Mouse discussion: PS/2 better than USB?!
I read this intresting fact the other day:
What does this mean?! Why does every "pro" users prase the USB mouses so high if the PS/2 connection is almost twise as smooth?! 
BTW, I got a MX 510 for cristmas!
I wonted to change it for a MX 1000, but after reading this article I realy changed my mind!
What I wanted was many buttons, and wireless... but since the only more buttons the MX 1000 has was the mouseweel tilt, wich sounded enoying, I didnt mind.
And when I look at the specs, the only thing MX 1000 was better at than the MX 700 was the "image progression" (or wth its called) wich was 5.8MPix compared to 4.7MPix... but the MX 510 had the same quality as MX 1000!
So it all came down to wireless or not... untill I read about some sort of calibration lag that the new laser tecnology was supose to have... when you lifted the mouse from the surface, and put it back down it used 0.2 - 0.3 seconds to calibrate... or respond if you want. And that realy sounded like a problem for a fast paced gamer!
No, screw laser tecnology... MX 510 > MX *
... lets not forget this is about USB and PS/2 and NOT MX 1000!
:up:
Transulated from Hardware.no
Hertz, or number of points per second, is calculated by the USB uper limit of 125 packages per second. On older mouses this was actually better. The PS/2 connection could transfer 200 packages per second
Hertz, or number of points per second, is calculated by the USB uper limit of 125 packages per second. On older mouses this was actually better. The PS/2 connection could transfer 200 packages per second
BTW, I got a MX 510 for cristmas!
I wonted to change it for a MX 1000, but after reading this article I realy changed my mind!What I wanted was many buttons, and wireless... but since the only more buttons the MX 1000 has was the mouseweel tilt, wich sounded enoying, I didnt mind.
And when I look at the specs, the only thing MX 1000 was better at than the MX 700 was the "image progression" (or wth its called) wich was 5.8MPix compared to 4.7MPix... but the MX 510 had the same quality as MX 1000!
So it all came down to wireless or not... untill I read about some sort of calibration lag that the new laser tecnology was supose to have... when you lifted the mouse from the surface, and put it back down it used 0.2 - 0.3 seconds to calibrate... or respond if you want. And that realy sounded like a problem for a fast paced gamer!
No, screw laser tecnology... MX 510 > MX *
... lets not forget this is about USB and PS/2 and NOT MX 1000!
:up:
Comment