Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Copperhead vs. G5

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
August 21, 2005 3:12:39 PM

Razer and Logitech will be releasing their latest gaming mice soon. Razer will release Copperhead and Logitech G5 and G7. I was wondering which on of these would be best for gaming, especially for Half-Life 2.

All of these mice are laser mice. Copperhead and G5 are corded mice and actually really similat specswise. Copperhead does have that on-board memory thing though. G7 is a cordless mice.

Reliability: Logitech G5 wins here. Logitech has a solid reputation in this apartment while Razer mice have been known to break after just one or two months of use. G7 is cordless so the probability of having problems is greater than G5s.

Ergonomics: The winner is G5 again. Although G5 and G7 are identical in shape, G5 is more lighter (and the weight can be adjusted with special weights). Copperhead has that neutral shape as do all Razer mice. However, Razer has improved ergonomics by solving the 'sidebutton issue' from Diamondback and making the mouse a bit taller so that it feels better under the palm. That being said, Razer isn't exactly the most comfortable mouse and even Razer-fans will agree.

Performance: The winner is Copperhead. While those G-series mice from Logitech do have very similar specs with Copperhead like 2000DPIs, Copperhead is better in some areas. Also, it's well-known that Razer mice are the most accurate mice available. G5 would beat G7 because while G7 is the first cordless gaming grade mouse I'd imagine G5 is slightly better.

Looks: I'd say Copperhead wins here, but just by an inch. G7 looks cool and G5 isn't bad either.

Value: Well G5 is the cheapest of the bunch and it costs about 70 euros. Copperhead costs 75 euros and G7 costs about 95 euros. I'd say the best price/performance ratio goes to G5.

Overall: If we are talking about who's the winner is best overall mouse, I'd say it's G5 just because it's a better mouse to use in various programs not just games. If we are talking about the best mouse for gaming and specifically for FPS-games then I'd say Copperhead might be slightly better than G5.

What are your thoughts? I'm buying a new mouse for my new gaming laptop and I have two options: 1) Buy G5 or 2) Buy Copperhead and then another mouse for basic use (maybe G7 because I love the good ergonomics of the more expensive mice and I don't care if it's a gaming mouse or not). I have two homes so if I bought two mice I could leave one mouse in one home and carry the other mouse with my notebook.

More about : copperhead

October 4, 2005 1:12:54 AM

jeez luise, i was trying to find out betweed these as well. i'm not so much a gamer as i edit pics (wedding photographer) in photoshop. my crappy old logitech ball mouse (looks like the pilot with scroll button) just doesn't cut it. my question is, i don't want to buy a wacom tablet for PS work, so i'd like to have a precision mouse that can hit on a pixel! it needs to be very comfortable, and because i have long fingers, i constantly right click accidentaly. my brother told me he bought the razor coppermine, but the size/comfort doesn't look much different then the POS i have. i was leaning toward the G5 but i was also looking at the MX1000. after reading peoples small problems (unlike tom's review which he raves about) with MX1000's reaction/dpi compared to the wired mouses (which is something i hate with my mouse) i thought to finalize it to either the G5 or MX518. any input and help appreciated.
btw, FWIW, i hate when a mouse will fly off the screen when i move the mouse 1/2 an inch. i know that's the settings /control panel. so i'm hoping this is not what the G5 will do...?
October 5, 2005 9:31:45 AM

anyone? please feel free...
Related resources
October 13, 2005 5:53:56 AM

if you dont do much gaming, a high dpi mouse will only make things worse for you.

i'll explain as i am an X-pert: FOR DESKTOP APPLICATIONS, HIGHER DPI = MORE SENSITIVITY, NOT MORE PRECISION. this is opposite of what you want. most people probably arent aware of this when they go out and buy an expensive mouse.

why?: with desktop applications, dpi maps directly to on-screen pixels. the size of your pixels, therefore determine your mouse resolution. to get more precision, you could increase the resolution but that is where you're screwed. higher resolution = smaller icons. overall effect is no change in precision.

as mentioned, this is only for desktop applications. FOR GAMES, DPI MAPS TO SOMETHING CALLED "WORLD CO-ORDINATES" which are much smaller than pixels and independant of resolution. because co-ordinates are so much smaller, a high dpi mouse can use all its dpi without being too sensitive.

to the specific problem of being able to click icons precisely, there is no solution until application programmers adress the issue. it wont happen untill high desktop resolutions become the norm and icons correspondingly become too small to see. with the advent of HD tv and the new graphics card it might happen soon.

so, why not turn the sensitivity down on a 2000 dpi mouse if its too fast? you just turned a 2000 dpi mouse into an 800 dpi mouse so why spend the money? (by the way, for win xp keep the sensitivity slider in the middle to use full dpi).




<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by picture_perfect on 10/13/05 02:37 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
October 15, 2005 12:02:39 PM

PP,
thanks for the reply. can you explain about gaming mouse in stupid language for me the "idiot" please? i'd like to use for editing pics in PS. will i not get better accuracy? i don't need it to fly off the screen by moving it an inch physically, that i can do with POS ball mouse i have now. i don't want to buy a wacom tablet, so what are my options? any help appreciated...
October 16, 2005 5:03:08 AM

how an optical mouse works simplified: dpi means "dots counted per inch". a 400 dpi mouse can count up to 400 "dots" (surface irregularities) under it during 1" of physical travel. it sees each dot as a pixel of your DESKTOP RESOLUTION, so for each dot passed the cursor jumps one pixel (i say "jump" because the cursor CAN NOT move between pixels). 1" of physical travel will move the cursor 400 pixels (at 800x600 desktop setting, thats 1/2 the screen width). an 800 dpi mouse would move the cursor 800 screen pixels (the whole screen width). btw, it doesnt matter how fast you move the mouse, its always "x" dots per inch. the sensor can almost always keep up, but thats beside the point.

so a 2000 dpi mouse is no more precise than a 400 dpi mouse, it just faster (covers more pixels). to increase precision you have to make the pixels smaller (i.e. increase your desktop resolution).
also make sure the mouse sensitivity is below the middle setting in win xp. otherwise the cursor will start skipping pixels.
and just a note on the "enhance pointer precision" button in win xp: this does NOT increase precision as im describing here. its real name is "acceleration" which is an exponential function applied to mouse inputs making the cursor move faster as the mouse moves faster. it can be helpfull for desktop applications, but a lot of gamers who prefer a linear, predictable response despise it and will go to great lengths to eradicate it totally from their system. anyway, i recommend:


1)increase desktop resolution. this will be limited by:
a)your monitor
b)your video card
c)icon sizes, which will get smaller as resolution goes up.
(this is what i was complaining about earlier)

2)make sure the mouse sensitivity slider is below the middle position. try turning off "enhance pointer precision"

3)if your current mouse is too slow at these settings, which i doubt, more dpi would be needed according to this formula:

dpi needed = resolution/travel
so if resolution = 1600x1200 and you want the mouse to move 4" to cross the screen, you need 1600/4 = 400 dpi.




<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by picture_perfect on 10/16/05 02:17 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
October 23, 2005 2:11:58 PM

Hey man,
thanks alot i learned something new today holy crap i love learning cool stuff like this! i have the mx 1000 and i love it mostly because of the comfort level(the mouse arches like the arch in your hand so your hand is resting perfectly) and the buttons are great i dont even have to move my mouse for various things like when i go backwards on the internet i dont have to move the mouse to hit the back button i just hit the button on the mouse and ive gone back to the previoius page all the buttons have great benefits to users and i only use my computer for games and entertainment so im not a techi but the mx 1000is awsome it really is almost perfect that being said i wouldnt buy th mx 1000 i wouldnt buy the g5 either i would buy the new g7!! better than the copperhead as well with 2400dpi not that you need it in your case but its the same as the g5 and mx 1000 only better and prolly cost almost the same and just so you know i played with the razer copperhead mouse at best buy and for gamming i think it is perfect because of the fact its flatter and your fingers end up in a position of aiming exactly where the mouse is pointing which i believe helps accuracy .i dont care about the looks thats a bonus but the feel of the mouse and accuracy our what is important to us gamers in my opinon. anyways thx guys for the great thread.I just wanted to say for me gamming wise i am looking at trying the copperhead instead of getting the g7 because the way the copperhead felt in my head i think they might just have found the perfect fit for gamers.

athlon 64/msik8n neo2 plat/corsair twinx1024-3200/
thermalright120mm heatsink,fan/wd 74gig raptor and 250gig/audigy2/logitechz-5500,mx1000laserwkeyboard
22inch mitsubishi mon<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by shaido7 on 10/23/05 10:18 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 1, 2005 6:03:12 AM

So are there big problems with the G7 then?? I've been debating between the G5 and the mX1000, just because it's cordless. I'm using a MX510 now and love it. But, my new setup would be nicer to have something wireless. I've been of the opinon that corded are just plain more reliable, etc. But, Logitech seems to have it down by now so I'm really considering the wireless.
So, is there big issues between G5, MX1000, and G7. Just the presence of the G7 kinda knocks the MX1000 out of contention. But, do I stick with the tried and true corded G5 or can I get the G7 and get the same kind of performance as the G5??
(I mostly play FPS: BF2, CS:S, etc.)

If you have any help here it'd make my life much easier. Those damn stores won't let you take one of each home to test drive, you know?
Thx in advance.

<font color=green> I doubt, therefore I might be. </font color=green>
April 8, 2006 9:38:31 PM

the mx1000 is a pretty awesome mouse, but for me, at first, it took me a bit of a learning curve to play games because i used an ambidextrous mouse with 400 dpi which had a weird sensor placement. i started getting picky about mice by then because i didn't do as well when i used the mx1000 over the first mouse i used. so i decided i'd buy the mx518, because it was described as a gaming mouse, it would be something new. currently its the mouse i use but i still feel out of place... so in a few days i'm gonna order a razer copperhead. its ambidextrous jsut like my first mouse, i think it includes the same sensor arrangment so i think it'll be a keeper.

and theres my life story, providing almost no useful info haha
!