XIM Community

Is this a good mouse?  (Read 5075 times)

Offline incredible

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 64
    • View Profile
    • Exever.net
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #15 on: 03:18 AM - 02/20/09 »
8(360)+8(pc's input)=16.
8(360)+1(pc's input)=9.
Ill take the lower amount of latency.

give up dawg, u still might have a little bit of dignity

Offline Memento_Mori

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #16 on: 04:54 AM - 02/20/09 »
8(360)+8(pc's input)=16.
8(360)+1(pc's input)=9.
Ill take the lower amount of latency.

give up dawg, u still might have a little bit of dignity
My evil part smiles every time you post.

Well, he might just have the wrong intuition about what's going on. If you consider the tickrate in terms of latency and misunderstand that as "the time to get the signal from one place to the other", you would end up with what he wrote.

Offline toysrme

  • 14 National Championships
  • MVP
  • *
  • Posts: 8290
  • FannyPAX, best avatar EVAAAR!
    • View Profile
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #17 on: 12:41 PM - 02/20/09 »
brain takes audio/video input
brain processes
brain tells hand what to do
mouse processes
mouse to pc
PC processes
pc to xim
xim processes
xim to controller/xfps
controller/xfps processes
controller/xfps to console
console processes
console output to audio/video
audio/video device processes
audio/video device sends input to brain

repeate cycle

the mouse to PC update is just one in an assload of steps. speeding up that step speeds the process of getting your console to do what your brain wants it too.






you both fail this much
Somebody didn't read the rules before posting. You need a post count of 100 500 to talk directly to toys.
[/size]

Offline Tonester

  • MVP
  • *
  • Posts: 1344
    • View Profile
  • Gamertag: EpicNerd
  • PSN ID: A_McCulley
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #18 on: 12:59 PM - 02/20/09 »
Um... actually, I think Toy is right if I understand how the XIM software works.

The XIM software TRANSLATES what is going on in the PC.

If the PC and PC Mouse is operating at 1800DPI and 1000mhz polling, all of that happens BEFORE it reaches the 360.  This means the XIM is capable of handling this (depending on your update rate) around 60 times a second.  The info being sent from the XIM to the 360 might only be 125mhz, but that doesn't mean what the XIM is TRANSLATING has to be 125mhz.

DPI matters for high sensi players and people with large screens.
Polling deals with latency.  Less latency from the mouse to the PC may not get translated 1:1 to the 360 from the XIM, but it certainly does give the XIM a much better/smoother curve from which to translate, I'm assuming.

Offline Memento_Mori

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #19 on: 02:35 PM - 02/20/09 »
I still think he is wrong.

If the last step of the pipeline has a tickrate of 125Hz, you could have a trillion Hz mouse before but it would not matter. Look at this picture:



Having 1000Hz does not change the speed of electrons, nor the xim processing. It simply reduces the waiting time between one mouse input and the other. But this leads nowhere, as only one input per xbox tick can pass.

The error is that when you convert 1000Hz to 1ms or 125Hz to 8ms, you are wrong in thinking that this is the "processing" time (so the former is faster). This is a waiting time. The transmission and processing of the signal has the same speed.

I hope I convinced you.

Offline Tonester

  • MVP
  • *
  • Posts: 1344
    • View Profile
  • Gamertag: EpicNerd
  • PSN ID: A_McCulley
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #20 on: 03:23 PM - 02/20/09 »
Haha

I give up.

Whatever works for you man - I'm all for it :)  You seem all smart and stuffs and you have pretty graphs :)

I totally see what you are saying and I agree there is tons of "wasted input".  But, what your graph doesn't show is that the input that is NOT wasted will tend to be more accurate (i.e. be where the user wants it to be) because there are soooooo many more intervals from the source where it is where the user wants it to be.

Its like.... imagine painting with a pen that pulses ink.  With a 1000Hz polling rate, the pen essentially pulses nonstop and your lines are smooth, full, and perfect.  As such, the user has a much better idea of where the next part of the line will be in relation to the previous part of the line because it is a constant flow of ink.

Now, imagine you paint with a pen that pulses 1/10th of the time.  If you try to draw the same line, you'll quickly realize that you won't be able to.  The reason being is because in between the pulses, you'll have gaps... which means less reference.

And now we come to the USB/360 which does nothing more than take "snapshots" along the line you paint.  If your line is better, your snapshots will be better.  Will there be tons of places in between that are "wasted"?  Sure - but that doesn't mean it is REALLY wasted.

In the end, it is up to the user.  If you don't think it matters... more power to you man, you'll spend less on mice than me.  I've been gaming competitively for a LONG time (I'm 32).  I have a startup company which focuses on LAN Gaming Centers.  I've sponsored one of the top CS teams in the nation.

To us... it matters and we can tell the difference.  Whether your chart indicates that or not.... it really doesn't matter.

Offline tweak

  • MVP
  • *
  • Posts: 2346
    • View Profile
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #21 on: 05:11 PM - 02/20/09 »
I now see why toysrme has managed to rack up so much negative karma...lol.  Obviously I've missed these types of threads.

I don't care what the graphs or math say, I'll take my G9 over any other mouse any day simply because it's comfy.

Offline Memento_Mori

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #22 on: 05:49 PM - 02/20/09 »
Haha

I give up.

Whatever works for you man - I'm all for it :)  You seem all smart and stuffs and you have pretty graphs :)

I totally see what you are saying and I agree there is tons of "wasted input".  But, what your graph doesn't show is that the input that is NOT wasted will tend to be more accurate (i.e. be where the user wants it to be) because there are soooooo many more intervals from the source where it is where the user wants it to be.

Its like.... imagine painting with a pen that pulses ink.  With a 1000Hz polling rate, the pen essentially pulses nonstop and your lines are smooth, full, and perfect.  As such, the user has a much better idea of where the next part of the line will be in relation to the previous part of the line because it is a constant flow of ink.

Now, imagine you paint with a pen that pulses 1/10th of the time.  If you try to draw the same line, you'll quickly realize that you won't be able to.  The reason being is because in between the pulses, you'll have gaps... which means less reference.

And now we come to the USB/360 which does nothing more than take "snapshots" along the line you paint.  If your line is better, your snapshots will be better.  Will there be tons of places in between that are "wasted"?  Sure - but that doesn't mean it is REALLY wasted.

In the end, it is up to the user.  If you don't think it matters... more power to you man, you'll spend less on mice than me.  I've been gaming competitively for a LONG time (I'm 32).  I have a startup company which focuses on LAN Gaming Centers.  I've sponsored one of the top CS teams in the nation.

To us... it matters and we can tell the difference.  Whether your chart indicates that or not.... it really doesn't matter.

Good reply. You made me smile :D

I see what you say: there is the original curve, then a sampling due to the mouse, and later another one due to the xbox usb. My opinion is that although the 1000Hz will produce a better initial approximation, the second sampling will chop it down anyway, eventually producing the same sampling of the 125Hz mouse. It would not surprise me if you can prove that the accuracy in the end is the same, but I guess it's not so important right now, is it?

Regarding the human factor thing, well this is completely another story. I will never stop you from using something that improves your game, regardless of it being because of a real technical advantage, or simply because of your believing. I did not want to be an @#$%, I just reacted to the super mouse specs boasting I saw in some discussions.

Offline Tonester

  • MVP
  • *
  • Posts: 1344
    • View Profile
  • Gamertag: EpicNerd
  • PSN ID: A_McCulley
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #23 on: 09:26 PM - 02/20/09 »
I didn't think you came across as an @#$% at all :)  I have a pretty think skin and it takes someone being a blatant @#$% before I think something like that.  I actually think the vast majority of people are cool - call me naive.

Offline incredible

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 64
    • View Profile
    • Exever.net
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #24 on: 01:55 AM - 02/21/09 »
um i think some of you lost the point, which is, a superior and expensive mouse capable of hi-dpi/default hi speed usb compared to regular gaming mouse WILL NOT be better with xim/xbox360

if you dont got anything to prove this is wrong theory (actually its a fact) then give up cuz we are right

Offline Tonester

  • MVP
  • *
  • Posts: 1344
    • View Profile
  • Gamertag: EpicNerd
  • PSN ID: A_McCulley
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #25 on: 02:04 PM - 02/21/09 »
Read my post.

It does make a difference and I thought I explained very clearly why it does make a difference.

DPI certainly does make a difference - I hope you aren't debating that.  It matters for all sorts of reason, but high sensi and large display players absolutely need a higher DPI.  If you play at a small resolution and/or low sensi, not so much.

The real thing in debate is the USB polling rate on your PC and Mouse - and yes, I clearly explained why this makes a difference.  It may be more subtle/apparent depending on how sensitive you are to such things, but it makes a difference.

Offline Memento_Mori

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #26 on: 03:20 PM - 02/22/09 »
Read my post.

It does make a difference and I thought I explained very clearly why it does make a difference.

DPI certainly does make a difference - I hope you aren't debating that.  It matters for all sorts of reason, but high sensi and large display players absolutely need a higher DPI.  If you play at a small resolution and/or low sensi, not so much.

I agree.

The real thing in debate is the USB polling rate on your PC and Mouse - and yes, I clearly explained why this makes a difference.  It may be more subtle/apparent depending on how sensitive you are to such things, but it makes a difference.

Sorry if I'm picky... but this point is still in debating. You gave your intuition, which is that two successive samplings (at 1000Hz and 125Hz) will produce a better result than a single one (directly at 125Hz).
I disagree with you. The values inside the samples are not changed in the process, so they hold the "true" original value of the curve. And both processes produce the same amount of samples (125Hz). Therefore the precision is exactly the same.

However there are other aspects related to DPI and polling rate using xim, but I'm still in  the process of gathering information.

Offline Tonester

  • MVP
  • *
  • Posts: 1344
    • View Profile
  • Gamertag: EpicNerd
  • PSN ID: A_McCulley
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #27 on: 06:33 PM - 02/22/09 »
I disagree with you. The values inside the samples are not changed in the process, so they hold the "true" original value of the curve.

You know - if this were just a Mouse to PC enviro, I'd stick to my claim that it makes a difference.

However, since the only feedback we are given has to communicate over the 360 interface, I'm starting to think it probably doesn't make a difference.

So, I guess I'll agree:

I certainly think DPI is important for high sensitivity and/or large display players.

Polling rate probably doesn't make a difference at all as long as it is 125Hz or 250Hz.

Offline Cameron3395

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #28 on: 09:45 PM - 02/22/09 »
Read my post.

It does make a difference and I thought I explained very clearly why it does make a difference.

DPI certainly does make a difference - I hope you aren't debating that.  It matters for all sorts of reason, but high sensi and large display players absolutely need a higher DPI.  If you play at a small resolution and/or low sensi, not so much.

I agree.

The real thing in debate is the USB polling rate on your PC and Mouse - and yes, I clearly explained why this makes a difference.  It may be more subtle/apparent depending on how sensitive you are to such things, but it makes a difference.

Sorry if I'm picky... but this point is still in debating. You gave your intuition, which is that two successive samplings (at 1000Hz and 125Hz) will produce a better result than a single one (directly at 125Hz).
I disagree with you. The values inside the samples are not changed in the process, so they hold the "true" original value of the curve. And both processes produce the same amount of samples (125Hz). Therefore the precision is exactly the same.

However there are other aspects related to DPI and polling rate using xim, but I'm still in  the process of gathering information.

Don't be sorry.  At least you are being respectful about the debate and trying to prove your point unlike incredible who is being disrespectful and telling people to @#$% in their mouth.  ::)

Offline incredible

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 64
    • View Profile
    • Exever.net
Re: Is this a good mouse?
« Reply #29 on: 01:55 AM - 02/23/09 »
Read my post.

It does make a difference and I thought I explained very clearly why it does make a difference.

DPI certainly does make a difference - I hope you aren't debating that.  It matters for all sorts of reason, but high sensi and large display players absolutely need a higher DPI.  If you play at a small resolution and/or low sensi, not so much.

I agree.

The real thing in debate is the USB polling rate on your PC and Mouse - and yes, I clearly explained why this makes a difference.  It may be more subtle/apparent depending on how sensitive you are to such things, but it makes a difference.

at the end of this thread everybody will agree with my few points i stated in the beginning
there is no other truth except mine, but you will find out anyway, take your time
Sorry if I'm picky... but this point is still in debating. You gave your intuition, which is that two successive samplings (at 1000Hz and 125Hz) will produce a better result than a single one (directly at 125Hz).
I disagree with you. The values inside the samples are not changed in the process, so they hold the "true" original value of the curve. And both processes produce the same amount of samples (125Hz). Therefore the precision is exactly the same.

However there are other aspects related to DPI and polling rate using xim, but I'm still in  the process of gathering information.

Don't be sorry.  At least you are being respectful about the debate and trying to prove your point unlike incredible who is being disrespectful and telling people to @#$% in their mouth.  ::)


Admin