Gigabyte GM-M8000 Mouse - A GHOST Story

by Gary Key on 6/15/2009 3:00 PM EST
POST A COMMENT

44 Comments

Back to Article

  • dragunover - Monday, June 22, 2009 - link

    Size and design shape is a serious problem with me. I think I will go with the 20 dollar cheaper OCZ Behemoth rather than this, though I might recommend it to people with a bit smaller hands (not like a 6 10 cro magnon?) than me. Reply
  • yyrkoon - Thursday, June 18, 2009 - link

    Not sure I agree that this would be a gaming mouse just because of a few software features, and adjustable DPI. The reason being, is that I bought a Logitech G7 gaming mouse ~4 years ago, or when they first came out, and paid a hefty price of ~$80 USD for it thinking the adjustable DPI (400, 800, 1600 DPI I think ) would help me with fine movement in certain games when needed. This is not the case, and actually, all it really did when turning up the DPI was make the mouse more twitchy. Maybe the screen resolution I play at is not large enough, but this has been my experience.

    For the above reason I was disappointed, albeit briefly until I got used to the mouse, and just left the mouse on the medium DPI setting. A few things to note however . . . The G7 is wireless (2.4Ghz wireless), has very fine control once you become accustomed to it. Enough that you can *easily* use it for fine pixel pushing in Photoshop (and yes I also own a pen / tablet too). Last but definitely not least the darned thing is several years old, and is still making the owner ( me ) very happy.

    Anyhow my point here is that in order for this mouse to make *me* happy, it would have to meet, or exceed the above "standards". e.g wireless, fine mouse control, and longevity. I suspect that some people do not like wireless mice, but if Gigabyte made this wireless I figure it would sell well/better. Either way, for me to spend my money on such a thing, it must be wireless.
    Reply
  • sotoa - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    Does the software sense what program you're in? From the pics it seems so.
    So if I launch the game, and I have button 4 set as CTR-z and button 5 to CTR-x, will that work? Even if the game doesn't understand button 4&5?
    I think the mx518 has that feature, but I hate cordless mice.
    Reply
  • aeternitas - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - link

    Saying you hate cordless mice is like saying you hate automobiles based on a few cheap car brands. Reply
  • sotoa - Thursday, June 18, 2009 - link

    Nope, I don't go for cheap, I go for quality.
    1)I don't like how cordless run out of power,
    2)the internal battery dieing after about 1-2 years, therefore force to buy a new one (or in others... replace the battery),
    3)I prefer the response of a corded one.

    Cordless, if not needed, are not the green way to go either.
    Reply
  • yyrkoon - Thursday, June 18, 2009 - link

    If you can not take one battery out of the mouse, put it in the charger/base station, and put the other back into the mouse( yes, two batteries ), then you're very hard to please. This is something that logitech did with the G7 1600 DPI mouse ( which I own ), and is something that you only need worry about 1-2 times a day( swapping batteries that is ). Depends on how often you use the mouse, and for how long. My G7 is also ~4 years old, and while the batteries do not hold a charge as long, they still work great. As for the "response", there is no input lag what-so-ever.

    Cordless mice are not any less green if you choose the right one. But you have to ask yourself how green you're really being if all you do is sit in front of a monitor, playing games all day.
    Reply
  • sotoa - Thursday, June 18, 2009 - link

    I can't game as much as I'd like. I work over 14 hrs a day, 70hrs/wk.

    I only took the time to post and read the article because I was also thinking about using this for work. So if it senses the program I'm in, I can click a button to execute a certain macro/or key, but only in that application. To avoid repetitive tasks in my work application.

    My belief is that even though some things are geared for gaming, they usually excel in other areas besides gaming. If a gaming mouse is great, then it should be great for work usually.
    Reply
  • yyrkoon - Thursday, June 18, 2009 - link

    "My belief is that even though some things are geared for gaming, they usually excel in other areas besides gaming. If a gaming mouse is great, then it should be great for work usually."

    Thats exactly what I meant In my post under yours here. I am a hobbyist image retoucher, and require a pen and tablet to do a lot of the stuff I like to do. However, with the mouse that I have (previously mentioned) I can do some of the stuff I'd normally do with the tablet, with the mouse instead. It is a little slower, and more prone to over/under correcting, but in a pinch it works fine.

    I purchased the mouse thinking it would make my gaming more fun, and enjoying, which it did, but not in the way I anticipated. Then as an added bonus as you and I both already have said, it has made my over all computing experience more pleasurable as well. Not to mention the fact that I did not have to buy another mouse over the course of 3.5-4 years . . . which is something that can be a pain if you're really picky with your input devices like I am.
    Reply
  • Dantte - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    "Gigabyte also allows dpi on-the-fly adjustments of 800, 1600, 3200, and 4000 compared to 400, 800, and 2000 on the G5."

    It should be noted that these are default settings. In the G5 software (Setpoint), you can add 2 more on-the-fly adjustments and tweak the dpi to any setting you desire, giving you a total of 5 adjustments with the G5 compared to the M8000's 4 adjustments. I dont think it was mentioned, but you can also adjust the USB report-rate for the G5 in Setpoint.
    Reply
  • Gary Key - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    I clarified that statement to include the default on-the-fly settings and added in the G5's additional DPI tweaks. One paragraph down I did mention the report rates being adjustable on both mice. :) Reply
  • kzage - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    Good review, I enjoyed it. Reply
  • Socaddict - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    Considering that the G5 is at least three years old, with a two year old revision. I know that they are at similar price points, but in terms of feature set and the like, isn't the G9 a more appllicable comparison, at least in terms of age and expectations.

    Over here in the UK, theres little difference in pricing between the gigabyte, G5 and G9,

    On the subject of being able to install software, then uninstall, the G9 also offers that feature, as you can save profiles, macros, etc to the mouse, and carry only that with you. I've carried my G9 settings across two XP installs, and now on a Windows 7 RC1 install, and its working perfectly, with all the macros I had saved.
    Reply
  • XtAzY - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    Can you guys review the Roccat Kone mouse? It looks pretty cool compare to this one and has many good reviews in the European countries. Reply
  • XtAzY - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    Oops forgot the link to the site:

    http://www.roccat.org">http://www.roccat.org
    Reply
  • nubie - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    Interesting. But . . .

    For $50 you can get a dual-core 45nm 2MB level 2 cache Intel processor. This mouse would need to feed me unlimited cheetos, pizza and root beer to make up the value-for-money.

    I have a problem with mouse drivers. I think they are useless. Then again I think any "driver" that needs a widget running after you have set whatever settings it needs (and then never touch the thing again, ever) is a stupid proposition.

    Why can't the functionality be embedded in a simple driver that operates within the OS (or in hardware on the Mouse itself). Run the program, set the mouse, delete the program.

    Move it to a MAC or Linux or Playstation 3 and it will still keep the settings, no "drivers" necessary.
    I am very function over form, it should just work without the crappy blech. I mostly make do with $3 Logitech optical mice, but I don't game or anything else (CG/Photo manip./CAD) 99% of the time. You plug it in, it moves the cursor, scrolls the webpage, selects or brings up a context menu, rinse repeat.
    Reply
  • jordanclock - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    The people that spend $50 on a mouse don't spend $50 on a processor (unless they spend four times as much on cooling to overclock it to extreme levels), so I don't think that is necessarily an accurate comparison. I agree with your point about these "mouse apps" that are necessary to get full use of all the features. I am almost positive I read a review of a mouse that does exactly what you describe: The widget program is only run to change the settings of the mouse, then they're saved to the mouse. I can't remember what mouse it was for the life of me, but I do remember wanting to buy it for that reason. Reply
  • overzealot - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    "Gigabyte also allows dpi on-the-fly adjustments of 800, 1600, 3200, and 4000 compared to 400, 800, and 2000 on the G5."

    I think this is a bit out of place, considering you can have 1 to 5 sensitivity settings in the range from 400 - 2000 on the G5 (not indicated in article), and similarly programmable settings on the GHOST (as indicated later in the article).
    Reply
  • jordanclock - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    But the GHOST has two settings that are higher than the G5 has available. It is completely relevant. Is it particularly useful? That hasn't been objectively determined because we don't know at what DPI value that other limitations become bigger factors. Reply
  • Ecmaster76 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    Since everything is slow, it might be a good time to review sound cards, periphreals, etc. Those things are important too.

    BTW The GHOST logo reminds me of Spawn *a lot*.
    Reply
  • JohnMD1022 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    1. Do you think it will show up in Best Buy?

    2. Ive had a couple of wireless mice. They were OK until they failed, or lost synch, whichever came first.

    3. What's wrong with wired? My wife hated the CAT 5 cable across the floor, and had to have wireless. Her wired connection never went down.

    4. I'm not a gamer, so all the extra buttons are a PITA. I use a Logitech LX3 (and an IBM Model M keyboard). I've used Logitech mice for over 20 years. Give me a fast laser mouse with no extras and maybe I'll buy one.
    Reply
  • doncerdo1 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    Hmmm so Anandtech now makes mice reviews...not so long ago this site wouldn't have time to do such a thing as there were actually interesting reviews or articles being made. Sad state of affairs. Miss the good ol days. Reply
  • Gasaraki88 - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    Wow, you are such an idiot. Anandtech always had reviews and articles on anything computer related. Reply
  • aeternitas - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    You are an idiot. Stop coming here, we need less of you. Reply
  • Lord 666 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    In 2009, they still make corded mice? Reply
  • MamiyaOtaru - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    I HATE cordless mice.

    Aside from the lag issue that makes them useless for gaming, I've never used one that had perfect connectivity. Always replacing batteries or recharging and fiddling with antenna placement :( I'd rather not worry about that crap.
    Reply
  • ap90033 - Wednesday, August 05, 2009 - link

    I hate dumb uninformed comments like these... Razor Mamba = Wireless Gaming mouse 1ms response 5200DPI and its GREAT... Reply
  • aeternitas - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - link

    I HATE computers.

    Aside from taking up the space of a large garage, they are hot and clunky and the hard drives are the size of my refrigerator!

    How about jumping to the year 2009, kid.
    Reply
  • mindless1 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    You didn't realize a corded mouse is more appropriate for a high-end product? The lagginess of cordless mice doesn't seem like it's much of a detriment to lower performance mice but the better the mouse the more you notice it.

    Plus, contrary to Gigabyte's idea about adding weights, some people (myself included) want a mouse as light as possible so long as it doesn't effect material or construction quality. Even with a Li-Ion battery you simply cannot build a wireless mouse as light as a corded one when it comes to weight actually moved (entire cord does not move when mouse itself is moved).

    I happen to use a cordless myself for everyday tasks so I don't feel I'm biased when I switch to the corded mouse for gaming.
    Reply
  • ap90033 - Wednesday, August 05, 2009 - link

    What a dumb comment, or I am guessing you have not tried out the Razor Mamba for example. I and my friends cant tell the difference between it plugged in directly or used wireless. Of course having a 1ms response helps I bet. Anyway just because your mouse sucks at gaming and is wireless doesnt give you the right to condemn EVERY Wireless Mouse. Sheesh. Reply
  • mindless1 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    I should have written you can't build a cordless as light and have the battery last for any good amount of runtime, in theory a radio could be downsized enough that by itself it is no heavier than the amount of cord a corded mouse moves, although all my Logitech cordless mice are still heavier even without the batteries in them, if contrasting once you take the steel weight out of the corded ones that they screw to the top of the shell. Reply
  • Samus - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    I love my corded OCZ Equalizer. It also cost less than 20 bucks and has been blinking along that lonely mousepad trail for years. Reply
  • cosmotic - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    Are you serious? It's hideous! Why are they custom painting their driver window? You should not be reinforcing this sort of crap behavior. Reply
  • teohhanhui - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    Logitech does that too... Reply
  • mindless1 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    Does that REALLY matter? Reply
  • aeternitas - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    Some people like their UIs to be standardized. I for one agree. Im getting sick of utilities that think they are unique by giving me a hideous UI.

    It doesnt effect crucial things, but it DOES matter.
    Reply
  • ahmshaegar - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    Even Microsoft doesn't standardize their UI; why should Gigabyte? Reply
  • niva - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    Umm... actually they do, everything in the windows OS has a generic look and feel ranging from explorer to the admin tools. I totally agree with this comment, Asus does the same crap too (example: the asus update utility.) I'm all for allowing apps to be skinned but they should come with a default skin that utilizes the OSs selected look and feel. If you're going to skin something by default at least do a good job at it. Reply
  • MamiyaOtaru - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    They do? Media Player and Office spring to mind immediately as apps that don't match the others. Reply
  • aeternitas - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - link

    WMP and Office are consistent with what they are doing and with the general Vista pioneered UI. When you up a window to open up a file, you dont see a bullshit Win 3.1 menu system pop up. You see a standardized and easily manageable windows from the MS framework.

    Stop arguing, you're wrong.
    Reply
  • ahmshaegar - Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - link

    A year later! I'm baaack!

    And that last comment was highly unnecessary. Boo hoo. But anyway...

    Let's dig into your comment. You said something about consistent for what they are doing. Well, okay, but I was under the impression we were talking about consistency with Windows (meaning consistency with Explorer, the Windows file manager.) So I'm not sure what consistency for what they are doing means. You also mention they're consistent with Vista. I'm not aware of Vista making use of Ribbons extensively. And then you bring up Windows 3.1-style dialog boxes. What does that have to do with anything?

    "You see a standardized and easily manageable windows from the MS framework." Okay. But if you grew up with Windows 3.1, that would be easily manageable. And Windows 3.1 was standardized, too, to some extent. And since it's a Microsoft product, wouldn't it also be some kind of "MS framework"?

    Moving on....

    We have Windows Explorer (by that, I mean the file manager.) We have Office. We have WMP. We have many random applications. In general, if you run some random old application, it's going to look like Windows Explorer.

    Of course Office is generally internally consistent, and so is WMP. But the point is that Office is not consistent with Windows. Now, I haven't used the latest versions of Office, (can't afford it, so I'm stuck with OpenOffice) but I am aware it uses that Ribbons interface or whatever they call it. I think some other apps use ribbons... Paint? But the point is it's not consistent with Explorer.

    So Office is its own program, if you will, and so is this mouse driver. The mouse driver is not consistent with Explorer, and neither is Office. In that sense, they're not consistent.

    On the other hand, if you want to change the boundaries of the argument and say that Office is internally consistent with itself, then I guess we'll just have to say this mouse driver is internally consistent with itself.

    But let's forget about consistency for a moment. I couldn't care less if all my apps are consistent, because certain specialized apps may require a different UI paradigm for maximum efficiency. If the UI allows me to work better, then I'm all for it. Of course, the tradeoff is a learning curve, but life is full of those. Unfortunately, I can't argue that this UI is better.

    Basically, think Media Center. Explorer and other desktop applications are designed for use at a desk, or at least on a computer monitor. The user's eyes are generally no more than half a meter away. Media Center is for use on a TV, so of course the interface is different (and not consistent with the rest of Windows.)

    But the argument was merely about consistency, and on that point, we have Office and WMP differing from Explorer (the file manager) for reasons that are debatable, and Media Center differing from Explorer for good reason.

    Anyway, I'm aware nobody is ever going to read this comment, but it had to be posted.
    Reply
  • jordanclock - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    Mayhaps you could set up something like this fellow did for objective mouse testing: http://www.esreality.com/?a=longpost&id=126567...">http://www.esreality.com/?a=longpost&id=126567... .

    Seems like an adequate method to me. A better rig would be able to test multiple directions, but I think that the turn-table method would give a fair representation of the "raw performance" of a mouse.
    Reply
  • dvinnen - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    I was going to post the same article.

    I don't like it when hardware sites review mice as they generally only give a personal opinion on the mouse. While that can be helpful for the feel of the mouse it doesn't truly address the performance of the mouse and seem to harp on the useless features of the mouse. If you are a serious gamer you should be more concern about negative acceleration and acceleration in general then a weight system or on the fly DPI switching.

    In the article you talk about the software and the fine-tune DPI changing but ignore the fact that in all likely hood that it is simply adjusting the courser speed which is bad. The reason you have high DPI is so that speed can increase without the increase in aliasing and skipping and loss in precision. This happens when you simply just increase the speed. Who would actually want different X and Y axis speeds anyways?

    Generally you want as low of sensitivity as you can stand while in a game for increase aiming precision with no positive acceleration (it screws with consistency of one swipe of your hand) and absolutely no negative acceleration (same problem with consistency but worse as if you swipe to fast the mouse won't track at all and your courser won't move.).
    Reply
  • MamiyaOtaru - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link

    I was going to mention the same thing. DPI over 1600 is overkill for almost anyone, super super high sensitivy gamers excepted. Max speed with perfect control is far more important, and at least at the time of the esreality article, lasers weren't up to snuff in that department.

    I want to know if a mouse will handle fast movements accurately, not how I can cover 3 screen widths of pixels in one inch.
    Reply
  • goinginstyle - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link

    Really liked the review and the ZZ Top reference. I actually know something more about this mouse than what is on the Gigabyte website and some other one page reviews. Is there anyway to test the actual USB report rates on an AMD750 chipset to see if there are still lags that were present on the SB600? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now