• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Reaction speed

AyashiKaibutsu

AyashiKaibutsu

Diamond Member
I was messing around with this site: http://www.aimbooster.com/

and did their reaction test under training. After about two minutes my average was 239.5 ms. The lowest I would get was 183 (got exactly that multiple times) The highest was 300 (exactly that multiple times when it would give one in quick succession from another and I wasn't quite ready). Most of them where 230-260ish.

I don't have a frame of reference for the numbers though; quarter of a second sounds kind of slow to me 🙁 so I figured hey makes for a good thread 🙂

Edit: Second attempt Avg: 216 hit 183 multiple times again and 184 once all overs above 200 😵 Kind of weird that seems like a magic number for me.
 
Last edited:
We as a species have known our eye to brain to hand delay time is around 200ms for quite a while. Add in a little bit of time for actually the movement itself and you easily get to the 250ms mark. As you get old that time increases a little. Its a physical limitation of the human processing speed, we simply aren't that fast in many activities.

Bare in mind the power of this sort of game is that it trains mouse aiming, the reaction time isn't really all that important IMO, the key thing is how long you go for, your accuracy and how far you can move and still hit the small targets.
 
Even professional athletes don't have have amazing reaction times. Its kind of interesting really. Instead they get really good at prediction and and read a situation and react appropriately while most people are still processing what they saw. But it terms of raw speed.... same as everyday people. Imagine it works just like that in FPS people just get better at predicting where their target will be.
 
236 average. Mine was pretty consistent. Honestly that's significantly better than I usually do on such tests.
 
I went back to doing the test a bit and I noticed I do about ~20ms worse with a claw grip than I do a palm grip. Maybe it's just because palm is what I use when I'm playing serious.
 
Alright, tried it again with my home 144Hz monitor, got a 30 ms improvement (220 ms -> 190 ms). The advantage is real! 😉
 
Hmm, shutting off dual monitor seems to knock like 10ms off my averages. Interesting, but I'm not going to test it enough to to get concrete numbers 😛
 
Average was 250ms, lowest I got was 117ms. Reaction time was the easiest of all the tests available, Sniping was crazy hard for me and I consider myself a decent running sniper. LOL

Auto Balanced seems to be the test available there.
 
I hit 180 a bunch of times, and 160 a few times. always an even number?

120hz BenQ monitor and Logitech G500 @ 1000 polling
 
Its a website so I suspect its timer resolution is limited by your version of Windows. On older ones like XP the minimum timer interval available would have been 50ms, nowadays I think its more like 10ms although it varies with hardware. But you will only see certain intervals depending on your hardware and the error rate for speeds that high are going to be in the 10% range. Its possible to have a better timer, down in the nanoseconds, but it requires native code.
 
I regularly get odd numbers 219 213. The first site is done in flash and I would assume the second is either flash or JavaScript; I would have to assume purely client side except to transmit end results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top