least something dumb going on.
> 
> Otherwise with decent hardware there is no notable significance imho.


On some mice I got coil whine (or something that sounds like it) when moving on the desktop. That's probably related?


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> i keep seeing that picture posted, but those "skips" are the system's fault, not the mouse's.


Why do you think that? They're consistent with the explained reasoning - a desync between the refresh rate of the monitor.

Every X refreshes the cursor will jump ahead on the screen (rather than moving a consistent amount per refresh) because of the mismatch; lower update rates and more mismatched rates look more clearly broken.

144hz screen, 1000hz mouse minimizes this for now (almost exactly ~7 polls per refresh) while 144hz screen paired with 500hz mouse is a pretty bad offender.


----------



## Thoth420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ino.*
> 
> On some mice I got coil whine (or something that sounds like it) when moving on the desktop. That's probably related?


This occurs to my g502 in desktop as well. If you turn on mouse cursor trailing it stops it though...strange. I am guessing it is a biproduct of low clock state.


----------



## Razhad

i do feel the difference on cs.

on 500 i feel that it's more accurate, slower yes but my aim always hit where i meant it to.
not to mention spraying is easier on that.

on 1000 i feel that it's faster, i can hit flick easier.
but everything is mess up for me, my aim dont hit where i meant it to & my spray is a shameful PoS.

now i use 1000 just because my g102 has it's default to 1000.

and no, i'm not an idiot who doesnt know the difference of polling rate & dpi.

NB. i play cs [email protected] in-game sens.


----------



## F3yer

Here is my question. Somewhat related. Is there actually any difference between having 2.2 @ 400 DPI and having 1.1 @ 800 DPI?


----------



## cdcd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *F3yer*
> 
> Here is my question. Somewhat related. Is there actually any difference between having 2.2 @ 400 DPI and having 1.1 @ 800 DPI?


Sensitivity will differ because the actual dpi values can (and do) differ from the nominal ones.
Aside from that, I think pixel skipping can occur when using high resolutions and a low dpi. Don't quote me on that though.


----------



## F3yer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cdcd*
> 
> Sensitivity will differ because the actual dpi values can (and do) differ from the nominal ones.
> Aside from that, I think pixel skipping can occur when using high resolutions and a low dpi. Don't quote me on that though.


So why not just use really high DPI and very low in-game sensitivity? So many ppl use 400 DPI.


----------



## Alya

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cdcd*
> 
> Sensitivity will differ because the actual dpi values can (and do) differ from the nominal ones.
> Aside from that, I think pixel skipping can occur when using high resolutions and a low dpi. Don't quote me on that though.


Resolution has nothing to do with angle skipping occurring, it simply exaggerates what already exists.


----------



## F3yer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alya*
> 
> Resolution has nothing to do with angle skipping occurring, it simply exaggerates what already exists.


Isn't that point kind of irrelevant though since the result is the same. You're still visually seeing a difference?


----------



## Alya

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *F3yer*
> 
> Isn't that point kind of irrelevant though since the result is the same. You're still visually seeing a difference?


Resolution was never relevant to how small or large the angle can change.


----------



## F3yer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alya*
> 
> Resolution was never relevant to how small or large the angle can change.


All I really want to know is if 1.1 @ 800 is actually difference from 2.2 @ 400. I don't really know the advantages you could have at staying 400


----------



## NovaGOD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *F3yer*
> 
> All I really want to know is if 1.1 @ 800 is actually difference from 2.2 @ 400. I don't really know the advantages you could have at staying 400


AFAIK there is no advantage, it should be the same, however there is a disadvantage due to smoothing in a lot of mice if you crank up the dpi high enough.


----------



## F3yer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NovaGOD*
> 
> AFAIK there is no advantage, it should be the same, however there is a disadvantage due to smoothing in a lot of mice if you crank up the dpi high enough.


That's what I figured. The only thing that would impact it would be smoothing. Since pros want to avoid angle snapping and smoothing and just have pure raw input, they stick to 400. I'm assuming that's literally the only reason.


----------



## Razhad

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *F3yer*
> 
> Here is my question. Somewhat related. Is there actually any difference between having 2.2 @ 400 DPI and having 1.1 @ 800 DPI?


actual dpi is different, the feels are different too.

i was a [email protected] user, then it feels kinda "wonky" i switch to [email protected] and now [email protected]


----------



## ncck

400 is just consistent and safe across pretty much every mouse. Many others and myself use 400 in-game, if it's too slow on the desktop then simply crank up your dpi for desktop use only. You can use whatever you want really but I don't see a point. I tried to feel/see if there was a real difference between the two for hours on end and I just came down to the fact that anything I'm experiencing that feels different makes no difference performance wise in game or was completely placebo.

Also having to use decimals and stuff for higher dpis gets annoying


----------

