Is 4000hz polling rate a scam?

4000hz polling rate is here! But is it even worth it? With a large amount of gaming mice coming out this year also jumping on the 4000hz train I decided to run a small test to see if there's going to be any noticeable improvement in my aim. The result? It's in the video.

#gamingmouse #review #razer

[whytronicnorthborn]

still remember coldzera 2015-2017 dropping 30 bombs every match with zowie za11 with 500hz on it.

[olsaaan]

I got 4khz and now i'm a pro, the mouse reporting 1000 times a second instead of 4000 was really holding me back

[ViscoseOCE]

something to note here, accuracy on this task isnt necessarily related to performance due to misses not counting towards accuracy for up to 200(i think)ms after you get a kill, so how specifically you kill a target matters more than your ttk in this scenario for accuracy. just a minor thing and doesnt change your results though, interesting vid! i expected there to be a noticeable difference in performance tbh, might do some tests myself

[homi]

Doesn't a 4KHz polling rate translate to a signal every 0.25ms and not every 0.125? It send every quater of a millisecond a signal (1/4th = 0.25) and not every eighth (1/8=0.125).
Sorry, I had to write it, as I have been using reddit way too much in recent weeks.

[streaky]

With 4k polling I can now be an Apex Radiant Elite gamer

[dokkie]

In terms off accuracy, you shouldn't use that as a measurement in target switching scenarios on kovaaks. Kovaaks has a weird 200-250ms grace period after a successful kill where your weapon doesnt shoot until you reach the next target. So slower accurate flicks can provide higher accuracy but lower scores compared to fast shaky flicks that cause you to go on and off targets but result in higher kills. Which is the cause of the accuracy discrepancies you've experienced. Accuracy is only a consistent factor in tracking scenarios with invincible bots if you never let go of your shoot button during the whole run. Still doesnt interfere with your results, just wanted to share information incase you do future testing so you dont get skewed results by chance. Fun watch tho!

[JonelKingas]

Ive been telling this to people a lot, 1000 and 4000 there are no difference, its best to find what mouse shape is best, and that is what you will aim better with...

[MJ-uklu]

I know, it's not the same, but when I went from 250Hz to 500Hz, I could easily tell a difference even on 60 Hz display. For highest polling rates, you might need faster monitor, really high skill level. Also mouse might feel smoother when flicking, more confident.

[abcdef]

Theoretically speaking, polling rate does not really affect mouse movement on the monitor because it can only be as fast as the refresh rate, however in terms of the cpu registering commands such as clicks then it matter because a 4000 polling date would send a “packet” to the cpu telling what it’s doing at a faster rate than the 1000 polling rate mouse. So within the same spans of time, 4000 sends more packets and therefore leaves less time in between each packet sent, so basically means there is a higher “chance” that your response will be sent to the cpu at a faster rate. If I use an analogy, say company A and company B ships it’s orders at different increments, A ships every 30 minutes and B ships at every 1 hour. Say they all start at the same starting point which is 0 minutes, I place a order at 25 minutes then Company A will ship faster because it’s only 5 minutes between each package sent, that’s the same with 4000hz it will send packages more frequently and most likely your command will be sent quicker too. But company B would have you wait 35 more minutes. Obviously there’s a chance for it to be the same if you send it between 30-60 minutes then the wait is the same, but overall A is still more responsive in that it sends faster.

[theguycanfly]

The glasses push with the snort really got me 🤣

[ivey]

The main result from this research is that bottom of the barrel spec (125hz office mouse + 60hz monitor) lowers your accuracy by like 2% compared to best "gaming" tier setup, lol.
Not that I am surprised though.

[durikke]

but what if you're just less precise because you're used to it being less responsive and doing Corrections a fraction of a fraction of a second before?

[thebeatentrader]

I dont feel like it makes aiming easier, but the Feeling is great

[EbonySeraphim]

Yes 4000hz is worthless unless the operating system / generic mouse driver and application level API to see and be concerned about mouse update that fast AND the game itself actually runs an input polling loop fast enough for it to matter. As far as I know, neither are happening and the latter is the most critically important and least like to happen. Unless something else radically changes with software/kernel efficiency around input devices, likely through something new being done in hardware (motherboards and chipsets), 4000hz, even 1000hz and 500hz is thrown away data. Shy of that, your game almost certainly handles the mouse by polling on it's "main thread" (and most games do 90% of work on a main thread) and that is running at your framerate. It gets the data by observing what the net position change along X and Y axes are (arbitrary units to scale by sensitivity) since the last time it asked. It can ask as many times as it wants, and behind that API, it doesn't matter if the device reported 3 times, of 500 times, went to the moon and back, if the net change was 1 pixel X and 1 pixel Y, that's all your application sees. There may be a benefit to having information at twice the framerate...possibly. But faster than that is a lot of throwaway data. If anyone does videography (content creators with nice games most certainly have a concept), they would know that the best motion for video is when you set the shutter speed to twice the framerate you are recording at. This has a motion smoothing effective benefit, but anything substantially higher or lower is immedialy worse. So yeah, if your framerate is actually 220-270, then a 500hz mouse is the limit to benefit. Don't let silly graphs that show you "more points of data matter" fool you -- like the thumbnail here properly pokes fun of.

Gaming/tech channels testing things is always amusing to me too. When you're a programmer yourself who has written code against the raw (DirectX) libraries, have dabbled in some hobby game engines, graphics rendering and monitor presenting, and made actual games as well, also understands hardware/sensors and how such hardware reports to your PC to bubble up the game API....you realize how the sauce is made 99% of the time. If tests produce surprising results, then what's happening is someone has a tool/library/access to something that is new or uncommon that they are unaware of. Gamer joes "who know tech, " can keep up and follow 95% but sometimes need to take a step back when things really do evolve and they are out of their league but they keep talking about it as if they know (Vulkan/D3D12 vs DX11 for example). I see too many gaming channels reporting on hardware/software latency on input device peripherals that are slices of actual framerates difference that DO NOT MATTER (yes, you optimumtech). If even your monitor even is displaying 500fps, from a PC CPU/GPU that can drive a game that fast for you, AND the monitor latency itself is actually < 15ms -- I mean both monitor getting the new frame data AND the pixel light to have actually changed, you're still dealing with a baseline of around 15ms-20ms hardware input (submitted by firmware running on device) before an action translates to an observable change. My friends, that's 60fps. When you introduce actual HUMAN time, and I'm not even talking "reaction speed" which is .2seconds. Even your brain has observed some light, done its processing and decision over what to do and commits to that action, your fingers take time to move. It takes time for that key to physically go down and that stuff is happening on the order of 1/10ths and 1/100ths of a second as well; that is 100ms and 10ms latency. My point is, you want to be good at a game? Learn the game itself, player reads, strategy, map knowledge, commit control muscle memory so you don't mess up execution and chain executions faster. Maybe you need to notice how to "hear" like others do -- small tip I learned recently is Windows has a sound feature called Loudness EQ which literally takes sounds it knows it's playing that are quite, and it just say "OK make all of this stuff louder." Basically any game that has scaling footstep audio to play faintly at larger distance, players are now hearing you far easier that other players need a far closer distance to unambiguosly notice and track. Save your money people, get mid range and affordable gaming hardware that isn't trash tier but mostly fits your ergonomics (your play and focus time), and enjoyment (because you should be having fun). Don't let anyone convince you otherwise.

I know this is long, but I just enjoy typing (and thinking somewhat) -- the one thing to validate gamers who are/have been using low latency / high refresh products, particularly high refresh in terms of display, are correct in is that they may have a "feel" for it. If you've been playing on a 60hz monitor and switch to a 120hz monitor, you won't be blown away. However, if you're used to 120hz monitor, and suddenly experience a 60hz monitor, you will instantly notice and it will bother you. It is diminishing returns so those at a super high end suggesting they are all bent out of shape dropping from 480hz to 360hz either are special neurologically, or trying to be elite/snobbish.

[generallowres]

Different polling rates don't have that much of an effect on how it looks or feels. I'm pretty sure the higher polling rate mice being something that matters is because older mice even at the same polling rate as new ones were just bad and people assume it's because the polling rate is higher that it feels and looks idk more smooth but that is not the reason. The refresh rate on your monitor would have to be unreasonably high to notice the difference between 1000 and 4000hz like upwards of 5000+hz because it is not exactly the same as refresh rate on a monitor and even on a 4000hz monitor you wouldn't be able to tell which mouse was 1000 and 4000hz and maybe even 125 to 4000.

[xDJ_Cas]

Well said:“Have fun instead torture“ I never supported guys who run for last gen in everything or getting achievements. Just have fun and enjoy it 😊

[MichaelLim-ri]

Had a lamzu maya and ran 1khz for like 6 months. just switched to a superlight 2,
4khz and i broke my aim trainer tiles record in literally the first try with no warm up or anything. Im going with 4k

[yahiresteves]

The 4k hz mouse is actually .25 ms and the 8k hz mouse is .125!! (atleast that what google said but im not smart when it comes to tech 😅)

[loopernz]

Please do a test on the deathadder v3 wired 8k polling rate

[JBR_]

To me, the difference is how smooth my monitor and mouse movements feel like. With 500 Hz suddenly my game feels laggy. With 2000 Hz it's super smooth.