Hey r/MouseReview!   
   
I decided to run an audit of our [RTINGS.com](http://RTINGS.com) click latency test to see how well it holds up when you account for unit-to-unit variability of the left mouse click button. We typically only ever test one mouse when we’re testing a product, so I thought I’d buy multiple units and see if there was any meaningful difference between them. This test has always been pretty solid for us, but I wanted to dig deeper than just looking at the unit-to-unit variance and decided that I’d test clicking at the front, middle, or back of the left click, or even on the right click, to see if it would change things. 

Before getting into results, it’s worth explaining what the test actually measures. Something I’ve seen people talk about is we only test a single mouse, and that the unit-to-unit variance of the click matters enough that it could significantly affect the latency, whether it’s positive or negative. I wanted to see if how could the QC on the button is if I were to get a few samples of each. And whether it matters in the end.  
  
Our regular test includes the button travel which is important because, when you’re using a mouse, you’re pressing through the click button to reach the switch, and the travel is part of the process. By including that travel, the test gives a number that’s closer to the real-world latency you’ll actually experience. The signal goes through the Beagle USB 480 protocol analyzer (https://www.totalphase.com/products/beagle-usb480/ ) so that we can get the click data from contact with the button to the USB. That way, we don’t measure any system latency and successfully separate the mouse from the rest of the system. Testing through the PCB by soldering directly onto the switch pins and electronically triggering clicks might look cleaner on paper, but it doesn’t reflect real-world use. 

For this audit, I picked up five units of four popular gaming mice: the Logitech G Pro X Superlight 2, Razer Viper V3 Pro, Pulsar X3, and MCHOSE L7 Ultra. The only exception was the MCHOSE L7 Ultra, since when I was buying them for this audit, they were out of stock EVERYWHERE. I only managed to get a total of 2 of them. Using our standard solenoid testing rig, I ran 250 clicks per position per mouse. I tested the front of the left click, the middle of the left click (our usual spot), the back of the left click, and the middle of the right button. I positioned the solenoid in the same spot on each mouse, so I wasn’t just eyeballing it. I also tore down a few units and tried using the OSLTT and soldering directly onto the PCB to measure raw timings, though the results from those tests weren’t reliable enough to use.    
  
If you ever plan on taking apart one of your mice for any reason, proceed with caution as shorting the mice is very easy. 



||
||
|Mouse |Front |Middle |Back |Right |
|G Pro X SL2 |1.81 ms|1.34 ms|1.54 ms|1.35 ms|
|Viper V3 Pro |1.66 ms|1.13 ms|1.12 ms|1.07 ms|
|Pulsar X3 |2.13 ms|1.54 ms|1.85 ms|1.64 ms|
|MCHOSE L7 Ultra |1.69 ms|1.40 ms|1.81 ms|1.29 ms|

*(This is the rounded average of 5 units per model with a combined 1250 clicks per position)* 

The results were extremely consistent. Looking across the five units of each model, the widest spread between any single button position was 1.16 ms, which occurred on the Pulsar X3 unit’s left click at the front position. This was on our tested unit, which does have a bit more use than the newer mice that I purchased for this test. I’ve included graphs showing the result of each unit’s average latency at each position. On the X-Axis, the different labels are for each individual mouse, which I took some creative liberties with their naming. Each colour is a mouse position, and each column is a different unit. 

What all this testing really showed me is that click latency, even with the button involved, is a solved issue. Not only were the results across different mice stable, but each mouse was also remarkably consistent at every point I tested. The least consistent mouse I ran into was the previously mentioned Pulsar X3 and if you remove the largest outlier, that spread drops to 0.28ms. Whether it’s Logitech’s Lightforce hybrids, Razer’s Gen 3 opticals, or Kailh’s opticals, they’re all delivering excellent results. 

That said, button design still makes a huge difference in how a mouse feels. The shape of the shell, the stiffness near the hinge, the flex of the plastic, and even the material all play into the subjective feel of a click. The latency may be virtually identical, but a snappy button and a mushy button are two very different user experiences. Thankfully, on the mice I checked out, there wasn’t really any mushiness. All these mice are fairly well regarded and some of the top performers at their respective price points, so I wasn’t expecting to see these kinds of build quality issues, and thankfully I didn’t. I did answer my question though, click latency on the mouse itself isn’t really an issue and our test is able to identify that. It think the way the mouse fits in your hand is likely the thing that matters the most, since these high performers are all so close in terms of click latency.    
   
The PCB testing I tried doing didn’t pan out in the way I expected it to. It was much less consistent and the values I was getting were around 0.5ms on every mouse, but it would go up to around 1.5ms sometimes, which I couldn’t explain. It’s something I’ll need to spend more time with in the future. If you guys have experience with that tool, let me know! 

So, after finishing all the testing, as I mentioned before, the feeling of the click is probably more important than the actual latency we can record. A more comfortable button and hand positioning will absolutely have a bigger impact on how it feels than latency between these products, even accounting for unit-to-unit variance. Is it the shape of the button, the material, all of the above? What do you guys look for when it comes to the click? Or are you more concerned with the sensor?

We tested click latency across different button positions, to check for unit-to-unit variance and the results were nearly identical!