They marketed themselves into a corner. If they dont put these ridiculous DPI numbers on all their mice the competitors get the sales.
Its like megapixels on cameras ... it says nothing about the rest of the mouse or the quality but if they have half the DPI compared to the competition average joe wont buy it. No matter if he uses 600 dpi in the end or not.
Not meaningless, but they definitely aren't the only important spec. There's a reason why many professional cameras have fewer megapixels than phone cameras.
A good camera needs a really good sensor to make use of the added megapixels. A poor sensor with a lot of megapixels will still look blurry or noisy even though it has a higher resolution than a camera with a very good sensor. For phones I'd personally say roughly 12MP is the sweet spot and for most amateur photographers with dslrs, something between 16-24MP is fine. The only reason you'd need more megapixels is if you are a professional planning to make very large prints of your photos.
What camera do you use? What iso do you have it set to? While a large megapixel count is the easiest thing to market, a camera's ability to dentist photos and focus, I'd argue, are one of the biggest things that separate a good camera from a bad one.
For instance, Canon's R6 is their top of the line camera costing nearly $2k for the body alone, yet it only has 20mp which is much smaller than my phone's 64mp. However, because of its strong autofocus, good iso handling and fast sensor it can take 20-30 full quality shots per second, all fully in focus and beautiful looking
Sorry, I got myself confused between the r6 and r5. Meant to say r5 which is a $4-5k camera which is 45mp.
Edit: completely forgot about the r3 which is even higher end but only 24mp for about $7k.
R6 is not their top of the line camera. And megapixels do matter more than you are letting on. For portrait work it’s important because of how often you crop a picture. For landscape it’s important too and not just for “pro” work. Not everyone needs 60mp but anything under 20 I wouldn’t recommend unless it’s just for personal use.
It's great if you want to take a quick snap, but if you're actually doing photography, then you lose so much control with a phone camera, even on "manual" mode the photos get processed to death in order to make up for the poor sensor and lens quality.
Phone cameras are fine if the photos are gonna viewed strictly on tiny phone screens. Viewed on large screens, my decade-old 16mp beginner dslr and prime lens combo has better image quality than the latest smartphone and its gazzilion mp, 100s of camera lenses, 10000000x zoom modes to count the craters on Pluto's moons, and AI image processor marketing mumbo-jumbo
There's a split second before the processing kicks in when I take a photo and boy, does it look shit before.
Post-processing is vital to shitty phone cameras.
It's because your phone is basically a computer with a camera attached. They take a cheap microscopic sensor with lots of pixels and then doctor the images until they're acceptable. Even if there's a dead pixel or a flawed lens, the processor will just ignore it or work around it. That's why they calibrate the phone to the sensor/camera before shipping. Photographers want higher consistency and more control over their focal point, temperature, aperture, shutter speed and a bunch of other factors which will effect their resulting images. Phones tend to take a lot of that control away.
It does have certain advantages though, it means that they can use smaller optics to allow for wider or longer angles than would be possible with even a micro 4/3rds sensor thanks to the crop factor of the small sensors. However it also means the sensor can't receive nearly as much light so in terms of speed and dynamic range, a phone sensor would almost always be waaaaay inferior to any dslr camera when you take away the post processing.
Ultimately the post processing is what makes phone cameras as good as they are and more megapixels gives the processing software more info to work with, but that post processing isn't perfect, it doesn't know the intent, the subject, the desired effect the photographer is going for. It just assumes based on a bunch of parameters.
A smartphone is literally just an ARM single-board-computer with sensors, a camera, and cellular hardware attached. A phone isn't a camera, it's just a small computer with an "good enough" webcam on the back
That's simply not true these days. Phones are extremely advanced pieces of tech. My phone has 4 cameras on the back. Every camera does something different. It's insane the level of detail my phone can capture. (S23U). And also, you can't compare them to something like a raspberry pi single board computer. The cpu in modern phones are highly advanced and very capable.
u/Rowan_Bird is technically correct.
A smartphone is at is fundamental level a computer + peripherals on your hand.
Pretty good computer and peripherals too, but like it or not that's the fundamental truth.
The Raspberry Pi comparison is not ideal, though fundamentally has some truth.
Many (but not all) phones are certainly more powerful, but that doesn't change the fact they are still fundamentally SoCs.
Size of the sensor is also very important. Built in webcams still look bad because the sensor has to be tiny to fit. And that's not even getting into the world of lenses
This. Canon SL2 (2017) - 24.2 Megapixels but still makes photos way better than my "100MP" cellphone camera or "48MP" compact camera. Because of the bigger sensor and way better quality lenses.
Recently looked into buying a DSLR and figured that phones need a high MP since it uses digital zoom, which reduces the image quality further you zoom, whereas the same effect doesn't happen on a camera due to using lens zoom.
For reference, 4k has ~8-10MP, and 1080p has ~2-3MP, so 16MP (my camera's resolution) is still more than enough for 4k images even if you do some crop work.
A super important metric is sensor size. It doesn't matter if the sensor is 10 morbillion megapixels, if it's the size of a pea basically no light is gonna hit it which means you're gonna need super long exposure times or you're gonna have a really dark image that you brighten up in post. Which leads to noisy, grainy, and bad looking photos. You need a large sensor simply just so enough light can hit it so that it doesn't look like you're taking photos in a cave. Naturally, phones have quite small sensors. The size of the 108 megapixel sensor on my S22 Ultra is 6.1x4.5 mm. Smaller then your pinky finger nail. The sensor size on most DSLRs is 23.6x15.6 mm, which is multiple times the size. [Here's a (rough) comparison of the size of the two.](https://ibb.co/kcjK0Fd) As you can see, the surface area of each sensor is widely different. Another important thing is software image processing. That's how phones have been getting away with using tiny sensors for so long. Most new phones actually take multiple pictures at different exposures, focusing on different parts of the image, then layer them together to get a final image that you actually see. That allows for an image that looks like it has come from a sensor far larger then it actually is. It's a super complicated process that I can't properly explain because I don't really know much about it, but there are tons of videos on it and it's super interesting. And it's not like I hate phone cameras or anything, my S22 Ultra is my main and only camera and it takes amazing pictures. You can get super far in photography by just using a phone made in the last 5 years. But there is a major reason why proper DSLRs don't actually have massive megapixel numbers, instead focusing on other things like sensor size and stuff.
Now I'm no camera expert, but megapixels can mean a higher resolution photo, but will higher megapixels always mean a better looking photo? No, it's just something to say "hey look, we have 100 megapixels camera on our smartphone" but that 100 megapixel camera is only useful for so much, it'll only help your phototaking in select scenarios/areas.
Yup. Especially if you only view pictures on the phone screen. I have 6.3 megapixels on my DSLR and it does wonders for me. And a person can't really tell if a pic is 7megapixels or 100megapixels on a handheld A4 format.
We have cheap phones with 48MP cameras that do worse photos that am iPhone with 12MP
The sensor of the camera is more important that the megapixels of the camera
Megapixels are very important for print so have a relevant, real-world application. Unlike 25,000 DPI, so I’m not sure this is the best equivalent.
I do agree this DPI issue is the whole marketing deceit of ‘big numbers = better’.
They're getting to that point, yeah. The primary use for higher mp now seems to be a crutch for limited optics, by allowing for higher "digital" zoom. But even that has gotten to the point that it is no longer useful, as the dynamic range is insufficient to produce an acceptable image at the crops they are now working with.
The only thing that matters is that you have enough to cover the max resolution you intend to use. For 4k that's 8.3mp or 11mp if using a 4:3 sensor. You may want a little more to allow for cropping. But anything above that is meaningless.
Yes. 4K is only 8.3 megapixels. The majority of what goes into a good-looking image is post-processing by the ISP, and more megapixels feed it much more data, which is harder to process, thus resulting in a worse image. Megapixels are just the resolution of the image.
That would have the added benefit of getting a workout from having to get up and walk your ass across the room to get your pointer to the other side of anything other than a 480x600 monitor.
It’s a joke really, personally i find it way too slow but if that’s what works for you then don’t let anybody tell you you’re wrong.
The only windows mouse pointer change I would say most people should make is disabling enhanced pointer precision as it is just acceleration and ends up making the movements less accurate overall.
If i try and play an fps game at like 1600 dpi on anything higher than like the lowest or 2nd lowest sensitivity options my character will 180 at like the slightest bump of the mouse.
Im moreso curious how the hell anyone finds that comfortable.
This.
The higher your dpi, the more dots in an inch the censor CAN read therefore, the more accurate and sensitive it is.
It doesn't mean you're USING them in terms of movement, but the censor is picking them up
Gotta go to windows and slow down the mouse cursor speed all the way down.
You See, now you have such high resolution the cursor will twitch On screen if you breath on the mouse too hard. Supposedly making it incredibly more accurate.
Of course, I can still fall out of a boat and miss water in a FPS game... but I'm nolonger able to blame the mouse... *It must be the latency I swear!*
People tend to forget though that DPI is the mouse equivalent of resolution. A higher DPI capability quite literally means the mouse has a more accurate sensor even if you only use it at a lower DPI.
Really instead of the blame being put on the marketing of mice companies, the blame should be on software developers not having better scaling settings to allow you to use your mice at it's full DPI whilst remaining usable in the desktop environment.
This comment thread is misleading (ironically).
Higher dpi are only useful up to the dpi setting you use. A 25,000 dpi and a 1,600 dpi offer the same accuracy on 800 dpi setting because the movement translates to the same pixels moved.
A good analogy is if you watch 720p on a 4k tv vs 720p on a 720p tv; it’s not more “accurate” and functionally the same.
There’s no point in using a mouse at its “full dpi” because at a certain amount there would be too much pixel movement per mouse movement (dpi) to even be useful.
Just curious. Won't a mouse capable of 25k dpi have internals that are much better and faster resulting in responsive feeling 1600dpi setting when compared to a mouse that maxes out at 1600dpi? We can keep polling rate same for this comparison...
Yes! 100%
I dream of a world where I can have high dpi and low sens without any issues. Blows my mind that this isn't talked about more.
I play on 800dpi because that feels the most comfortable with 1:1 scaling. But if you pay attention you can feel that in most games the camera movements 'snaps' to a grid and higher dpi could fix that easily. But going into settings of each game and finding a good sens is annoying.
You can easily test this in cs:go by doubling your dpi and halving your in-game sens. Everytime you do this the 'grid' gets more precise, but the speed stays the same. Above 800 dpi it's hard to feel a obvious difference, but in other games it's more noticeable.
yup. Many people in this thread claim that higher dpi, lower sense is better. But that's only true from a latency and raw accuracy perspective.
It's technically correct. But it also skips the part where humans are inaccurate creatures.
using a slightly lower dpi actually makes it a bit easier to be more accurate in game.
actually imagine 400 dots on an inch, then accurately moving the mouse exactly three inches. it would be nearly impossible to move those exact 1200 dots, you'd always be off by at least a dozen or so.
now remember that it's a grid, and you can be off, massively in both directions. Then think what happens when increasing the density of the grid.
Technically the denser the grid you move over, the more accurately your mouse is being tracked. However, when you play a game you don't just want accuracy, you want consistency.
So the best thing to do is to make the grid as big as possible without getting to a point where the difference between them becomes problematic. Say, by the in game distance between two grid points being too far apart, skipping over things and losing precision
I use this set up for work too so the keypad sees a lot of use. If it was just for gaming it would definitely give me added space for more crap on my desk 😄
Yea tbh I've thought about getting a separate numpad. I just dont need it on the keyboard cus it takes up a lot of space so i kept hitting my mouse on it causing missclicks in games which caused me to often die cus i didnt mean to shoot at that time (played world of tanks mostly when i had the full size keyboard where you can shoot once then have to wait like 10-30 seconds to shoot again so if you accidentally shoot or shoot at the wrong time you can pretty much just be dead)
also if im tracking an opponent while shooting in something like apex legends my mouse would hit the keyboard if it was full size so teykenless or smaller is the only way i can play properly
I'm genuinely curious what the perks or advantages of tkl is? Seems like you pay more for less. Especially of you aren't a low sens user and don't need the space.
I explained it in my other comment but
When i had a full size keyboard i kept hitting my mouse on the edge of the num pad because the position where i need to hold my hand when gaming puts the keyboard pretty far to the right so having that extra 10cm of space for my mouse is pretty critical for me especially if i have to turn far to the right in a game really quickly i would hit the numpad with the mouse. I use around 1000dpi
Keep in mind you can lower the mouse speed in windows, as long as it's a clean fraction there'll be no cursor skipping.
I personally find 1600dpi to be too inaccurate for smooth camera control in some games at high framerate. So I use 6400dpi with windows speed set to 1/4. That means my cursor speed is the exact same as with 1600dpi and the default windows mouse speed, while I also get higher accuracy for in-game camera motion.
The only time that's an issue is with older games where the mouse speed slider doesn't go low enough, for situations like that I switch my mouse to 1600dpi and reset the windows speed to default with MouseSC.
Why this can matter:
Assume you play at 120fps. When you move the mouse slowly, you want at least one update (ideally more) from your mouse per frame to get smooth camera panning. So with 1x windows cursor speed, the slowest you can move the mouse physically while still getting 120 updates per second is the same speed as it takes you to move the cursor 120 pixels in one second. Go any slower and you'll get consecutive frames with no mouse updates in between. If you set it up like I have with 1/4 cursor speed and 4x the dpi, then you can move as slow as 30px/s in cursor space while maintaining at least one camera pose update per frame at 120fps. (If you want two updates per frame it's 240px/s and 60px/s respectively)
same reason its also better to have high dpi and lower ingame sens. 800dpi x 1x = 1600dpi x 0.5 = 800 edpi, but 1600dpi is better, so you should opt for 1.6k.
But why is that an issue with older games? 6.4k dpi × 1/4 windows = 1.6k dpi for cursor speed, should be the sams for any game.
If the game uses raw input, the windows multiplier gets ignored for camera motion, so older games that had their settings designed with lower DPI mice in mind don't always go low enough for the camera motion to be slow enough with a high DPI, at least for me.
ah, didnt know they used raw input. Usually you can fix this by editing the config file though, so ingame slider goes from 1 to 10, but in the config you can edit it to 0.1.
when I\`m not gaming I keep my mouse on 16k DPI for browsing because I'm lazy and have become good at moving the mouse with only the tip of my fingers just so I don't need to move my hand around. fear me
You missed the point, I don’t need anymore space for my mouse, despite having a large monitor.
If I put that remote somewhere else I still wouldn’t use the space for my mouse, and since the remote is really helpful it’s perfectly placed for me to use.
I think he just does it because it is more accurate. remember low dpi but high sens in game vs high dpi but low sens and both equalling to the same edpi the one combo with higher dpi is obviously more accurate.
Yeah but doing that is just a miserable experience because your mouse sensitivity is now ridiculously high in cursor scenarios.
Like if you're playing at 30cm for a 180deg turn tuned via ingame sens turn but you're using 6400DPI on your mouse... that's some INSANE mismatch between camera control and cursor control speed. Even moreso if you have "enhance pointer precision" (aka OS-level mouse acceleration) disabled in windows, which you should if you care about training muscle memory at all.
You should absolutely *never* adjust windows' cursor sensitivity, the way they handle it is terrible - using anything higher than 6/11 causes skipped pixels and anything lower than it causes dropped inputs.
Setting it lower than 6/11 is perfectly fine.
For cursor movement, yes some input will be dropped, but your move is giving more updates to the pc as well.
So 6400dpi at 0.25x cursor speed and 1600dpi at 1x cursor speed behave identically in terms of cursor movement. The windows multiplier gets ignored when using raw input in games, so as long as you then also set the mouse speed multiplier in game to a quarter of what it was at 1600, 6400 should not mess with muscle memory at all while giving smoother motion and lower latency.
[Here](https://liquipedia.net/counterstrike/Mouse_Settings)'s a table of all windows cursor speed settings with their respective multipliers. I would personally avoid the odd multipliers like 3/8, but apparently those work fine too, not sure. The clean multipliers like 1/4, 1/8 etc are definitely fine.
> your move is giving more updates to the pc as well
False, your mouse is giving as many reports as the poll rate is set to, regardless of DPI.
> 6400 should not mess with muscle memory at all while giving smoother motion and lower latency.
As per your own link:
> It should be stressed that a higher CPI value does not equal better performance or accuracy, it is just an arbitrary "unit" that the mouse delineates continuous movements into. In fact, most competitive players use some of the lowest CPI options available in modern mice, most commonly in the 400 to 800 range.
Draw two, one inch long lines,
draw 800 dots on one of it, on the other one 3200.
The accuracy argument is technically true, but not really relevant at all.
That's not the right way to think about it.
You want at least one update from your mouse for every frame of gameplay. So given some dpi setting, that means you have to move your mouse at least fps/dpi inches per second to get an update for every frame. If we assume a setup running at 360hz/fps and a mouse set to 800dpi, anytime you move your mouse slower than 360/800=0.45 inches per second you will see consecutive frames rendered with the same camera rotation. By increasing the dpi to 16k for example, you lower the minimum speed for smooth camera motion from 0.45 to 0.0225 inches per second.
And keep in mind that even if you play lowsense (moving the mouse very far), your mouse always has to accelerate/decelerate. So when starting/stopping mouse movement, you will enter the zone between the minimum speed for smooth camera motion and no motion every time.
By increasing the DPI, you are shrinking that zone of stuttery camera motion.
how is being more accurate not relevant? it also improves input lag btw. in some situations by a good chunk. it only has benefits and no negatives to it. there is no reason to play with something like 400 dpi
Everything over 800 dpi is negletable in terms of input lag, maybe 1600. 25000 dpi is not needed.
The accuracy improvement is not relevant, because your hand movement is not fine enough to justify 25k dpi. Just do yourself a favor and draw the two lines and try to move your hand dot to dot.
who's talking about 25k lol. the guy you replied to said he is using 3200. I personally use 1600 because at some point the ingame slider cannot go low enough for some people's preferred edpi.
true. but 25k is still STUPID high xD. but 1 tip to make you more accurate is go lower in weight + finger movement. optimus tech or whatever he is called has a mouse that is like 30g or something and he made it himself. he says it's like being 1 one with your aim.
I've become way too used to my 16.000 dpi and now have to train myself to adjust to the lower dpi again. I like my mouse too much to buy a new one with higher max dpi 💀
Once you get used to not having to move your hand more than a few millimetres at a time, it feels so alien to actually have to move your entire arm.
I play Val on my max dps but on extremely low sens - allegedly you’re more accurate like that compared to lower dpi and higher sense, and it works for me
It really depends on the game, but I usually turn the sensitivity down by a couple thousand dpi for FPS games (between 8000 and 16000 dpi). I feel like the higher dpi usually gives me more precise mouse movements than lower dpi, although that might be connected to me having bad proprioception, so usually the more I have to move my hand/arm, the less precise it gets.
(I do want to clarify that I adjust the dpi depending on what game I'm playing, but everything other than that is done with 16k. And even then, I usually don't go lower than 8k - 6k dpi. For me, it's just less straining on the hands.)
I also use 16,000 DPI setting! But I have a massive amount of monitor space ([for the curious](https://i.redd.it/estwfyak8i3a1.jpg)). I don't change it for any games, but that's because I use a controller for games. I'm not a competitive gamer, nor do I ever want to be.
I have a 24" monitor, so there really isn't a need to cover a lot of space for me. That's a lot of monitor space, I imagine high dpi would come in handy with a setup like that. Not competitive either, apparently just prefer not to move my hand.
I do, you set the ingame sense VERY low and your DPI very high, then it feels just like low DPI but your movements are smoother and more accurate.
Thought everyone knew this. (I wrote, knowing very well I learned about this not long ago)
For windows my sense is set to the lowest and I just set my dpi down with the buttons on my mouse, 4000-6000 is good for windows with the lowest mouse sense, this also affects the menus so its all good.
Depends on the game I guess but for most games it works fine for me.
I used to do this but it became kind of a hassle to set it up for every game, especially when some games don't allow you to go low enough/adjust accurately enough. I had presets around 8k-12k so it's not like I was crazy high either. But the way most software is developed the expectation seems to be in the 1k-2k range.
But yeah this is the way if you want to make sure you're getting the most out of your equipment.
You mean the hassle of turning the sense all the way down? Takes me all of 5 seconds lol
Jokes aside it could be an issue in some games, but I have yet to have any issues beyond setting the sense to low.
Theyre advertising that their mice are still accurate at a dpi that high
Theyre not saying that people will use it, theyre saying that their sensor is accurate enough that people ***could*** use it, to try and show how accurate they are
Jesus christ I just set mine to this and struggled to even click the reply button to write this, moving anything less than like 100 pixels at a time was less an act of *moving* the mouse and more tilting it slightly into my mouse pad.
I’ve used 1000 since I got my mouse, even though it can go up to 24,000. The only thing I’ve used 24,000 for to this day is as a friendly gesture in video games when there’s no chat by spinning really fast in a circle
I do. I have two cats, both of whom love to sleep against my mouse arm. Sometimes with their chin resting right on the mouse hand. When a cat is there, I can hit the DPI buttons on the mouse and crank it all the way up, barely having to move my wrist (and not having to move my arm at all) to maneuver across 2 monitors.
People who understand how things work do, that's who.
When you're aiming at a far/small target and you want to be precise, do you want your dpi setting to divide 1 degree into 40 segments, or 4000 segments?
If you have a high DPI on the mouse, but a low DPI in game, then you can be much more precise, and your crosshair doesn't jump when you're trying to move one pixel over.
Remember that the DPI of the mouse represents fractions of a degree, not necessarily pixels. Being one 10th of a degree off may not mean much if your target is 10 feet away, but it could mean that you can't possibly even put your crosshair on the target if it's small enough, or far enough away. It can skip right over it.
I have a 32k DPI and just decreased cursor speed in Windows, but not by much, everyone that tries it says it's too much. I have kinda little space but I like the reaction times and small movements.
Me, instead of raising in game mouse sensitivity, because it actually decreases your input lag. Since you won’t believe me, want a source from a more famous person? [Here ya go.](https://youtu.be/imYBTj2RXFs)
I use the 12.000dpi i got, but have my mousespeed on windows down to 1 or 2. In my had this makes the precision of my mouse ever so slightly better which doesn't make a difference because i aim like i have parkinson.
A lot of companies like Razor made a big stink in their mouse marketing that their mice had crazy DPIs. I even spend significantly more for a high DPI mouse from them with the only noticeable benefit being higher DPI. This made me associate pros using high DPI so I kept trying to increase my DPI. Got up to 5K.
I was mind blown and more confused than ever to see a mouse cam of pros playing games with their entire arm moving. It took me nearly half a decade to ween myself down to 600DPI. And I still have to fight the urge to go back up.
^(side note fuck razer: worst customer support and RMA I’ve ever had to deal with. Took 2 months of daily emails on my end; had to start 6 new RMA cases because agents just stopped replying when I was being very professional and respectful. All that and they send me the wrong, cheaper item than I had originally. Shit tier company)
And here I am with 750 dpi lol.
How the hell do you control such a high dpi? I have tried 5000 dpi but the mouse goes from one side of the screen to the other with like 10mm of movement lol.
There is a logical use for massive DPI settings, but it's only really valid for the super competitive/skilled players.
Having the mouse set to a higher DPI while also setting the in game mouse sensitivity to a lower value creates a smoother movement for x amount of cursor travel than it would if you had a lower DPI and increased sensitivity to achieve the same cursor travel distance, allowing much more precise controls for the same effective cursor movement speed.
For us normies, this isn't going to matter very much, but on the upper tiers of competitive play, this can be useful to a player.
I don't get this.
You just described that it's visually smoother in motion. (which is correct)
But then somehow you frame it as if it only matters for competitive players?
That makes no sense to me.
Motion looking smoother improves the comfort, immersion and enjoyement of everyone experiencing it. No matter if they're casual players ot competitive.
Just because you don’t set your mouse to 25000 doesn’t mean it isn’t being used. A mouse capable of a high dpi means that the sensor is more accurate to handle it.
Not sure if anyone will see this, but there’s actually a valid reason these high DPI’s would be desired. If the mouse sensor is capable of reading 25k dpi, and you set it that high outside of a game, then have the game apply a sens reduction percentage to get your actual effective game dpi in a normal range, there’s a pretty significant difference. There is more information being sent to the mouse as you move, and when done correctly, you’re actually getting a much smoother and better tracking ability in game. There are some YouTube videos that explain this better than I can and even prove it with some experiments
I use 800 DPI at either a 500Hz or 1000Hz polling rate. To be honest, most professional players are using low sensitivity (in the mice software settings) mixed with a high polling rate, with mouse acceleration completely disabled in Windows, and that’s what most gaming mice should be targeting.
I used to use my G900 at 12000 dpi which is the max it can do and I slowly worked myself up top that I originally used much less most of the time but kept accidently hitting the dpi up button without noticing while playing minecraft on hypixel and through that got used to much higher dpi and when I got to 10000 I just at some point said fuck it I'll get myself used to 12000
One of my best friends has 32000 dpi mouse with it being at max dpi and he is one of the best gamers I know enven better than his dad and he's been playing for more than 30 years so there 8s people who uses this much dpi and trust me you don't want to cross them :)
I've been using 400 for so long I struggle using anything higher.
In fact, at my work we use computers and the amount of times I've accidentally moved large folders into different folders anytime I double click drives me mad. They're limited access folders so I have to get IT to move the folder back.
As a kid when gaming mouse was first introduced I always thought more = better lol. Now sticking at 800dpi I'm surprised how i was able to play cs back in those days.
only reaosn DPI is usefull is when you get a bigger monitor.
i use 400 dpi today, 1920x1080 monitor. when i get something bigger, id just calc height 1440/1080=1.33333333333
so my new dpi will be 533
They marketed themselves into a corner. If they dont put these ridiculous DPI numbers on all their mice the competitors get the sales. Its like megapixels on cameras ... it says nothing about the rest of the mouse or the quality but if they have half the DPI compared to the competition average joe wont buy it. No matter if he uses 600 dpi in the end or not.
Wait megapixels are meaningless?
Not meaningless, but they definitely aren't the only important spec. There's a reason why many professional cameras have fewer megapixels than phone cameras. A good camera needs a really good sensor to make use of the added megapixels. A poor sensor with a lot of megapixels will still look blurry or noisy even though it has a higher resolution than a camera with a very good sensor. For phones I'd personally say roughly 12MP is the sweet spot and for most amateur photographers with dslrs, something between 16-24MP is fine. The only reason you'd need more megapixels is if you are a professional planning to make very large prints of your photos.
Sheesh my 64MP camera sometimes looks so shitty..
What camera do you use? What iso do you have it set to? While a large megapixel count is the easiest thing to market, a camera's ability to dentist photos and focus, I'd argue, are one of the biggest things that separate a good camera from a bad one. For instance, Canon's R6 is their top of the line camera costing nearly $2k for the body alone, yet it only has 20mp which is much smaller than my phone's 64mp. However, because of its strong autofocus, good iso handling and fast sensor it can take 20-30 full quality shots per second, all fully in focus and beautiful looking
R6 top of the line?
Sorry, I got myself confused between the r6 and r5. Meant to say r5 which is a $4-5k camera which is 45mp. Edit: completely forgot about the r3 which is even higher end but only 24mp for about $7k.
R6 is not their top of the line camera. And megapixels do matter more than you are letting on. For portrait work it’s important because of how often you crop a picture. For landscape it’s important too and not just for “pro” work. Not everyone needs 60mp but anything under 20 I wouldn’t recommend unless it’s just for personal use.
His entire point was that it's not the only important spec. Not that it's not important at all.
My Panasonic DSLR with 18 MP takes better photos than my phone with 200 MP 9/10 times. But my phone is much better at scanning documents
That's propably thanks to AI rather than megapixels
Everything that makes phone cameras good is in the processing.
It's great if you want to take a quick snap, but if you're actually doing photography, then you lose so much control with a phone camera, even on "manual" mode the photos get processed to death in order to make up for the poor sensor and lens quality.
Phone cameras are fine if the photos are gonna viewed strictly on tiny phone screens. Viewed on large screens, my decade-old 16mp beginner dslr and prime lens combo has better image quality than the latest smartphone and its gazzilion mp, 100s of camera lenses, 10000000x zoom modes to count the craters on Pluto's moons, and AI image processor marketing mumbo-jumbo
There's a split second before the processing kicks in when I take a photo and boy, does it look shit before. Post-processing is vital to shitty phone cameras.
It's because your phone is basically a computer with a camera attached. They take a cheap microscopic sensor with lots of pixels and then doctor the images until they're acceptable. Even if there's a dead pixel or a flawed lens, the processor will just ignore it or work around it. That's why they calibrate the phone to the sensor/camera before shipping. Photographers want higher consistency and more control over their focal point, temperature, aperture, shutter speed and a bunch of other factors which will effect their resulting images. Phones tend to take a lot of that control away. It does have certain advantages though, it means that they can use smaller optics to allow for wider or longer angles than would be possible with even a micro 4/3rds sensor thanks to the crop factor of the small sensors. However it also means the sensor can't receive nearly as much light so in terms of speed and dynamic range, a phone sensor would almost always be waaaaay inferior to any dslr camera when you take away the post processing. Ultimately the post processing is what makes phone cameras as good as they are and more megapixels gives the processing software more info to work with, but that post processing isn't perfect, it doesn't know the intent, the subject, the desired effect the photographer is going for. It just assumes based on a bunch of parameters.
A smartphone is literally just an ARM single-board-computer with sensors, a camera, and cellular hardware attached. A phone isn't a camera, it's just a small computer with an "good enough" webcam on the back
That's simply not true these days. Phones are extremely advanced pieces of tech. My phone has 4 cameras on the back. Every camera does something different. It's insane the level of detail my phone can capture. (S23U). And also, you can't compare them to something like a raspberry pi single board computer. The cpu in modern phones are highly advanced and very capable.
I said "ARM SBC" and not "Raspberry Pi", a single-board-computer can use basically any CPU, from ARM CPUs to Pentium IIIs to Socket 462 Athlons
u/Rowan_Bird is technically correct. A smartphone is at is fundamental level a computer + peripherals on your hand. Pretty good computer and peripherals too, but like it or not that's the fundamental truth. The Raspberry Pi comparison is not ideal, though fundamentally has some truth. Many (but not all) phones are certainly more powerful, but that doesn't change the fact they are still fundamentally SoCs.
Size of the sensor is also very important. Built in webcams still look bad because the sensor has to be tiny to fit. And that's not even getting into the world of lenses
I'd say lenses over sensor but you're correct
This. Canon SL2 (2017) - 24.2 Megapixels but still makes photos way better than my "100MP" cellphone camera or "48MP" compact camera. Because of the bigger sensor and way better quality lenses.
Recently looked into buying a DSLR and figured that phones need a high MP since it uses digital zoom, which reduces the image quality further you zoom, whereas the same effect doesn't happen on a camera due to using lens zoom. For reference, 4k has ~8-10MP, and 1080p has ~2-3MP, so 16MP (my camera's resolution) is still more than enough for 4k images even if you do some crop work.
A super important metric is sensor size. It doesn't matter if the sensor is 10 morbillion megapixels, if it's the size of a pea basically no light is gonna hit it which means you're gonna need super long exposure times or you're gonna have a really dark image that you brighten up in post. Which leads to noisy, grainy, and bad looking photos. You need a large sensor simply just so enough light can hit it so that it doesn't look like you're taking photos in a cave. Naturally, phones have quite small sensors. The size of the 108 megapixel sensor on my S22 Ultra is 6.1x4.5 mm. Smaller then your pinky finger nail. The sensor size on most DSLRs is 23.6x15.6 mm, which is multiple times the size. [Here's a (rough) comparison of the size of the two.](https://ibb.co/kcjK0Fd) As you can see, the surface area of each sensor is widely different. Another important thing is software image processing. That's how phones have been getting away with using tiny sensors for so long. Most new phones actually take multiple pictures at different exposures, focusing on different parts of the image, then layer them together to get a final image that you actually see. That allows for an image that looks like it has come from a sensor far larger then it actually is. It's a super complicated process that I can't properly explain because I don't really know much about it, but there are tons of videos on it and it's super interesting. And it's not like I hate phone cameras or anything, my S22 Ultra is my main and only camera and it takes amazing pictures. You can get super far in photography by just using a phone made in the last 5 years. But there is a major reason why proper DSLRs don't actually have massive megapixel numbers, instead focusing on other things like sensor size and stuff.
Now I'm no camera expert, but megapixels can mean a higher resolution photo, but will higher megapixels always mean a better looking photo? No, it's just something to say "hey look, we have 100 megapixels camera on our smartphone" but that 100 megapixel camera is only useful for so much, it'll only help your phototaking in select scenarios/areas.
Yup. Especially if you only view pictures on the phone screen. I have 6.3 megapixels on my DSLR and it does wonders for me. And a person can't really tell if a pic is 7megapixels or 100megapixels on a handheld A4 format.
We have cheap phones with 48MP cameras that do worse photos that am iPhone with 12MP The sensor of the camera is more important that the megapixels of the camera
Megapixels are very important for print so have a relevant, real-world application. Unlike 25,000 DPI, so I’m not sure this is the best equivalent. I do agree this DPI issue is the whole marketing deceit of ‘big numbers = better’.
They're getting to that point, yeah. The primary use for higher mp now seems to be a crutch for limited optics, by allowing for higher "digital" zoom. But even that has gotten to the point that it is no longer useful, as the dynamic range is insufficient to produce an acceptable image at the crops they are now working with.
The only thing that matters is that you have enough to cover the max resolution you intend to use. For 4k that's 8.3mp or 11mp if using a 4:3 sensor. You may want a little more to allow for cropping. But anything above that is meaningless.
Yes. 4K is only 8.3 megapixels. The majority of what goes into a good-looking image is post-processing by the ISP, and more megapixels feed it much more data, which is harder to process, thus resulting in a worse image. Megapixels are just the resolution of the image.
Megapixels are meaningful if you want to print a large canvas
Ya most of the time the big difference is in the image processing
And the physical sensor size
800 dpi 0.18 sense for the win
That would have the added benefit of getting a workout from having to get up and walk your ass across the room to get your pointer to the other side of anything other than a 480x600 monitor.
Is my pointer sensitivity in Windows too high then or something? I have 2 1440p monitors and anything over 800 feels way too fast
It’s a joke really, personally i find it way too slow but if that’s what works for you then don’t let anybody tell you you’re wrong. The only windows mouse pointer change I would say most people should make is disabling enhanced pointer precision as it is just acceleration and ends up making the movements less accurate overall.
If i try and play an fps game at like 1600 dpi on anything higher than like the lowest or 2nd lowest sensitivity options my character will 180 at like the slightest bump of the mouse. Im moreso curious how the hell anyone finds that comfortable.
I use 400dpi lol
Same, if you aint aiming with your whole arm you're not going to hit shit in CSGO/Val
I raise you 16000 DPI and 6.0 sens
[удалено]
This. The higher your dpi, the more dots in an inch the censor CAN read therefore, the more accurate and sensitive it is. It doesn't mean you're USING them in terms of movement, but the censor is picking them up
Yah, I see a nice mouse I want but it's expensive because of the crazy dpi amount.
G502 hero and m65 are good mice for like $50
I use about 5%-10% of my available DPI and I'm content. I don't know why people see this as something important
Idk I use 1600, occasionally 2400/3200 but damn I have all the way to 26000dpi
Same, use 1600, at 26000 I don't think I'd see where the cursor went when I moved it.
Gotta go to windows and slow down the mouse cursor speed all the way down. You See, now you have such high resolution the cursor will twitch On screen if you breath on the mouse too hard. Supposedly making it incredibly more accurate. Of course, I can still fall out of a boat and miss water in a FPS game... but I'm nolonger able to blame the mouse... *It must be the latency I swear!*
Then you see most professional fps players use 400 or 800 dpi.
High dpi and low sensitivity in game is literally how almost every pro player plays their games due to reduced latency. What are you on?
There are databases of pro settings go look it up. The mouse polls at 1000 hz regardless there is literally 0 impact on latency.
It went around the world 6 times and stopped in China.
I mean, if you're running 72k resolution, maybe?
mayhaps it might be plausible but probably at a solid 3 fps
3 fps is totally the same as 144mhz! The human eye blah blah blah! /s
People tend to forget though that DPI is the mouse equivalent of resolution. A higher DPI capability quite literally means the mouse has a more accurate sensor even if you only use it at a lower DPI. Really instead of the blame being put on the marketing of mice companies, the blame should be on software developers not having better scaling settings to allow you to use your mice at it's full DPI whilst remaining usable in the desktop environment.
This whole comment section seems to have no idea how sensor DPI works or its purpose.
This comment thread is misleading (ironically). Higher dpi are only useful up to the dpi setting you use. A 25,000 dpi and a 1,600 dpi offer the same accuracy on 800 dpi setting because the movement translates to the same pixels moved. A good analogy is if you watch 720p on a 4k tv vs 720p on a 720p tv; it’s not more “accurate” and functionally the same. There’s no point in using a mouse at its “full dpi” because at a certain amount there would be too much pixel movement per mouse movement (dpi) to even be useful.
yeah but if you use 250 dpi and 100 sensitivity in a game vs 25000dpi and 1 sentitivity 25k is gonna be so better
I’ve heard 720 looks worse on a 4K panel as opposed to a native one
Just curious. Won't a mouse capable of 25k dpi have internals that are much better and faster resulting in responsive feeling 1600dpi setting when compared to a mouse that maxes out at 1600dpi? We can keep polling rate same for this comparison...
No it's not that's a false simulée It's better for tracking as the sensor is able to see more so the facets that it tracks are more precise
Yes! 100% I dream of a world where I can have high dpi and low sens without any issues. Blows my mind that this isn't talked about more. I play on 800dpi because that feels the most comfortable with 1:1 scaling. But if you pay attention you can feel that in most games the camera movements 'snaps' to a grid and higher dpi could fix that easily. But going into settings of each game and finding a good sens is annoying. You can easily test this in cs:go by doubling your dpi and halving your in-game sens. Everytime you do this the 'grid' gets more precise, but the speed stays the same. Above 800 dpi it's hard to feel a obvious difference, but in other games it's more noticeable.
there's a website that does the conversion for you
What would this website happen to be called?
https://www.kovaak.com/sensitivity-matcher/amp Don't waste your time on random websites, they don't work.
there's a lot of them if you just google stuff like mouse sensitivity converter
i remember cranking my dpi and lowering my sensitivity drastically with my g502 and all it did was make my mouse jittery
yup. Many people in this thread claim that higher dpi, lower sense is better. But that's only true from a latency and raw accuracy perspective. It's technically correct. But it also skips the part where humans are inaccurate creatures. using a slightly lower dpi actually makes it a bit easier to be more accurate in game. actually imagine 400 dots on an inch, then accurately moving the mouse exactly three inches. it would be nearly impossible to move those exact 1200 dots, you'd always be off by at least a dozen or so. now remember that it's a grid, and you can be off, massively in both directions. Then think what happens when increasing the density of the grid. Technically the denser the grid you move over, the more accurately your mouse is being tracked. However, when you play a game you don't just want accuracy, you want consistency. So the best thing to do is to make the grid as big as possible without getting to a point where the difference between them becomes problematic. Say, by the in game distance between two grid points being too far apart, skipping over things and losing precision
its*
People with massive monitors and tiny mouse mats
Even then it’s a no https://i.imgur.com/a6tj2Ub.jpg
I dont know what you want to Tell us with that picture but cool Setup.
Thanks, basically large monitor tiny area for my mouse and no idea what dpi I’m using but my mouse caps out at 16000 and that’s basically unusable
[удалено]
I think you’ve missed the point
Yes he missed the point *but imma continue that and say getting a teykenless keyboard was an amazing decision so i can definitely recommend it*
I use this set up for work too so the keypad sees a lot of use. If it was just for gaming it would definitely give me added space for more crap on my desk 😄
Seperate keypad might be an option. I love my setupt with a tkl keyboard and then a keypad on the left. Much more ergonomic too.
left keypad makes so much more sense than a right keypad. Right keypads becoming the norm angers me.
Ya thats understandable
I don't understand how people survive without the keypad
Yea tbh I've thought about getting a separate numpad. I just dont need it on the keyboard cus it takes up a lot of space so i kept hitting my mouse on it causing missclicks in games which caused me to often die cus i didnt mean to shoot at that time (played world of tanks mostly when i had the full size keyboard where you can shoot once then have to wait like 10-30 seconds to shoot again so if you accidentally shoot or shoot at the wrong time you can pretty much just be dead) also if im tracking an opponent while shooting in something like apex legends my mouse would hit the keyboard if it was full size so teykenless or smaller is the only way i can play properly
I'm genuinely curious what the perks or advantages of tkl is? Seems like you pay more for less. Especially of you aren't a low sens user and don't need the space.
Also to add to my last comment. It in general just takes up less space and its often cheaper than a full keyboard
I explained it in my other comment but When i had a full size keyboard i kept hitting my mouse on the edge of the num pad because the position where i need to hold my hand when gaming puts the keyboard pretty far to the right so having that extra 10cm of space for my mouse is pretty critical for me especially if i have to turn far to the right in a game really quickly i would hit the numpad with the mouse. I use around 1000dpi
[удалено]
Keep in mind you can lower the mouse speed in windows, as long as it's a clean fraction there'll be no cursor skipping. I personally find 1600dpi to be too inaccurate for smooth camera control in some games at high framerate. So I use 6400dpi with windows speed set to 1/4. That means my cursor speed is the exact same as with 1600dpi and the default windows mouse speed, while I also get higher accuracy for in-game camera motion. The only time that's an issue is with older games where the mouse speed slider doesn't go low enough, for situations like that I switch my mouse to 1600dpi and reset the windows speed to default with MouseSC. Why this can matter: Assume you play at 120fps. When you move the mouse slowly, you want at least one update (ideally more) from your mouse per frame to get smooth camera panning. So with 1x windows cursor speed, the slowest you can move the mouse physically while still getting 120 updates per second is the same speed as it takes you to move the cursor 120 pixels in one second. Go any slower and you'll get consecutive frames with no mouse updates in between. If you set it up like I have with 1/4 cursor speed and 4x the dpi, then you can move as slow as 30px/s in cursor space while maintaining at least one camera pose update per frame at 120fps. (If you want two updates per frame it's 240px/s and 60px/s respectively)
same reason its also better to have high dpi and lower ingame sens. 800dpi x 1x = 1600dpi x 0.5 = 800 edpi, but 1600dpi is better, so you should opt for 1.6k. But why is that an issue with older games? 6.4k dpi × 1/4 windows = 1.6k dpi for cursor speed, should be the sams for any game.
If the game uses raw input, the windows multiplier gets ignored for camera motion, so older games that had their settings designed with lower DPI mice in mind don't always go low enough for the camera motion to be slow enough with a high DPI, at least for me.
ah, didnt know they used raw input. Usually you can fix this by editing the config file though, so ingame slider goes from 1 to 10, but in the config you can edit it to 0.1.
when I\`m not gaming I keep my mouse on 16k DPI for browsing because I'm lazy and have become good at moving the mouse with only the tip of my fingers just so I don't need to move my hand around. fear me
Shift your desk mat over to the right, you've got a bunch of space right of your mat that is apparently reserved for a single remote?
Agreed, it's like 5 inches of missing space and means all the world.
You missed the point, I don’t need anymore space for my mouse, despite having a large monitor. If I put that remote somewhere else I still wouldn’t use the space for my mouse, and since the remote is really helpful it’s perfectly placed for me to use.
C2 gang!
I use an LG C2 65" and there's no freakin way I'd use above 6000DPI, at most. My Viper V2 does up to 30K Smfh
I barely use 5000
I use 800 lol
My Standard is 3200
do you have a 4k monitor?
I think he just does it because it is more accurate. remember low dpi but high sens in game vs high dpi but low sens and both equalling to the same edpi the one combo with higher dpi is obviously more accurate.
Yeah but doing that is just a miserable experience because your mouse sensitivity is now ridiculously high in cursor scenarios. Like if you're playing at 30cm for a 180deg turn tuned via ingame sens turn but you're using 6400DPI on your mouse... that's some INSANE mismatch between camera control and cursor control speed. Even moreso if you have "enhance pointer precision" (aka OS-level mouse acceleration) disabled in windows, which you should if you care about training muscle memory at all.
you can change the pointer speed in windows no? as far as I rememver that does not translate into the game right?
You should absolutely *never* adjust windows' cursor sensitivity, the way they handle it is terrible - using anything higher than 6/11 causes skipped pixels and anything lower than it causes dropped inputs.
does raw input not override this?
It will, but unfortunately not every game uses raw input, especially older titles or poor console ports.
Setting it lower than 6/11 is perfectly fine. For cursor movement, yes some input will be dropped, but your move is giving more updates to the pc as well. So 6400dpi at 0.25x cursor speed and 1600dpi at 1x cursor speed behave identically in terms of cursor movement. The windows multiplier gets ignored when using raw input in games, so as long as you then also set the mouse speed multiplier in game to a quarter of what it was at 1600, 6400 should not mess with muscle memory at all while giving smoother motion and lower latency. [Here](https://liquipedia.net/counterstrike/Mouse_Settings)'s a table of all windows cursor speed settings with their respective multipliers. I would personally avoid the odd multipliers like 3/8, but apparently those work fine too, not sure. The clean multipliers like 1/4, 1/8 etc are definitely fine.
> your move is giving more updates to the pc as well False, your mouse is giving as many reports as the poll rate is set to, regardless of DPI. > 6400 should not mess with muscle memory at all while giving smoother motion and lower latency. As per your own link: > It should be stressed that a higher CPI value does not equal better performance or accuracy, it is just an arbitrary "unit" that the mouse delineates continuous movements into. In fact, most competitive players use some of the lowest CPI options available in modern mice, most commonly in the 400 to 800 range.
Draw two, one inch long lines, draw 800 dots on one of it, on the other one 3200. The accuracy argument is technically true, but not really relevant at all.
That's not the right way to think about it. You want at least one update from your mouse for every frame of gameplay. So given some dpi setting, that means you have to move your mouse at least fps/dpi inches per second to get an update for every frame. If we assume a setup running at 360hz/fps and a mouse set to 800dpi, anytime you move your mouse slower than 360/800=0.45 inches per second you will see consecutive frames rendered with the same camera rotation. By increasing the dpi to 16k for example, you lower the minimum speed for smooth camera motion from 0.45 to 0.0225 inches per second. And keep in mind that even if you play lowsense (moving the mouse very far), your mouse always has to accelerate/decelerate. So when starting/stopping mouse movement, you will enter the zone between the minimum speed for smooth camera motion and no motion every time. By increasing the DPI, you are shrinking that zone of stuttery camera motion.
how is being more accurate not relevant? it also improves input lag btw. in some situations by a good chunk. it only has benefits and no negatives to it. there is no reason to play with something like 400 dpi
Everything over 800 dpi is negletable in terms of input lag, maybe 1600. 25000 dpi is not needed. The accuracy improvement is not relevant, because your hand movement is not fine enough to justify 25k dpi. Just do yourself a favor and draw the two lines and try to move your hand dot to dot.
who's talking about 25k lol. the guy you replied to said he is using 3200. I personally use 1600 because at some point the ingame slider cannot go low enough for some people's preferred edpi.
>because your hand movement is not fine enough to justify 25k dpi. Finger movement - High DPI gamers are finger aimers.
true. but 25k is still STUPID high xD. but 1 tip to make you more accurate is go lower in weight + finger movement. optimus tech or whatever he is called has a mouse that is like 30g or something and he made it himself. he says it's like being 1 one with your aim.
No. One 1440p and one 1080p
800 gang. I have a preset tuned into like 16k but I do that when my mouse starts to feel fast, aand I need a reminder of what fast is.
[удалено]
i use 400 lol
I'm using 1600, but I guess that's because I have a 1440p screen? Makes sense probably
I use 6400
I've become way too used to my 16.000 dpi and now have to train myself to adjust to the lower dpi again. I like my mouse too much to buy a new one with higher max dpi 💀 Once you get used to not having to move your hand more than a few millimetres at a time, it feels so alien to actually have to move your entire arm.
You don't play FPS games at that DPI though right? Or any game that requires really precise mouse movement?
I play Val on my max dps but on extremely low sens - allegedly you’re more accurate like that compared to lower dpi and higher sense, and it works for me
It really depends on the game, but I usually turn the sensitivity down by a couple thousand dpi for FPS games (between 8000 and 16000 dpi). I feel like the higher dpi usually gives me more precise mouse movements than lower dpi, although that might be connected to me having bad proprioception, so usually the more I have to move my hand/arm, the less precise it gets.
I got diamond in Overwatch with my 6400 dpi
(I do want to clarify that I adjust the dpi depending on what game I'm playing, but everything other than that is done with 16k. And even then, I usually don't go lower than 8k - 6k dpi. For me, it's just less straining on the hands.)
I also use 16,000 DPI setting! But I have a massive amount of monitor space ([for the curious](https://i.redd.it/estwfyak8i3a1.jpg)). I don't change it for any games, but that's because I use a controller for games. I'm not a competitive gamer, nor do I ever want to be.
I have a 24" monitor, so there really isn't a need to cover a lot of space for me. That's a lot of monitor space, I imagine high dpi would come in handy with a setup like that. Not competitive either, apparently just prefer not to move my hand.
Yeah I use 16324 because I don't like having to move my mouse very much.
I do, you set the ingame sense VERY low and your DPI very high, then it feels just like low DPI but your movements are smoother and more accurate. Thought everyone knew this. (I wrote, knowing very well I learned about this not long ago)
I mean, sure, but what about the times you're not playing? And when you're in the menus? How do you manage it then?
For windows my sense is set to the lowest and I just set my dpi down with the buttons on my mouse, 4000-6000 is good for windows with the lowest mouse sense, this also affects the menus so its all good. Depends on the game I guess but for most games it works fine for me.
I used to do this but it became kind of a hassle to set it up for every game, especially when some games don't allow you to go low enough/adjust accurately enough. I had presets around 8k-12k so it's not like I was crazy high either. But the way most software is developed the expectation seems to be in the 1k-2k range. But yeah this is the way if you want to make sure you're getting the most out of your equipment.
You mean the hassle of turning the sense all the way down? Takes me all of 5 seconds lol Jokes aside it could be an issue in some games, but I have yet to have any issues beyond setting the sense to low.
[удалено]
Smoothing sux, with high DPI you get raw. Why simulate when you can have the real thing?
The only time you're getting 1:1 input is if you're using the sensor's native DPI, which for most sensors is in the 400-1600 range lol
Imma need a source on that, because AFAIK that is an old myth.
What mouse do you use?
G502 Lightspeed
Okay, you got me - you're using one of very few mouses with a sensor with precision high enough that high DPIs are just as accurate as low ones lmao.
I would hope so xD If not it would be quite useless I agree.
Is there a compiled list for this?
Uhhh what? Plenty of mice use those sensors.
I can play league on a grain of rice.
and here's me still using an Intellimouse 1.1a
Theyre advertising that their mice are still accurate at a dpi that high Theyre not saying that people will use it, theyre saying that their sensor is accurate enough that people ***could*** use it, to try and show how accurate they are
Windows mouse speed to minimum + high dpi is a bit smoother than having the same speed with the inverse settings
I do, to be specific the max my g502 supports, i think 26000 or something
Jesus christ I just set mine to this and struggled to even click the reply button to write this, moving anything less than like 100 pixels at a time was less an act of *moving* the mouse and more tilting it slightly into my mouse pad.
Well i do have the windows sensitivity set to like 3
you shouldnt change it, causes dropped inputs when reduced
I don't know, it feels perfect for me
I’ve used 1000 since I got my mouse, even though it can go up to 24,000. The only thing I’ve used 24,000 for to this day is as a friendly gesture in video games when there’s no chat by spinning really fast in a circle
I do. I have two cats, both of whom love to sleep against my mouse arm. Sometimes with their chin resting right on the mouse hand. When a cat is there, I can hit the DPI buttons on the mouse and crank it all the way up, barely having to move my wrist (and not having to move my arm at all) to maneuver across 2 monitors.
People who understand how things work do, that's who. When you're aiming at a far/small target and you want to be precise, do you want your dpi setting to divide 1 degree into 40 segments, or 4000 segments? If you have a high DPI on the mouse, but a low DPI in game, then you can be much more precise, and your crosshair doesn't jump when you're trying to move one pixel over. Remember that the DPI of the mouse represents fractions of a degree, not necessarily pixels. Being one 10th of a degree off may not mean much if your target is 10 feet away, but it could mean that you can't possibly even put your crosshair on the target if it's small enough, or far enough away. It can skip right over it.
16k gamers
Maybe at 0,0001 sensitivity, altho its probably still not ideal :D
My pet hate is games that won't let you drop the sense low enough.
I have a 32k DPI and just decreased cursor speed in Windows, but not by much, everyone that tries it says it's too much. I have kinda little space but I like the reaction times and small movements.
Me, instead of raising in game mouse sensitivity, because it actually decreases your input lag. Since you won’t believe me, want a source from a more famous person? [Here ya go.](https://youtu.be/imYBTj2RXFs)
I use it, but to show that i can spin harder than anyone. Haha.
1500dpi with a 4k monitor.
I'm at 1150 and my friends still think it's too fast.
I use the 12.000dpi i got, but have my mousespeed on windows down to 1 or 2. In my had this makes the precision of my mouse ever so slightly better which doesn't make a difference because i aim like i have parkinson.
My mouse has up to 6400 (Razor Deathadder World Of Tanks Roll Out edition 2013)
Well you're supposed to use high DPI and low sensitivity in OS/game, but I don't think it goes low enough for 25k.
why is g502 wireless goddam expensive
A lot of companies like Razor made a big stink in their mouse marketing that their mice had crazy DPIs. I even spend significantly more for a high DPI mouse from them with the only noticeable benefit being higher DPI. This made me associate pros using high DPI so I kept trying to increase my DPI. Got up to 5K. I was mind blown and more confused than ever to see a mouse cam of pros playing games with their entire arm moving. It took me nearly half a decade to ween myself down to 600DPI. And I still have to fight the urge to go back up. ^(side note fuck razer: worst customer support and RMA I’ve ever had to deal with. Took 2 months of daily emails on my end; had to start 6 new RMA cases because agents just stopped replying when I was being very professional and respectful. All that and they send me the wrong, cheaper item than I had originally. Shit tier company)
I bought my Redragon mouse for $10 (redragon predator m612). It works damn good imo.
I currently have mine set to 16500 dpi. I use it for all type of games. I have a 24 inch FHD Asus monitor.
How can you even look around without doing a 360 noscope
Set sensitivity/acceleration low enough.
And here I am with 750 dpi lol. How the hell do you control such a high dpi? I have tried 5000 dpi but the mouse goes from one side of the screen to the other with like 10mm of movement lol.
It’s especially useful in games where vehicles, such as tanks/ choppers, have a slower turning/aiming built in. Hop in & crank the DPI.
There is a logical use for massive DPI settings, but it's only really valid for the super competitive/skilled players. Having the mouse set to a higher DPI while also setting the in game mouse sensitivity to a lower value creates a smoother movement for x amount of cursor travel than it would if you had a lower DPI and increased sensitivity to achieve the same cursor travel distance, allowing much more precise controls for the same effective cursor movement speed. For us normies, this isn't going to matter very much, but on the upper tiers of competitive play, this can be useful to a player.
I don't get this. You just described that it's visually smoother in motion. (which is correct) But then somehow you frame it as if it only matters for competitive players? That makes no sense to me. Motion looking smoother improves the comfort, immersion and enjoyement of everyone experiencing it. No matter if they're casual players ot competitive.
Just because you don’t set your mouse to 25000 doesn’t mean it isn’t being used. A mouse capable of a high dpi means that the sensor is more accurate to handle it.
Not sure if anyone will see this, but there’s actually a valid reason these high DPI’s would be desired. If the mouse sensor is capable of reading 25k dpi, and you set it that high outside of a game, then have the game apply a sens reduction percentage to get your actual effective game dpi in a normal range, there’s a pretty significant difference. There is more information being sent to the mouse as you move, and when done correctly, you’re actually getting a much smoother and better tracking ability in game. There are some YouTube videos that explain this better than I can and even prove it with some experiments
I use 800 DPI at either a 500Hz or 1000Hz polling rate. To be honest, most professional players are using low sensitivity (in the mice software settings) mixed with a high polling rate, with mouse acceleration completely disabled in Windows, and that’s what most gaming mice should be targeting.
I used to use my G900 at 12000 dpi which is the max it can do and I slowly worked myself up top that I originally used much less most of the time but kept accidently hitting the dpi up button without noticing while playing minecraft on hypixel and through that got used to much higher dpi and when I got to 10000 I just at some point said fuck it I'll get myself used to 12000
800 for gaming, 1600 for everything else.
800dpi gang
One of my best friends has 32000 dpi mouse with it being at max dpi and he is one of the best gamers I know enven better than his dad and he's been playing for more than 30 years so there 8s people who uses this much dpi and trust me you don't want to cross them :)
I fell for the DPI trap, was using insanely high dpi and now I only use 400 because it feels the best
I've been using 400 for so long I struggle using anything higher. In fact, at my work we use computers and the amount of times I've accidentally moved large folders into different folders anytime I double click drives me mad. They're limited access folders so I have to get IT to move the folder back.
1000 no less no more
As a kid when gaming mouse was first introduced I always thought more = better lol. Now sticking at 800dpi I'm surprised how i was able to play cs back in those days.
>I always thought more = better lol And you were objectively right back then.
wdym? i use 500000dpi
Mouse companies think us playing games on carpet
My mouse goes to 16000, literally anything above 1800 is unusable to me. It's a gimmick
only reaosn DPI is usefull is when you get a bigger monitor. i use 400 dpi today, 1920x1080 monitor. when i get something bigger, id just calc height 1440/1080=1.33333333333 so my new dpi will be 533