Opa, yeap, errei, sao 6k scans/s com 400 dpi e o mx500 faz 2.5k em 800 dpi.
Originalmente enviada por UmK
explorer tem 400dpi
eh o grande problema dele, e de 90% dos mouses oticos q existem
a diferença q eu creio q vc estava se referindo era os 6000scans/s (3.0) contra os 2x 3000scans/s do mx500 (6k eh melhor)
mas EU axo q iria de mx500, eu so acustumado com mouse 700dpi, e soh troco por mouse com MAIS resolucao
ps: posso tar errado qto aos scans, mas o 3.0 é sim 400dpi
The real problem is in assessing how these two factors should be combined to arrive at a perfect result. Last year, for instance, Microsoft claimed that speed was all-important, and the standard optical mouse resolution of 400 dpi was quite ample. So they brought out a system with 6000 images per second. Logitech, however, said it was not worth going beyond 2500 images per second, but doubling the resolution to 800 dpi would result in greater precision and responsiveness. At the time, we found it hard to decide which of the two theories worked better in practice, but now our tests have progressed somewhat. Microsoft, without warning, reduced its blue mouse sensors to 2500 images per second. Now, it is decidedly hard to spot any difference in responsiveness compared to 6000 images per second.