Does the USB port matter for Keyboard/Mouse?

[dgianstefani]

And I thought we were having a nice talk…

Not everything is personally directed at you. If it is, it tends to follow a direct quote.

There is nothing, as we’ve seen, that stops a mouse from having 0.1 ms click latency (or even negative one as per the TPU table) while being still at 1000Hz polling.

Except math.

Using exceptions to the rule isn't convincing.

Yes, a random click could happen that hits right before the poll is sent, with perfect timing.

No, this doesn't happen consistently.

Consistency is key for performance. You don't want FPS fluctuating between 120 and 240. You want 99% lows to be above your monitor refresh rate. This has been proven with aim performance. The same goes for peripherals performance. Pzogel periodically finds incredibly inconsistent mice and makes sure to mention the detrimental effects of using those.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Sure, but I do get a bit tired of "the human eye can only see 24 FPS" equivalent gang poking fun

I agree with you there.

 

[Jetster]

If 2.0 is better imagine using a PS2 port, or a serial

 

[Onasi]

@dgianstefani
I suppose at this point we are at an impasse. All we can do is to wait until @pzogel confirms and reiterates his methodology. To me, him stating this:

“Click latency has been measured to be 0.1 (0.12) ms, with standard deviation being 0.00 ms. Polling rate has no effect on click latency.”

is a fairly clear and distinct statement that no, it’s not just random clicks. You claim that this is mathematically impossible. I see no reason to argue without a full disclosure by the person taking the measurements.

Not everything is personally directed at you. If it is, it tends to follow a direct quote.

That’s me trying and failing to be funny. I don’t actually care if you think me a luddite with the reaction time of a sloth on barbiturates who plays COD with a Genesis controller or something. I tried it once, by the way, wasn’t fun.

 

[dgianstefani]

@dgianstefani
I suppose at this point we are at an impasse. All we can do is to wait until @pzogel confirms and reiterates his methodology. To me, him stating this:

“Click latency has been measured to be 0.1 (0.12) ms, with standard deviation being 0.00 ms. Polling rate has no effect on click latency.”

is a fairly clear and distinct statement that no, it’s not just random clicks. You claim that this is mathematically impossible.

One quote from one review that supports your opinion is not proof of a rule.

You claim that this is mathematically impossible. I see no reason to argue without a full disclosure by the person taking the measurements.

If you have a claim otherwise I'd be interested to see your workings out. The math itself is fairly indisputable due to the simplicity as far as I can tell. As already stated, unless the on paper spec and the spec that is actually in use are two different numbers, there is no way for a 1000 Hz (1ms) mouse to get consistent 0.1 ms (10,000 Hz) results.

That’s me trying and failing to be funny. I don’t actually care if you think me a luddite with the reaction time of a sloth on barbiturates who plays COD with a Genesis controller or something. I tried it once, by the way, wasn’t fun.

I made no such claims, this is your projection.

 

[Onasi]

If you have a claim otherwise I'd be interested to see your workings out. The math itself is fairly indisputable due to the simplicity as far as I can tell.

My claim is actually in agreement with you, for the most part. Such low and consistent latencies should mathematically be an impossibility at 1000Hz. So something else is going on. You mentioned dynamic polling. I don’t think it’s exactly that. My theory is that, depending on MCU/firmware implementation, some mice have decoupled sensor and click events and said click events always take precedence and are transmitted at the highest possible polling (as @lexluthermiester mentioned, even a base USB 2.0 port is technically capable of rates exceeding 1000Hz). That makes for mice that are still 1000Hz and behave as such for the sensor tracking (which is what things like Mouse Tester measure), but can achieve superior click latency. So that would explain why some mice benefit from higher polling set in firmware, and some are consistent throughout.

 

[AusWolf]

Well it's like when you were talking about how RAM speed is meaningless for X3D, but then it turns out you play single player games at 60 FPS. There's nothing wrong with that, it just puts context on what you say.

The context of the hardware/settings you use is relevant to whether it's possible for you to notice the improved experiences available (assuming you have the hardware required, and are playing with the resolution/frame rates where it makes a difference.

It's like if I said "well I don't understand why anyone would buy a fast car" when I live in a country where the speed limit is 70 mph. Thing is, some people race competitively, or live in places like Germany, where they can actually go faster than that.

The other thing is I never told you your experience was crap, that's just you putting words into my mouth somewhat defensively. I suggested you get a mouse that has modern performance characteristics, and explained why.

Why do you have to bring up what I said about CPUs and RAM in a completely unrelated thread? Of course every experience is an individual thing, and everything is contextual, I thought that went without saying.

I only came here to give my two cents on the question posted: whether it matters what USB you plug your mouse into. I didn't come here to seek advice on replacing my own mouse that I bought merely 6 months ago and I absolutely love. If you think it's inadequate for your needs for whatever reason, that's fine, but since we're talking about my mouse, don't you think that my opinion on it matters just a little? I'm not being defensive, I'm just stating the fact that I don't need a new mouse. I don't play competitively, and for story-driven single player games, my polling rate is fine. I don't know why that bothers you.

 

[dgianstefani]

Why do you have to bring up what I said about CPUs and RAM in a completely unrelated thread? Of course every experience is an individual thing, and everything is contextual, I thought that went without saying.

It does go without saying that a 125 Hz mouse doesn't need a specific port.

It's less of an individual experience matter and more of a "new standards require new hardware, old standards require old hardware" issue. Therefore giving context is relevant.

I only came here to give my two cents on the question posted: whether it matters what USB you plug your mouse into. I didn't come here to seek advice on replacing my own mouse that I bought merely 6 months ago and I absolutely love.

Regardless, this is an open forum and feedback can be given on any post.

my polling rate is fine. I don't know why that bothers you.

Projection. What mouse you do or do not use has no bearing on whether I'm bothered or not. I'm simply giving friendly feedback that you may not have been aware the mouse operates at 125 Hz, designed for office work, not gaming. At that frequency you don't need to be playing at high refresh rate to see issues.

 

[AusWolf]

It does go without saying that a 125 Hz mouse doesn't need a specific port.

It's less of an individual experience matter and more of a "new standards require new hardware, old standards require old hardware" issue. Therefore giving context is relevant.


Regardless, this is an open forum and feedback can be given on any post.

Projection. What mouse you do or do not use has no bearing on whether I'm bothered or not. I'm simply giving friendly feedback that you may not have been aware the mouse operates at 125 Hz, designed for office work, not gaming. At that frequency you don't need to be playing at high refresh rate to see issues.

That's cool.

But similarly to me not needing a constant 144 FPS to enjoy a game, I don't need a high polling rate mouse, either. If my FPS drops to 100 or 80, and I'm still happy, then I probably couldn't notice if the effects of my click got delayed by a frame or two, either.

If you need a million Hz polling rate that USB 2.0 can't supply, then I suppose your mouse has a 3.0 or 3.1 cable, and you should plug it into a 3.0 or 3.1 port. I just don't thing that this is the case with most mice on the market. I think OP's question was about a USB 2.0 mouse as well, to which I gave my answer.

 

[dgianstefani]

My claim is actually in agreement with you, for the most part. Such low and consistent latencies should mathematically be an impossibility at 1000Hz. So something else is going on. You mentioned dynamic polling. I don’t think it’s exactly that. My theory is that, depending on MCU/firmware implementation, some mice have decoupled sensor and click events and said click events always take precedence and are transmitted at the highest possible polling (as @lexluthermiester mentioned, even a base USB 2.0 port is technically capable of rates exceeding 1000Hz). That makes for mice that are still 1000Hz and behave as such for the sensor tracking (which is what things like Mouse Tester measure), but can achieve superior click latency. So that would explain why some mice benefit from higher polling set in firmware, and some are consistent throughout.

So, the mouse is actually operating at above 1000 Hz for click operations, it's just we don't click 1000 times in a second to test that "1000 Hz" spec out.

If the time between the finger actuating the switch and the click bring registered on screen is less than 1 ms, then for that operation, the effective Hz is higher than 1000, I don't care if the average Hz is 1000, or motion tracking is, or whatever. It's clever if that's what's happening, but it's also wrong to call these "1000 Hz" mice. Hence the erroneous data.

That's cool.

But similarly to me not needing a constant 144 FPS to enjoy a game, I don't need a high polling rate mouse, either. If my FPS drops to 100 or 80, and I'm still happy, then I probably couldn't notice if the effects of my click got delayed by a frame or two, either.

If you need a million Hz polling rate that USB 2.0 can't supply, then I suppose your mouse has a 3.0 or 3.1 cable, and you should plug it into a 3.0 or 3.1 port. I just don't thing that this is the case with most mice on the market. I think OP's question was about a USB 2.0 mouse as well, to which I gave my answer.

Most mice on the gaming market are 1000 Hz or higher. So they do require a USB 3.0 port or newer, else they run at slower than spec.

 

[AusWolf]

Most mice on the gaming market are 1000 Hz or higher. So they do require a USB 3.0 port or newer, else they run at slower than spec.

To quote OP:

The connectors on every any mouse and keyboard I have in the house has 4 pins for USB2.0, cause they don't need more bandwidth but whatever.

Like you said, context matters.

 

[eidairaman1]

Just plug in anywhere you need and if you need the higher bandwidth ports for external drives just swap things around, it is a Universal Serial Bus afterall which was developed in 1995 and went primetime in 1996 and has been updated every so often

 

[dgianstefani]

To quote OP:

Like you said, context matters.

Context does matter. However, so does precision of speech and whether a statement is factual or not.

You claim most mice on the market don't require a USB 3/3.1 port. This may be true for office mice or the wired mouse that comes with your Dell laptop as a freebie.

For the gaming market, 1000 Hz has been standard for years, perhaps decades. Arguably it's now the bare minimum in what's being sold, and most offer more than that. These mice require a 3/3.1 port or they run slower than advertised. This is a simple fact and it's not "individual experience".

OP apparently having older peripherals or office peripherals does not bring any meaning to these statistics, which are true in the bigger picture.

This is even seen in most new motherboards. Where are the USB 2.0 ports?

 

[AusWolf]

Context does matter. However, so does precision of speech and whether a statement is factual or not.

You claim most mice on the market don't require a USB 3/3.1 port. This may be true for office mice or the wired mouse that comes with your Dell laptop as a freebie.

For the gaming market, 1000 Hz has been standard for years, perhaps decades. Arguably it's now the bare minimum in what's being sold. These mice require a 3/3.1 port or they run slower than advertised. This is a simple fact and it's not "individual experience".

OP apparently having older peripherals or office peripherals does not bring any meaning to these statistics, which are true in the bigger picture.

This is even seen in most new motherboards. Where are the USB 2.0 ports?

There is no bigger picture. OP asked a question, which I answered the best way I could. They've got an X570 motherboard with 4 USB 2.0 ports, and a bunch of USB 2.0 mice. The "gaming market" isn't involved in this topic in any way.

 

[dgianstefani]

There is no bigger picture. OP asked a question, which I answered the best way I could. They've got an X570 motherboard with 4 USB 2.0 ports, and a bunch of USB 2.0 mice. The "gaming market" isn't involved in this topic in any way.

Does the USB port matter for Keyboard/Mouse?

Yes. It does.

 

[AusWolf]

Yes. It does.

Maybe to you, but not to OP, it doesn't.

 

[dgianstefani]

Maybe to you, but not to OP, it doesn't.

If this is the hill you want to die on, feel free. Myself and others have clarified the situation with gaming peripherals and USB ports.

 

[Ferrum Master]

What are you even arguing about? It is not about USB2 or USB3 it is only about EHCI and xHCI, quit the bull crap.

 

[AusWolf]

If this is the hill you want to die on, feel free. Myself and others have clarified the situation with gaming peripherals and USB ports.

It's not a hill I'm dying on. I just focused on OP's question, and answered exactly that, this is all. You're free to go on a tangent about gaming peripherals that OP doesn't have all you like. I've got nothing else.

 

[dgianstefani]

My claim is actually in agreement with you, for the most part. Such low and consistent latencies should mathematically be an impossibility at 1000Hz. So something else is going on. You mentioned dynamic polling. I don’t think it’s exactly that. My theory is that, depending on MCU/firmware implementation, some mice have decoupled sensor and click events and said click events always take precedence and are transmitted at the highest possible polling (as @lexluthermiester mentioned, even a base USB 2.0 port is technically capable of rates exceeding 1000Hz). That makes for mice that are still 1000Hz and behave as such for the sensor tracking (which is what things like Mouse Tester measure), but can achieve superior click latency. So that would explain why some mice benefit from higher polling set in firmware, and some are consistent throughout.

Yep, said this already.

Many mice have improved click latency as polling rate increases. Some do not, but I suspect this is because clicks are transmitted at a rate higher than 1000 Hz, i.e. whenever they are made, but tracking is not.

I wonder if this is the cause of the "periodic off period polls" inconsistency that Pzogel has noted in some mouse reviews.

I guess not, as those would notably be when the buttons are pressed which would stand out in the data.

 

[Onasi]

I wonder if this is the cause of the "periodic off period polls" inconsistency that Pzogel has noted in some mouse reviews.

I guess not, as those would notably be when the buttons are pressed which would stand out in the data.

Shouldn’t be, since according to his described method, the polling rate test is solely movement based and the click test is solely click-to-register based without any movement events.

 

[lexluthermiester]

This is even seen in most new motherboards. Where are the USB 2.0 ports?

For the most part they're being ditched. But for those boards that still have them, they should be used for KB&M first, gamepads next then printers/scanners and so on.

I mean, do we all not agree on that?

 

[dgianstefani]

For the most part they're being ditched. But for those boards that still have them, they should be used for KB&M first, gamepads next then printers/scanners and so on.

I mean, do we all not agree on that?

It depends if the keyboard/mouse is high polling rate or not. As time goes on the ratio is shifting towards high polling gaming devices.

They're being ditched because new platforms have enough lanes to populate all ports with high bandwidth revisions, and hardware USB 2.0 is no longer required for compatibility.

 

[Klemc]

For the most part they're being ditched. But for those boards that still have them, they should be used for KB&M first, gamepads next then printers/scanners and so on.

I mean, do we all not agree on that?

I have a lot, the best MB in the universe :

Rear (12)
1 x USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 port (1 x USB Type-C®)
7 x USB 3.2 Gen 2 ports (6 x Type-A + 1 x USB Type-C®)
4 x USB 2.0 ports
Front (7)
1 x USB 3.2 Gen 2 connector (supports USB Type-C®)
1 x USB 3.2 Gen 1 header supports additional 2 USB 3.2 Gen 1 ports
2 x USB 2.0 headers support additional 4 USB 2.0 ports

ROG STRIX B650E-E GAMING WIFI | Gaming motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global

The ROG Strix B650E-E Gaming WiFi is a future-ready B-series beast, featuring 16 + 2 power stages, hyperspeed DDR5 memory, and next-gen PCIe® 5.0 connectivity. It features four M.2 slots with heatsinks, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 support, WiFi 6E, AI Cooling II, AI Networking, Two-Way AI Noise Cancelation...

rog.asus.com

 

[Macro Device]

You want 99% lows to be above your monitor refresh rate.

Whenever I play like that I suffer from insane tearing.

Also apparently I'm too slow to benefit from fast polling on my mouse as my experience doesn't differ on 1000 Hz from that on 125 Hz. Well, I always knew I'm not fast.