There are hundreds of ways to statistically measure computer mice, and while many 1000Hz+ mouse metrics are vastly superior, the law of averages still have a (bare) few metrics of 500Hz still outperforming. This was much more true back in the days of the first 1000Hz mice, and there is much fewer reasons to use 500Hz now.lexlazootin wrote:what are you talking about? can you give examples?sensors do degrade in positional accuracy at higher mouse Hz
What I find hairpulling, is lobotomizing choice to 500Hz, with zero ability to choose 1000Hz or 2000Hz with their clear superior statistics in other measurement criteria.
There is always sensor "noise" -- even positional reports from a mouse sensor. It is never zero. The longer you average the noise in *anything* for -- like a longer camera exposure -- a longer math averaging -- a longer smarter calculation -- a longer whatever -- etc, etc -- the less noise (error) there is.
Mathematics Point Of View #1: Mouse sensors are often ~16x16 or ~32x32 pixel cameras pointing straight down at a mousemat (often laser-illuminated, red-illuminated or infrared illuminated). It's always oversampled. For a mouse that does, say, 6000 camera reads a second, you get 6 camera reads averaged for 1000Hz, or 20 camera reads averaged at 500Hz. Less aliasing/grainyfeel effects when pushing DPI by turning off acceleration and relying on sheer DPI for fast 1:1 linear movements. More sensor reads averaged means better, smarter and more noise-free averaging. The noise is getting very low now, but the noise is still there in some cases.
Mathematics Point Of View #2: Mouse sensors often exist in 1500 samples per second internally. If the camera reads per second is not evenly divisible, there can also be aliasing issues. Many sensors also have sampling rates that are not even divisors of the mouse poll rates, too. Mouse sensor camera reads at 1500 Hz internally may produce better accuracy at 500Hz (evenly divisible) than at 1000Hz (not evenly divisible). The 6000Hz-sensors will produce better 1000Hz-poll results than 1500Hz-sensors.
Which means while 1000Hz is usually superior, it may be only superior in, say 95% or 98% of mouse-measurement criteria. There could be situations where a paid professional eSports player is adapted to tactics that really depends on those outside-criteria metrics, and I certainly can respect that, even if I myself merrily keep my mice at 1000Hz (or 2000Hz) for the better strobed feel / GSYNC feel / etc.
Choice, you mouse manufacturers, choice!