Fixed my frame skipping, input lag, mouse on ice issue after 5 years of utter agony

[Slender]

snip

IMHO its a actually a job for OP and all OPs who post here these solutions to do:
If you want to yell "Fix", give proof it's actually works, e.g. measurements, spreadsheets, data, self-tests with LDAT (phototiode connected to Arduino-type microcontrollers etc) to prove that a specific change to WIndows is actually affecting things, etc.

OP doesn't have to prove anything to anyone, he posted a solution that works for him. Another forum member called his solution a placebo without providing any evidence for this.
(I'm sure he didn't even try it, because all he can do is write a placebo).
I am very glad that there are people who offer original solutions that have not been seen before and try something new. I hope that those who write about placebos will never solve this problem, I believe.

[dervu]

snip

IMHO its a actually a job for OP and all OPs who post here these solutions to do:
If you want to yell "Fix", give proof it's actually works, e.g. measurements, spreadsheets, data, self-tests with LDAT (phototiode connected to Arduino-type microcontrollers etc) to prove that a specific change to WIndows is actually affecting things, etc.

OP doesn't have to prove anything to anyone, he posted a solution that works for him. Another forum member called his solution a placebo without providing any evidence for this.
(I'm sure he didn't even try it, because all he can do is write a placebo).
I am very glad that there are people who offer original solutions that have not been seen before and try something new. I hope that those who write about placebos will never solve this problem, I believe.

If we keep posting "solutions" without any validity to them, we end up with trash forum.

[Slender]

snip

IMHO its a actually a job for OP and all OPs who post here these solutions to do:
If you want to yell "Fix", give proof it's actually works, e.g. measurements, spreadsheets, data, self-tests with LDAT (phototiode connected to Arduino-type microcontrollers etc) to prove that a specific change to WIndows is actually affecting things, etc.

OP doesn't have to prove anything to anyone, he posted a solution that works for him. Another forum member called his solution a placebo without providing any evidence for this.
(I'm sure he didn't even try it, because all he can do is write a placebo).
I am very glad that there are people who offer original solutions that have not been seen before and try something new. I hope that those who write about placebos will never solve this problem, I believe.

If we keep posting "solutions" without any validity to them, we end up with trash forum.

This forum is already garbage, instead of cooperating and starting to explore the problem, everyone believes that everything that the other writes on this forum is nonsense and placebo. Half of the messages do not correspond to the topic of this forum at all. For example, your message and my message are.

[dervu]

IMHO its a actually a job for OP and all OPs who post here these solutions to do:
If you want to yell "Fix", give proof it's actually works, e.g. measurements, spreadsheets, data, self-tests with LDAT (phototiode connected to Arduino-type microcontrollers etc) to prove that a specific change to WIndows is actually affecting things, etc.

OP doesn't have to prove anything to anyone, he posted a solution that works for him. Another forum member called his solution a placebo without providing any evidence for this.
(I'm sure he didn't even try it, because all he can do is write a placebo).
I am very glad that there are people who offer original solutions that have not been seen before and try something new. I hope that those who write about placebos will never solve this problem, I believe.

If we keep posting "solutions" without any validity to them, we end up with trash forum.

This forum is already garbage, instead of cooperating and starting to explore the problem, everyone believes that everything that the other writes on this forum is nonsense and placebo. Half of the messages do not correspond to the topic of this forum at all. For example, your message and my message are.

That's why it would be better to post something more as result than just text instead of adding to the pool of uncertain fixes that no one wants to try when it's ocean of those "fixes".

It's good to discuss, but when someone claims something helped it is good to test it for some time and then give any proof or at least try to have something as close as it can be to proof.
If science was about people claiming something and waiting for other's to disproof it, we would not get anywhere.

For example for people with EMI issues, who are not sure if they have it yet, they might check such fix that would work initially and then do not work at all. They will say it's placebo. If it was proven with some more evidence, then it would be clear it is valid and something else must be affecting it in their case.

That's how you get this garbage.

It's enough of discussion on this, everyone will do what they do anyways.

[Slender]

OP doesn't have to prove anything to anyone, he posted a solution that works for him. Another forum member called his solution a placebo without providing any evidence for this.
(I'm sure he didn't even try it, because all he can do is write a placebo).
I am very glad that there are people who offer original solutions that have not been seen before and try something new. I hope that those who write about placebos will never solve this problem, I believe.

If we keep posting "solutions" without any validity to them, we end up with trash forum.

This forum is already garbage, instead of cooperating and starting to explore the problem, everyone believes that everything that the other writes on this forum is nonsense and placebo. Half of the messages do not correspond to the topic of this forum at all. For example, your message and my message are.

That's why it would be better to post something more as result than just text instead of adding to the pool of uncertain fixes that no one wants to try when it's ocean of those "fixes".

It's good to discuss, but when someone claims something helped it is good to test it for some time and then give any proof or at least try to have something as close as it can be to proof.
If science was about people claiming something and waiting for other's to disproof it, we would not get anywhere.

For example for people with EMI issues, who are not sure if they have it yet, they might check such fix that would work initially and then do not work at all. They will say it's placebo. If it was proven with some more evidence, then it would be clear it is valid and something else must be affecting it in their case.

That's how you get this garbage.

ok, and how to measure that?

[dervu]

If we keep posting "solutions" without any validity to them, we end up with trash forum.

This forum is already garbage, instead of cooperating and starting to explore the problem, everyone believes that everything that the other writes on this forum is nonsense and placebo. Half of the messages do not correspond to the topic of this forum at all. For example, your message and my message are.

That's why it would be better to post something more as result than just text instead of adding to the pool of uncertain fixes that no one wants to try when it's ocean of those "fixes".

It's good to discuss, but when someone claims something helped it is good to test it for some time and then give any proof or at least try to have something as close as it can be to proof.
If science was about people claiming something and waiting for other's to disproof it, we would not get anywhere.

For example for people with EMI issues, who are not sure if they have it yet, they might check such fix that would work initially and then do not work at all. They will say it's placebo. If it was proven with some more evidence, then it would be clear it is valid and something else must be affecting it in their case.

That's how you get this garbage.

ok, and how to measure that?

1. Prepare motion test with input:
A) arduino simulated
B) same mouse moved by external machine

2. Prepare one PC with this issue, second one without issue.
Use same monitor. Use application showing only black background and mouse cursor or remove everything from desktop and set black background for best consistency

3. Setup 1000fps camera to capture whole test:
- Multiple runs on machine A with issue
- Multiple runs on machine B without issue
Save video to images frame by frame.

4. Compare multiple runs from machine A using image comparison tools to show discrepancy
5. Compare multiple runs from machine B using image comparison tools to show discrepancy
6. Compare runs from machine A to runs from machine B using image comparison tools to show discrepancy.
7. If discrepancy between A and B is higher than discrepancy between multiple runs from B, there is some evidence.

Then repeat for machine A with fix applied. If discrepancy is not there, it's fixed.

[Slender]

This forum is already garbage, instead of cooperating and starting to explore the problem, everyone believes that everything that the other writes on this forum is nonsense and placebo. Half of the messages do not correspond to the topic of this forum at all. For example, your message and my message are.

That's why it would be better to post something more as result than just text instead of adding to the pool of uncertain fixes that no one wants to try when it's ocean of those "fixes".

It's good to discuss, but when someone claims something helped it is good to test it for some time and then give any proof or at least try to have something as close as it can be to proof.
If science was about people claiming something and waiting for other's to disproof it, we would not get anywhere.

For example for people with EMI issues, who are not sure if they have it yet, they might check such fix that would work initially and then do not work at all. They will say it's placebo. If it was proven with some more evidence, then it would be clear it is valid and something else must be affecting it in their case.

That's how you get this garbage.

ok, and how to measure that?

1. Prepare motion test with input:
A) arduino simulated
B) same mouse moved by external machine

2. Prepare one PC with this issue, second one without issue.
Use same monitor. Use application showing only black background and mouse cursor or remove everything from desktop and set black background for best consistency

3. Setup 1000fps camera to capture whole test:
- Multiple runs on machine A with issue
- Multiple runs on machine B without issue
Save video to images frame by frame.

4. Compare multiple runs from machine A using image comparison tools to show discrepancy
5. Compare multiple runs from machine B using image comparison tools to show discrepancy
6. Compare runs from machine A to runs from machine B using image comparison tools to show discrepancy.
7. If discrepancy between A and B is higher than discrepancy between multiple runs from B, there is some evidence.

Then repeat for machine A with fix applied. If discrepancy is not there, it's fixed.

so, the difference between a healthy PC and a broken PC is in milliseconds, am I right?
And if the delay on a "broken" computer turns out to be lower, but I know from my own feelings that a healthy PC works better and smoother anyway?
I have two builds on the z790 and z370, both have an i7 processor, but they are incomparable in terms of the feel of the mouse and how the picture moves at all.
I can say with confidence that this 8700k runs much smoother and more responsive than the 13700k, but I'm also sure that the system latency on the z370 will be much higher than the z790.
On one system, I don't make an effort to kill, but on the other, I make a herculean effort and still can't kill anyone.
And you forgot to mention, the PCs must be absolutely identical, otherwise the comparison will not make sense.
To sum up, in order for you to be satisfied and try the fix that the OP kindly shared, so that he would buy an arduino machine, two absolutely identical PCs and a 1000fps camera, right?

[dervu]

That's why it would be better to post something more as result than just text instead of adding to the pool of uncertain fixes that no one wants to try when it's ocean of those "fixes".

It's good to discuss, but when someone claims something helped it is good to test it for some time and then give any proof or at least try to have something as close as it can be to proof.
If science was about people claiming something and waiting for other's to disproof it, we would not get anywhere.

For example for people with EMI issues, who are not sure if they have it yet, they might check such fix that would work initially and then do not work at all. They will say it's placebo. If it was proven with some more evidence, then it would be clear it is valid and something else must be affecting it in their case.

That's how you get this garbage.

ok, and how to measure that?

1. Prepare motion test with input:
A) arduino simulated
B) same mouse moved by external machine

2. Prepare one PC with this issue, second one without issue.
Use same monitor. Use application showing only black background and mouse cursor or remove everything from desktop and set black background for best consistency

3. Setup 1000fps camera to capture whole test:
- Multiple runs on machine A with issue
- Multiple runs on machine B without issue
Save video to images frame by frame.

4. Compare multiple runs from machine A using image comparison tools to show discrepancy
5. Compare multiple runs from machine B using image comparison tools to show discrepancy
6. Compare runs from machine A to runs from machine B using image comparison tools to show discrepancy.
7. If discrepancy between A and B is higher than discrepancy between multiple runs from B, there is some evidence.

Then repeat for machine A with fix applied. If discrepancy is not there, it's fixed.

so, the difference between a healthy PC and a broken PC is in milliseconds, am I right?
And if the delay on a "broken" computer turns out to be lower, but I know from my own feelings that a healthy PC works better and smoother anyway?
I have two builds on the z790 and z370, both have an i7 processor, but they are incomparable in terms of the feel of the mouse and how the picture moves at all.
I can say with confidence that this 8700k runs much smoother and more responsive than the 13700k, but I'm also sure that the system latency on the z370 will be much higher than the z790.
On one system, I don't make an effort to kill, but on the other, I make a herculean effort and still can't kill anyone.
And you forgot to mention, the PCs must be absolutely identical, otherwise the comparison will not make sense.
To sum up, in order for you to be satisfied and try the fix that the OP kindly shared, so that he would buy an arduino machine, two absolutely identical PCs and a 1000fps camera, right?

You can as well use same PC to simply this.
Sorry, but science is not always cheap.
It is not about my satisfaction, but to not waste peoples time.

[Slender]

ok, and how to measure that?

1. Prepare motion test with input:
A) arduino simulated
B) same mouse moved by external machine

2. Prepare one PC with this issue, second one without issue.
Use same monitor. Use application showing only black background and mouse cursor or remove everything from desktop and set black background for best consistency

3. Setup 1000fps camera to capture whole test:
- Multiple runs on machine A with issue
- Multiple runs on machine B without issue
Save video to images frame by frame.

4. Compare multiple runs from machine A using image comparison tools to show discrepancy
5. Compare multiple runs from machine B using image comparison tools to show discrepancy
6. Compare runs from machine A to runs from machine B using image comparison tools to show discrepancy.
7. If discrepancy between A and B is higher than discrepancy between multiple runs from B, there is some evidence.

Then repeat for machine A with fix applied. If discrepancy is not there, it's fixed.

so, the difference between a healthy PC and a broken PC is in milliseconds, am I right?
And if the delay on a "broken" computer turns out to be lower, but I know from my own feelings that a healthy PC works better and smoother anyway?
I have two builds on the z790 and z370, both have an i7 processor, but they are incomparable in terms of the feel of the mouse and how the picture moves at all.
I can say with confidence that this 8700k runs much smoother and more responsive than the 13700k, but I'm also sure that the system latency on the z370 will be much higher than the z790.
On one system, I don't make an effort to kill, but on the other, I make a herculean effort and still can't kill anyone.
And you forgot to mention, the PCs must be absolutely identical, otherwise the comparison will not make sense.
To sum up, in order for you to be satisfied and try the fix that the OP kindly shared, so that he would buy an arduino machine, two absolutely identical PCs and a 1000fps camera, right?

You can as well use same PC to simply this.
Sorry, but science is not always cheap.
It is not about my satisfaction, but to not waste peoples time.

How else can you find a solution? It seems to me that this is exactly what this forum is intended for, to find and solve problems.
very few people offer any solutions.
What science are we talking about? We are suffering here from the fact that computer games do not work as they should. It either works or it doesn't.

[Thatweirdinputlag]

This forum is already garbage, instead of cooperating and starting to explore the problem, everyone believes that everything that the other writes on this forum is nonsense and placebo.

Because it turned into an EMI culture. Anything that you do or say, that is not remotely close to electricity, EMI or EMF, means that it's placebo or absurd. With people left and right bashing your idea. People not differentiating between normal lag, and whatever the other lag is. Any newcomer asking a simple question about a laggy game, mouse, keyboard etc, gets bombarded from 10 different angels with what it appears to be "none-sense" to him/her. Instead of focusing on the basics of what that person is experiencing beforehand.

So yea, as much as I hated chief's decision to banish the EMI forum into off-topics. I now honestly feel like it was the right one. Even this sub-forum now is plagued. You have to filter through so much clutter to maybe find one useful post, reply or topic that might help with something.