1
00:00:00,160 --> 00:00:07,520
logitech has been claiming for years now and corsair recently joined them that

2
00:00:04,960 --> 00:00:10,960
their wireless gaming mice are indistinguishable

3
00:00:09,040 --> 00:00:16,960
from their wired ones because they've managed to get the processing latency so

4
00:00:13,840 --> 00:00:19,680
low that either one is less than one

5
00:00:16,960 --> 00:00:23,519
millisecond the fastest pulling or sample rate that's available over the

6
00:00:21,680 --> 00:00:30,560
usb connection and like that's pretty cool no cord dragging

7
00:00:27,920 --> 00:00:34,079
on your mouse hand has obvious benefits for gamers

8
00:00:32,000 --> 00:00:38,559
but the thing is is that we've mostly taken logitech's word for it up until

9
00:00:36,239 --> 00:00:42,160
now because we've never had any of the equipment that we would need to validate

10
00:00:40,559 --> 00:00:45,120
their claims well

11
00:00:43,760 --> 00:00:51,039
no more so we recently rented a phantom 4k

12
00:00:48,399 --> 00:00:55,760
high-speed camera from keslo camera for our recent collaboration with gav from

13
00:00:53,360 --> 00:00:59,359
slo-mo guys and we figured what the hey

14
00:00:56,960 --> 00:01:03,680
we've already got it we might as well use it oh that's hot

15
00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:07,520
speaking of hot this segway to our sponsor for today's video story blocks

16
00:01:05,360 --> 00:01:10,880
video storyblocks offers you studio quality stock video clips for a fraction

17
00:01:09,280 --> 00:01:22,000
of the cost check it out today at the link in the video description

18
00:01:22,000 --> 00:01:29,360
admittedly we haven't devised a way to intercept the signal from the mouse

19
00:01:27,360 --> 00:01:35,200
before it ever gets to the operating system video card driver game engine and

20
00:01:32,400 --> 00:01:39,759
finally your display so we aren't going to be able to address claims from brands

21
00:01:37,360 --> 00:01:44,079
like logitech and corsair about their mice achieving sub 1 millisecond

22
00:01:42,400 --> 00:01:48,159
transmission speeds what we can do however is determine

23
00:01:46,560 --> 00:01:54,720
whether any of the mice that we're looking at today including both wired

24
00:01:51,040 --> 00:01:56,560
and wireless models are faster or slower

25
00:01:54,720 --> 00:02:00,560
in a way that could possibly be meaningful to gamers

26
00:01:59,040 --> 00:02:06,240
because here's the thing our perception of mouse lag or mouse

27
00:02:03,280 --> 00:02:11,599
latency is dictated by the total delay that we feel between moving our hand and

28
00:02:09,280 --> 00:02:15,840
seeing the corresponding action on the screen

29
00:02:12,720 --> 00:02:17,920
so as long as we can ensure consistency

30
00:02:15,840 --> 00:02:22,319
in all of our other variables any difference that we observe from one

31
00:02:20,000 --> 00:02:27,200
mouse to the next comes down to the signal transmission time whether it's

32
00:02:24,239 --> 00:02:30,319
along a wire or whether it's wirelessly to

33
00:02:28,080 --> 00:02:35,519
a dongle let's have a look at our test rig here we're running competitive

34
00:02:32,160 --> 00:02:38,480
shooter cs go on this corsair vengeance

35
00:02:35,519 --> 00:02:43,680
gaming rig with a core i7 8700 and geforce rtx 2080 we've paired this with

36
00:02:41,920 --> 00:02:49,599
one of the fastest gaming monitors around this 1080p 240hz one from acer to

37
00:02:48,160 --> 00:02:55,280
record each run and measure our total mouse to screen

38
00:02:52,400 --> 00:03:01,040
latency we're using a phantom flex 4k from vision research at 4k

39
00:02:58,000 --> 00:03:05,120
1000 frames per second so that means

40
00:03:01,040 --> 00:03:05,920
every frame here is just one millisecond

41
00:03:05,120 --> 00:03:11,680
now you might think that to get a precise

42
00:03:08,480 --> 00:03:14,080
measurement for each mouse we could just

43
00:03:11,680 --> 00:03:19,519
move the mouse around with our arms and then count the frame delay

44
00:03:16,319 --> 00:03:22,959
but not so at a thousand frames per

45
00:03:19,519 --> 00:03:26,159
second any organic body is gonna have

46
00:03:22,959 --> 00:03:28,640
too much give to get a clear start point

47
00:03:26,159 --> 00:03:33,519
so we had to get a little bit uh more creative

48
00:03:30,000 --> 00:03:34,560
meet norm so named for its two not or

49
00:03:33,519 --> 00:03:40,239
gates with alex's creation here we can swing a

50
00:03:37,360 --> 00:03:46,080
hammer at the mouse and with these conductive surfaces on the backs of our

51
00:03:42,640 --> 00:03:48,319
mice and on the tip of our hammer we can

52
00:03:46,080 --> 00:03:53,760
record the exact moment of contact with the indicator led

53
00:03:51,599 --> 00:03:57,360
that's on this breadboard here that removes the reliability of our

54
00:03:55,360 --> 00:04:00,959
measurements dramatically and it's pretty fun to do

55
00:03:59,439 --> 00:04:03,840
for our first round of testing we're going to keep things simple we're going

56
00:04:02,480 --> 00:04:08,720
to take one of logitech's high performance wired mice so this is their

57
00:04:06,000 --> 00:04:12,159
new generation mx518 with their hero sensor and we're going to put it head to

58
00:04:10,720 --> 00:04:17,280
head against one of their high performance wireless mice in this case

59
00:04:14,480 --> 00:04:21,519
the g703 so we're gonna do the wired one first because the conventional wisdom

60
00:04:19,359 --> 00:04:26,440
would go that that's your that's your baseline right first run mx518

61
00:04:29,759 --> 00:04:35,759
fantastic wow that's a really short delay

62
00:04:33,600 --> 00:04:40,400
our first run with the mx-518 taught us a couple of things number one is that we

63
00:04:38,160 --> 00:04:44,800
could expect with a wired mouse anyway about 15 milliseconds of latency

64
00:04:42,800 --> 00:04:48,479
according to our measurements and that we could expect a high degree of

65
00:04:46,320 --> 00:04:52,240
consistency one other key takeaway was that the creation of the apparatus to

66
00:04:50,560 --> 00:04:56,639
light up the led when the hammer hits the back of the mouse was entirely

67
00:04:54,320 --> 00:05:01,360
unnecessary as it turns out using different mode in premiere to examine

68
00:04:58,720 --> 00:05:06,560
two frames we could more easily identify the true starting point for our mouse

69
00:05:03,120 --> 00:05:09,120
movement i am fascinated by this test we

70
00:05:06,560 --> 00:05:15,600
really have to get the actual milliseconds this is really interesting

71
00:05:12,960 --> 00:05:19,680
that seems like a really big distance before it actually registers

72
00:05:17,759 --> 00:05:24,000
that doesn't seem right we're not making the rules here it is what it is now one

73
00:05:22,320 --> 00:05:28,560
special thing that we're making sure to do here is we're putting the dongle right here

74
00:05:26,720 --> 00:05:34,000
above the table to ensure that it's not subject to any unfair interference

75
00:05:31,840 --> 00:05:38,400
first wireless mouse test here we go with the g703 wireless we weren't quite

76
00:05:36,080 --> 00:05:43,120
sure what to expect logitech claims the performance should be basically the same

77
00:05:40,880 --> 00:05:47,600
but our common sense tells us that it couldn't possibly be especially with

78
00:05:45,280 --> 00:05:51,919
respect to performance consistency because wireless is far more susceptible

79
00:05:49,600 --> 00:05:56,160
to interference than a wired connection well as it turns out within the margin

80
00:05:54,000 --> 00:06:04,759
of error of our experiment they were the same wow that actually looked

81
00:05:59,039 --> 00:06:04,759
a bit faster but i might just be crazy

82
00:06:06,639 --> 00:06:12,639
so there you have it guys not only did we learn that our wireless mouse

83
00:06:10,240 --> 00:06:16,319
performed the same as our wired mouse within the margin of error of our

84
00:06:13,919 --> 00:06:21,520
experiment we also saw that they both performed incredibly consistently from

85
00:06:19,520 --> 00:06:25,600
one run to the next but since we've got the rig set up anyway we figured why not

86
00:06:23,840 --> 00:06:31,520
investigate some other manufacturer's mice so we're gonna start with corsair's

87
00:06:28,400 --> 00:06:34,319
dark core rgb se

88
00:06:31,520 --> 00:06:39,360
we chose this one because it's corsair's sort of equivalent sub one millisecond

89
00:06:36,800 --> 00:06:44,160
latency mouse and we wanted to know how their claims stack up

90
00:06:41,919 --> 00:06:48,160
corsair's dark core rgb sc was an interesting one for us it was still

91
00:06:46,800 --> 00:06:52,720
within the margin of error of our experiment just as fast as both of the

92
00:06:50,479 --> 00:06:57,120
logitech mice but when we averaged our results it did measure a little bit

93
00:06:54,960 --> 00:07:02,240
slower the next thing we wanted to find out on our voyage of discovery today was

94
00:06:59,440 --> 00:07:06,880
whether it actually matters if a mouse can be set to a thousand hertz pulling

95
00:07:04,400 --> 00:07:12,800
rate so the final mouse ultra light sunset has a bit of a bad reputation for

96
00:07:09,680 --> 00:07:13,919
being capped out at 500 hertz does it

97
00:07:12,800 --> 00:07:19,599
matter only one way to know it actually tied for the lowest single

98
00:07:17,680 --> 00:07:23,919
response time but compared to the logitech mice it was less consistent

99
00:07:22,240 --> 00:07:27,840
could this be due to the 500 hertz pulling rate until we have a thousand

100
00:07:26,000 --> 00:07:32,400
hertz monitor it'll be hard for us to tell we're not done yet though for our

101
00:07:29,840 --> 00:07:37,759
last test we pulled out a logitech mx anywhere 2 mouse this is by no means a

102
00:07:35,520 --> 00:07:41,440
piece of gaming equipment but it gives us a great point of comparison for all

103
00:07:39,680 --> 00:07:45,440
the high performance gaming mice that we've looked at so far well

104
00:07:43,759 --> 00:07:49,440
this was a great lesson for gamers everywhere if you want to have the best

105
00:07:47,440 --> 00:07:55,360
most responsive experience you're going to want to choose a gaming mouse it was

106
00:07:52,240 --> 00:07:57,680
over double the average response time of

107
00:07:55,360 --> 00:08:02,560
all of our gaming grade mice and making matters worse that's with logitech's 2.4

108
00:08:00,639 --> 00:08:06,800
gigahertz wireless connection rather than bluetooth which introduces even

109
00:08:04,479 --> 00:08:10,479
further latency and more interference the final nail in its coffin for gaming

110
00:08:08,720 --> 00:08:15,199
is that the sudden acceleration from our hammer kick would cause the sensor in

111
00:08:12,560 --> 00:08:19,599
some cases to lose tracking and behave erratically so the conclusion here is

112
00:08:17,440 --> 00:08:23,360
pretty straightforward while i want to again acknowledge that we weren't able

113
00:08:21,680 --> 00:08:27,599
to test all the way down to one millisecond what we can take away from

114
00:08:26,000 --> 00:08:32,560
our experiment is that at least for logitech we have validated their

115
00:08:29,919 --> 00:08:36,880
position that anyone who claims to be able to tell the difference between

116
00:08:34,000 --> 00:08:41,599
their wired and wireless mice is either imagining it or full of

117
00:08:39,599 --> 00:08:45,200
but okay tell you what i will i will guess this one is faster i'll say this

118
00:08:42,880 --> 00:08:50,000
one's wired oh that's the wired mouse uh oh that's bad

119
00:08:47,120 --> 00:08:53,680
okay in fairness to me those mice had slightly different cables on them and

120
00:08:51,760 --> 00:08:59,760
that was probably what i was picking up on now a secondary observation here is that

121
00:08:57,279 --> 00:09:04,720
corsair's wireless appears at least within the margin of error of our test

122
00:09:01,680 --> 00:09:07,200
to be on par with logitechs though it is

123
00:09:04,720 --> 00:09:10,800
notable that our average results were slightly worse

124
00:09:08,880 --> 00:09:15,200
our next conclusion is that anyone claiming to be able to tell the

125
00:09:12,080 --> 00:09:17,120
difference between 500 hertz and 1000hz

126
00:09:15,200 --> 00:09:22,640
pulling rates on a high-performance mouse is also imagining it even if you

127
00:09:20,880 --> 00:09:26,720
were capable of feeling a two millisecond difference in responsiveness

128
00:09:24,800 --> 00:09:31,760
your monitor because you don't have more than a 240hz display would not be able

129
00:09:30,080 --> 00:09:37,279
to display it finally do gaming mice have a value

130
00:09:36,000 --> 00:09:42,240
absolutely not only did our mx anywhere 2 which to

131
00:09:39,839 --> 00:09:46,800
be clear isn't even a terrible mouse and we weren't even using with bluetooth

132
00:09:44,240 --> 00:09:53,760
have measurably higher latency thanks at least partially to its 125 hertz pulling

133
00:09:49,920 --> 00:09:56,000
rate it also didn't track as well or as

134
00:09:53,760 --> 00:10:01,360
consistently perhaps thanks to its less sophisticated sensor or its power saving

135
00:09:59,279 --> 00:10:04,800
features speaking of saving

136
00:10:02,800 --> 00:10:10,480
i've been saving this segway for a long time this video is brought to you by

137
00:10:08,000 --> 00:10:14,320
storyblocks you can get studio quality stock video clips for a fraction of the

138
00:10:12,320 --> 00:10:17,760
cost with storyblocks video you can download all the stock video your heart

139
00:10:16,000 --> 00:10:22,560
desires from their member library including hd and 4k footage after

140
00:10:20,560 --> 00:10:26,800
effects templates motion backgrounds and more and all the content is royalty free

141
00:10:25,040 --> 00:10:32,560
so you can use it for commercial projects like youtube videos if your us

142
00:10:29,920 --> 00:10:35,440
or personal projects like youtube videos if you're us

143
00:10:33,600 --> 00:10:38,959
new clips are added regularly so there's always something fresh to download so

144
00:10:37,120 --> 00:10:42,000
check them out today at the link in the video description

145
00:10:40,640 --> 00:10:45,440
so thanks for watching guys if you disliked this video you can hit that

146
00:10:43,760 --> 00:10:50,240
button but if you liked it because you love science hit like get subscribed or

147
00:10:48,800 --> 00:10:54,079
maybe consider checking out where to buy some of the stuff we featured at the

148
00:10:51,839 --> 00:10:57,360
link in the video description also down there is our merch store which has cool

149
00:10:55,680 --> 00:11:01,279
shirts like the one i'm wearing and our community forum which is totally worth a

150
00:10:59,200 --> 00:11:05,040
join by the way i'm sorry the audio was so bad in these videos guys we're just

151
00:11:03,360 --> 00:11:10,760
we're in the science warehouse and it doesn't have

152
00:11:06,560 --> 00:11:10,760
it's not coated so