Razer DeathAdder V3 Mouse Review

Sep 11, 2024 03:11 PM By  Gregory Vodden

Hey. That’s another great question! At the moment we only test one unit. But we do have several formal policies in place designed to mitigate the variance risk. First, we have a defective policy. If ever we buy a product and discover it’s defective (e.g., a non-functional wireless receiver or buttons), we don’t test that unit. Instead, we return it and buy a new one. Second, we have an out-of-spec policy which allows manufacturers to notify us if they believe we tested an out-of-spec unit. When this happens, we update our review to mention that our review may not be representative. We then buy and test a second unit from a different retailer. If the second unit performs better, we update our review with the new measurements. If not, we keep the original review and suspend the brand’s right to utilize our out-of-spec policy for one year or until we’ve reviewed 10 more units from that brand. These two policies help us address more obvious cases of product variation. But we’ve also been considering other approaches that could allow us to investigate more thoroughly. We’ve already held discussions about testing multiple units of individual mouse models. We may run small-scale internal tests soon to explore what this might look like—though no promises yet. All that to say, I hope that gives some insight about how seriously we take this issue and how eager we are about future ways we can give people a better idea of how tolerances and variation can affect the products we review. Best wishes,

Thanks for that info. Seems like your team have given serious considerations to your testing methodology. I’m impressed.

Sep 08, 2024 01:15 AM By Unworried3085

21

Thanks for the reply. How do you account for possible lemon units in your testing methodology? Do you only test a single unit at a time, or do you test a batch of multiple mice of the same model?

Hey. That’s another great question! At the moment we only test one unit. But we do have several formal policies in place designed to mitigate the variance risk.

First, we have a defective policy. If ever we buy a product and discover it’s defective (e.g., a non-functional wireless receiver or buttons), we don’t test that unit. Instead, we return it and buy a new one.

Second, we have an out-of-spec policy which allows manufacturers to notify us if they believe we tested an out-of-spec unit. When this happens, we update our review to mention that our review may not be representative. We then buy and test a second unit from a different retailer.

If the second unit performs better, we update our review with the new measurements. If not, we keep the original review and suspend the brand’s right to utilize our out-of-spec policy for one year or until we’ve reviewed 10 more units from that brand.

These two policies help us address more obvious cases of product variation. But we’ve also been considering other approaches that could allow us to investigate more thoroughly. We’ve already held discussions about testing multiple units of individual mouse models. We may run small-scale internal tests soon to explore what this might look like—though no promises yet. All that to say, I hope that gives some insight about how seriously we take this issue and how eager we are about future ways we can give people a better idea of how tolerances and variation can affect the products we review.

Best wishes,

Aug 30, 2024 12:45 PM By  Gregory Vodden

Hey Unworried3085, Great question. The short answer is we can’t say for sure. We were also a bit surprised and expected the overall performance of the wired DeathAdder V3 to be slightly better, but after multiple retests, we’re very confident in our findings on our unit. That said, we do have some possible explanations! Firstly, small firmware differences can account for the mismatch. The firmware version on the DeathAdder V3 Pro may just be better tuned overall such that it accounts for some if not all of the discrepancy. A second likely possibility comes down to manufacturing tolerance variance. Our click latency test includes switch pre-travel in the total latency measurement as it’s most representative of the actual latency you’ll feel as a user. Now, this does mean that if we get a unit with looser tolerances for its main click buttons, it can add a small degree of latency. Conversely, if we get an outstanding unit with perfectly tensioned clicks, it can have a small latency advantage. In this case, it’s possible the main buttons on the wired DeathAdder V3 have slightly more pre-travel due to poorly tensioned clicks, which may explain the added latency. Hopefully, that answers your question. Best wishes!

Thanks for the reply. How do you account for possible lemon units in your testing methodology? Do you only test a single unit at a time, or do you test a batch of multiple mice of the same model?

Aug 24, 2024 07:06 AM By Unworried3085

21

How is it that the deathadder v3 pro has a lower click latency at 8K over wireless than the wired deathadder v3 over its wire? A difference of 1.6 ms and 2.3 ms respectively seems like a considerable amount.

Hey Unworried3085,

Great question.

The short answer is we can’t say for sure. We were also a bit surprised and expected the overall performance of the wired DeathAdder V3 to be slightly better, but after multiple retests, we’re very confident in our findings on our unit. That said, we do have some possible explanations!

Firstly, small firmware differences can account for the mismatch. The firmware version on the DeathAdder V3 Pro may just be better tuned overall such that it accounts for some if not all of the discrepancy.

A second likely possibility comes down to manufacturing tolerance variance. Our click latency test includes switch pre-travel in the total latency measurement as it’s most representative of the actual latency you’ll feel as a user.

Now, this does mean that if we get a unit with looser tolerances for its main click buttons, it can add a small degree of latency. Conversely, if we get an outstanding unit with perfectly tensioned clicks, it can have a small latency advantage. In this case, it’s possible the main buttons on the wired DeathAdder V3 have slightly more pre-travel due to poorly tensioned clicks, which may explain the added latency.

Hopefully, that answers your question. Best wishes!

How is it that the deathadder v3 pro has a lower click latency at 8K over wireless than the wired deathadder v3 over its wire? A difference of 1.6 ms and 2.3 ms respectively seems like a considerable amount.

Aug 19, 2024 10:55 PM By Synd1cate

22

Do you have data on mouse latency at 1000Hz?

Hi Synd1cate, We don’t have performance data for this mouse at 1000Hz, as all our testing was conducted at the maximum polling rate of 8000Hz. We chose this configuration since it’s the one we expect most users to utilize.

Apr 29, 2024 08:22 PM By  Olivier Martin

Hello again, We haven’t explored the impact of higher Lift-Off Distance (LOD) settings on sensor latency yet. Our testing primarily focuses on the mouse’s lowest LOD, which we assume most users will utilize, being the default setting in most cases. Consequently, we don’t have data on sensor latency performance at higher LOD settings. During sensor latency testing, the mouse remains on the mousepad’s surface throughout, securely fixed in a rig that moves along a track. This renders the LOD setting irrelevant to sensor latency in our testing setup. Additionally, the DeathAdder V3 already boasts exceptional sensor latency, scoring a 9.3 in our testing. Any further improvement would likely be minimal and nearly imperceptible, even during the most intense gaming sessions.

Do you have data on mouse latency at 1000Hz?

Do you have data on mouse latency at 1000Hz?