Question My Aimlabs 7 mice test outcomes
Question My Aimlabs 7 mice test outcomes
UPFRONT NOTE: I don’t claim to be an expert in evaluating mouse precision, nor did I invest time in thorough testing, so don’t criticize my results harshly. I’m not a paid reviewer on YouTube. This was just a casual experiment in the morning.
😀
I found myself idle and noticed four gaming mice lying around or close to my mouse pad, ready whenever needed. That’s when I started experimenting with Aimlabs and comparing them after getting a brand new FNATIC MAYA 8K mouse.
Things to keep in mind while reviewing the outcomes
- My hand size isn’t large, so I favor compact mice.
- I’m using a Dell Alienware 34" widescreen AW3423DWF.
- Saturn Pro Mouse pad is in use.
- The default DPI settings matched what I’m comfortable with on Windows and most games, except for first-person shooters.
- All devices were wireless except the MX310 and M-UAE96, which I collected from my collection to test older versus newer models (assuming the older ones are around 400dpi; I couldn’t adjust DPI on these two and they slowed down). I had to boost mouse speed in Windows.
- The Aimlabs test used Reflexshot/Ultimate, which performed well. A random-sized target appears anywhere on the screen, and you have one second to hit it before it vanishes, with a new target replacing it each time. This repeats for about five minutes.
- I tested each mouse twice, discarding the lowest result. I also repeated the 400DPI test in reverse order and shot only once per second, aiming for the target or missing it.
- The "Try Hard" score came from rerunning the same test four to five times at full 400DPI after the initial run, removing the weakest attempts.
Summary
- I was taken aback by how much better my accuracy felt at 400dpi, thinking it was too low. It definitely seemed that way while playing. I’ll need to recheck this in some FPS titles.
- The Viper v2 Pro results surprised me too, as they’re larger and less comfortable than the rest, which is why I used them less than a day.
- What I thought was a disposable mouse given with a generic PC caught my attention. The HP M-UAE96 performed surprisingly well compared to other gaming models.
- This test helped confirm what I already knew: comfort in your hand leads to better performance. Consistent practice improves results. The old saying “practice makes perfect” seems true here.
- Staying focused and pushing harder also boosts scores. To be clear, I took short breaks during the session and had to restart after sitting down, missing the first few targets.
- Perhaps we don’t need a mouse costing over $100 to excel at precise shooting or sniping. (I’ve kept this thought in mind for years but haven’t shared it.)
😉
The HP M-UAE96 still impressed me—even under $30/$40 compared to pricier gaming mice.
During the experiment, I quickly realized or confirmed what I already suspected: comfort matters. Using a mouse that feels natural in your hand will help your performance grow. The adage “practice makes perfect” rings true here.
It was quite a task to compile all this information, but I'm glad it turned out to be a pleasant experience.
Technically, the MX310 from 2003 utilized the same Avago ADNS-S2020 sensor as the MX510 and G1, which offers native 800dpi. However, 400dpi is the default setting on the Microsoft driver for the MX310, and the most recent Mouseware drivers that let you switch to 800dpi were only available for Windows XP. Setpoint drivers for Windows Vista and later versions didn’t fully support 800dpi on the MX310.
Increasing mouse speed in Windows past the midpoint uses interpolation, which can significantly lower precision. Logitech also released the M-UAE96, but it was from the same time period as the MX310, so it might not have used the identical sensor as their own office mice like the earlier B58 or BJ58 Wheel Mouse, which were only 400dpi. The MX300 from 2002 employed the A2020 sensor, which is 400dpi only (even though the packaging claimed 800dpi—it was actually interpolated), but it performed better than the B58 because it supported 10g acceleration and could potentially be overclocked to 1000Hz for tracking at 154 inches per second.
The MX310 doesn’t achieve this, and unlike the G1, it can only maintain perfect 66" per second performance (note that the G1 defaults to 800dpi without a driver, while the MX310 needs a driver to reach that setting).
I'll expand on my previous comment. According to my hand size and claw grip, here are the five gaming mice from this test ranked by my preference:
1. Razer Cobra Pro
2. MZ1
3. Maya 8k
4. Pulsar x2h mini
5. Viper v2 Pro
The order between the Mazay and Pulsar could be a toss-up, but the Maya stands out for being only a day old. 😎