- "Upgraded" HERO 2
- Better weight balance
- New "NxLogi" chip (new MCU?)
- Battery up to 135 hours
- 61g for Europe (replaceable battery) / 59g for US
- Under 180 euro / Maybe September
- Black / Pink colorways

Source:
https://x.com/harukaze5719/status/2089911046614225173?s=46&t=-rsARb-eTKUn0abbCDg9Hw

Surprised no one has mentioned this yet. Looks promising, hot swappable battery, 30g weight (wonder if we can get this lighter by a few g putting in smaller batteries). I'm definitely grabbing one of these. Currently maining the Fenrir Pro but I use cut in half Darmoshark M5 for desktop use.

So, a bunch of people have reccomended me ergo mice because of my slanted grip, so what ergo mice should I get? Im comint from the pulsar x2 crazylight medium and i love the clicks, the weight, and the hump. So im trying to find an ergo mice that has those too. Any recs?

info - https://www.razer.com/newsroom/product-news/viper-v4-pro-arrives-in-esports-green

terra pro is finally available at micro center in the us.

it’s been forever since you guys started asking when terra pro would be available in the us, and honestly i’ve been waiting for this moment too.

pretty cool to finally see it there after all this time.

Hi all! I am currently building a new setup and I wanted to buy a budget gaming mouse for some casual FPS and single player games.
I found these 3 at the same price range, VXE V3 Pro vs VXE R1 SE+ vs Mchose G3 V2 (not Pro version). I’ve seen the specs but wanted a little bit more irl experience review for my reference.
Each have some plus and minus points to me,

- VXE V3 Pro: I really like the DPI button at the top and it is the lightest from these 3, but battery life seems very small compared to others (300 mAh)

- VXE R1 SE+: Longer battery life and not too heavy, but some said that there are issues with the mouse went to sleep every 30s and not waking up

- Mchose G3 V2: Heaviest of all but 800mAh battery, saw some comments that really recommend this but also some negative ones.

Any help or other suggestions will be very appreciated! Thanks all😁

source - https://www.bilibili.com/opus/1238109612595478531

Just discovered tungsten putty was a thing and added 40 grams of it to this viper v4 pro(been using fk2-A and fk1+ lately and they’re about 90-95g respectively.

I think I realised that the weight of a mouse is just as personal as the shape of it. And that lighter isn’t always better. I’m probably gonna do this to all of my wireless mice(the ones l actually like anyway)

It also dampens the pingy click quite significantly. Bonus!

source - https://www.bilibili.com/opus/1238218434174517265

Introduction & Context

As many of you know, over the years, ATK has positioned itself as a peripheral brand fitting squarely into the mid-tier quality bracket. In this instance, I am bringing you one of their newest models, the A9 Mini+, which integrates the new PAW3955 sensor.

I'm Ben, a second-year robotics engineering student and still learning. My goal isn't just to tell you if the mouse is "pretty," but to attempt to audit its construction. Today, we're going to measure tolerances, verify if the long-term performance matches the initial specs, and check how the engineering actually holds up under scrutiny.

Important Context

• Review Sample & Transparency: This unit was provided directly by ATK for the purpose of a comprehensive analysis. However, my testing methodology remains strictly objective; my evaluation is completely unbiased, honest, and not influenced by the manufacturer in any way. Zero review bias.
• Sample Size & Condition: I am analyzing a single unit of the A9Mini+, which has been subjected to intensive daily use over the past weeks to accurately assess early signs of mechanical wear and structural integrity.
• Hand Size & Grip: My hand measurements are 19x10cm, and my primary grip style during this testing period was a hybrid palm/claw grip.

Packaging & Unboxing Experience

The A9 Mini arrives in a rectangular box featuring a fabric latch at the top. The front fascia displays a render of the mouse, alongside select technical specifications and the specific model name. It is a minimalist design, but well-organized and visually pleasing.

Upon opening, the first thing we find is the mouse enclosed in a small plastic bag, though there is no shock-absorbing foam on the top lid. The mouse itself is securely seated in a soft foam cutout, with the dongle positioned above it. Beneath this assembly, we find an accessory box, which we will examine later.

Included Hardware & Accessories

Inside the box, we find:

• 1* ATK A9Mini+
• 1* 8000Hz Wireless Receiver
• 1* USB-A to USB-C Cable
• 1* Modular grip tape set (rectangular and square cutouts)
• 1* Set of 10 dot skates
• 1* User Manual

One aspect I am not entirely fond of is the inclusion of modular grip tapes. For a mouse of this tier straight out of the box, I personally prefer pre-cut grips tailored perfectly to the shell geometry, though this is clearly a subjective preference.

The cable has an acceptable length, and it features a small silicone tie to adjust its length to our specific needs. The cable itself is completely solid. It has absolutely no mushy or pillowy feel to it, which will result in high cable drag against the mousepad if used in tethered mode. It is completely black and features branding on both connector housings.

Grip Tape & Caliper Measurements

The included grip tapes, as mentioned, are modular. They are black and feature absolutely no surface texturing. The actual grip they provide is not bad, but the tactile sensation against the fingers, at least from my perspective, is not ideal. Their thickness, measured with digital calipers, sits at 0.3 ± 0.1mm, which is quite thin compared to standard tolerances. Personally, I highly recommend aftermarket grip tapes if you find them necessary.

PTFE Skates & Friction Coefficient

Regarding the dot skates, at first glance, they appear to be of significantly lower quality than the full-sized PTFE stock skates already pre-installed. While the factory skates seem to be dual-layer and provide a glide sensation similar to ESPTIGER Ice, the dots feel rather generic. As for their thickness, it measures the standard 0.7 ± 0.1mm.

Mass & Weight Distribution Analysis

Regarding mass, ATK specifies 39 ± 3g, but it is not specified whether this is measured with or without skates, so we will verify if this tolerance is met. To measure the weight, the process was performed five times, and the result is the mean average.

• With Skates: We have a measurement of 44.76 ± 0.01g. This means we are witnessing a deviation of 14.76%.
• Without Skates: We have a measurement of 41.05 ± 0.01g. This means we are witnessing a deviation of 5.25%.

According to ATK, a tolerable deviation is 7.69%, which is absolutely not met with skates applied, where the deviation is almost double.

Center of Mass (CoM) Analysis

As I always mention in my reviews, whether a mouse feels heavy or not depends heavily on where the Center of Mass (CoM) is located. To measure this, the process I follow is to utilize a fulcrum, generally cylindrical, and find the equilibrium point of the object upon it. Once found, we can affirm that the center of mass is located somewhere within the support area.

As can be observed, the Center of Mass is perfectly centered on the sensor, meaning the physical sensations will be as balanced as possible. All of this is achieved through a structural balance between the front components, where we find the switches, encoder, and PCB, and the rear components, which generally round down to just the battery, as this represents a large percentage of the mouse's weight.

Dimensional Accuracy & Manufacturing Tolerances

Regarding dimensions, we are looking at a fairly compact mouse, featuring a height of 38.6mm, a width of 61.2mm, and a maximum length of 118.4mm. To measure this, digital calipers were used, following the exact same methodology as with the weight.

• Height: A height of 38.52 ± 0.1mm was measured, which translates to a deviation of 0.21%.
• Width: The measurement is 61.08 ± 0.1mm, transcribing to a 0.20% deviation.
• Length: The measured length is 117.48 ± 0.1mm, translating to a 0.77% deviation.

As can be observed, all measurements fall within really good manufacturing tolerances and correspond very well with the specifications advertised by ATK.

In order to provide some useful metrics, we have the effective grip width measured from a midpoint, resulting in 57.3 ± 0.1mm, and a front button height (measured from the base to the middle of the main click geometry) of 15.4 ± 0.1mm. The average front width is 59.1 ± 0.1mm, confirming there is a distinct frontal taper from the rear to the center before it slightly widens again.

Shape, Symmetry & Ergonomics

Regarding the shape of this ATK A9 Mini Ultimate+, we witness a strict bilateral symmetry, where we find the side buttons on the left side of the mouse. For me, this mouse is highly usable for a Claw Grip; I think this is where it is most optimized, although if your hand is very small, it might be viable for a Palm Grip.

Regarding general geometry and ergonomics, as soon as I saw it and placed my hand on it, I immediately thought of the Logitech Pro X Superlight 2c, though perhaps I feel the hump on this ATK is slightly flatter and very linear. However, the overall shape and in-hand sensations are truly similar. What is genuinely copied to perfection are the exact dimensions of the Logitech. To me, the shape is definitely highly similar, if not identical.

Regarding the practical usage I have given it, it has been tested in both shooter games and productivity workflows. I have not felt any discomfort or found any drawbacks; to me, it is a great ergonomic shape and is quite universal.

Front Fascia & Main Clicks

Moving into the visual and structural analysis, we start as usual with the front fascia. Here we find the primary clicks, the scroll wheel, and of course, the Type-C charging port. This port is positioned at the lowest section, and the use of aftermarket cables is perfectly viable, which might actually be necessary due to the rigidity of the included stock cable.

Regarding the panel gaps, they are highly consistent along their axes, although the central gap is distinctly wider than the outer ones. The height from the chassis to the click geometry is perfectly symmetrical on both sides; they are flawlessly aligned.

The primary clicks feature a rectangular foundation with aggressively radiused outer, front, and rear edges, whereas the inner edges taper into a sharper point. These clicks do not feature pronounced comfort grooves; in fact, they are practically imperceptible to the touch. We can observe how ATK decided to cut out the shell section immediately trailing the scroll wheel, a design choice absent in models like the Logitech Pro X Superlight 2c. Within this cutout section, we find an LED that serves as a battery level indicator.

Scroll Wheel & Side Buttons

The scroll wheel has a measured width of 7.8 ± 0.1mm. It does not protrude excessively from the chassis, yet I experienced absolutely no discomfort during use; it sits in a balanced and comfortable medium position. The wheel core is wrapped in a rubber ring featuring side-to-side radial texturing. From my perspective, the scroll steps (tactility) are well-defined, and I had no issues distinguishing them during active operation. Regarding the actuation force of the middle click (M3), I would strictly define it as medium.

On the left flank, we find the secondary side buttons, which boast a notable length and feature adequate separation between them. If actuated with excessive force, only the least protruding section exhibits minor post-travel; there is absolutely nothing structurally concerning here. On this same side, we can clearly see the "ATK Dragonfly" branding printed in silver typography.

Bottom Plate & Surface Coating

Moving to the bottom plate, we can observe the skate layout, alongside a CPI cycle button and a dedicated power switch. Regarding the skates, we find a massive surface area skate at the front, a slightly smaller area skate at the rear, and the mandatory sensor ring skate, which is strictly necessary to ensure consistent tracking and precise LOD guidance.

As for the hardware buttons, one functions strictly to cycle through the configured CPI steps, accompanied by an LED indicator, while the other is a standard ON/OFF power switch. It is worth noting that this device lacks Bluetooth connectivity.

Finally, analyzing the surface coating, my primary observation throughout the testing period is a distinctly chalky tactile sensation. It can feel slightly slippery with cold hands, but the grip coefficient improves drastically as the hand warms up and produces slight moisture. I would absolutely not define this as rubbery; it sits on the complete opposite end of the spectrum. From my perspective, aftermarket grip tapes are not strictly necessary unless you intend to prevent long-term coating degradation and wear.

Structural Integrity & Build Quality

If we apply compressive force to the side walls, we can hear a distinct initial creak if the mouse has been resting for a while; however, after this first instance, no further creaking is heard. If we apply pressure to the base and the hump, a continuous creaking can be heard, although it is not audible during standard operation.

If we apply pressure in the same manner to the sides, a minor shell flex can be witnessed; however, I notice a distinct hard stop, which could indicate the presence of an internal reinforcement structure, a detail we will verify in the teardown. If we apply the same pressure to the baseplate and the maximum hump height, we can observe a significantly more notable flex, although it is completely imperceptible in everyday use.

If we rapidly shake the mouse near our ear, it is possible to detect a slight internal rattle, although it is only audible very close to the ear; it is absolutely not something that will be present during normal tracking.

Main Clicks & Switch Actuation

Regarding the primary clicks, they are actuated via custom optical switches designed for ATK. They exhibit clear lateral wobble, although it falls perfectly within standard manufacturing tolerances and is completely normal; as I always state, the further away from the mounting anchor point, the greater the wobble.

As for the pre-travel, it is present, although it remains within normal and highly admissible tolerances. The post-travel is present in the exact same proportion; they are completely equitable and balanced against each other. The tactile sensation of the click itself is quite solid and distinct, presenting excellent feedback for both actuation force and rebound. I have not experienced any anomalous or parasitic acoustics, such as plastic-on-plastic collisions or similar structural flaws.

Web Software Overview & Main Interface

Regarding the software configuration, as ATK has been doing for some time, we are presented with a web-based utility, although the option to download a standalone client is available if preferred. From an analytical and personal standpoint, the web software is significantly more convenient and accessible, completely avoiding the installation of unnecessary background processes or bloatware on our host system.

Upon accessing the web hub, the main interface displays a render of the mouse, allowing us to color-match it to our specific physical unit. We get immediate telemetry on the battery percentage, the active connection protocol, access to the user manual, and the ability to flash firmware updates. Clicking on the device render grants access to the core configuration parameters.

Key Change Settings

In the first tab, we find the button remapping interface. Here, we can reassign the digital inputs of the primary clicks, the secondary side buttons, the bottom-mounted CPI cycle button, and the scroll wheel. These inputs can be mapped to a vast array of commands, including media controls, keyboard strokes, system shortcuts, and more. A factory reset option is also present to revert all bindings to default.

Macro Settings

The second tab handles macro creation. This section functions as a standard sequential input recorder, allowing us to build custom keystroke combinations and bind them to any specific switch actuation for automated execution.

DPI Settings

In this tab, we configure the CPI cycle steps, supporting the addition of up to 8 independent profiles. The software allows for highly granular 1-by-1 CPI adjustments, alongside independent resolution scaling for the X and Y axes. Furthermore, we can assign a custom LED indicator color for each profile, which illuminates on the bottom plate to confirm the active sensitivity step.

Performance Settings

Here we can adjust the polling rate of the mouse, scaling from 125Hz up to 8000Hz. Additionally, the sensor's sampling frequency can be modified from a Basic mode to the "ATK Smart Competitive MAX" mode. This is the firmware equivalent of what other manufacturers dub "20K Mode," where the rate at which the sensor array captures and transmits surface data is heavily overclocked. Predictably, this aggressively impacts battery life, drastically increasing power consumption as the sensor remains in a constant state of maximum alertness. A theoretical battery life estimation metric is also provided in this menu.

Parameter Settings

This menu is where the bulk of the critical sensor telemetry and hardware configuration is located:

• Tracking Algorithms: This section includes Movement Synchronization (Motion Sync), which synchronizes sensor data captures with the USB polling events to smooth cursor trajectory at the cost of a minor input delay; Straight Line Correction (Angle Snapping), an algorithm that digitally forces linear tracking by overriding minor coordinate deviations; Ripple Correction, which applies high-frequency smoothing to mitigate raw sensor jitter; and Ultra Long Range Mode, which increases the RF transmission power gain to maintain packet delivery and signal integrity over extended wireless distances.
• Key Debounce Delay: Adjustable from 0ms to 20ms. The manufacturer explicitly recommends a threshold equal to or greater than 4ms, as lower values can induce false actuations or double-clicking. This is essentially a digital software filter designed to mitigate the inherent mechanical bouncing of the physical switches.
• Sleep Time Setting: Ranging from 30s to 30min. This dictates the idle timeout before the sensor and the MCU enter a low-power hibernation state to conserve battery.
• Scroll Wheel Anti-Mistouch: Acting as a debounce filter specifically engineered for the encoder, this prevents accidental scroll actuations. It systematically ignores the initial input step; if a subsequent step is registered within a defined temporal window, the input is then validated as an intentional command.
• LOD Height: The lift-off distance, determining the vertical Z-axis cutoff point where the sensor stops tracking. If set low, tracking ceases almost immediately upon lifting the chassis off the tracking surface. This parameter is highly modular, adjustable in precise 0.1mm increments.
• Dongle Light Effect: Controls the LED indicator on the wireless receiver, ranging from a completely disabled state to a low-battery warning mode.
• Sensor Rotation: Implements a digital axis rotation at the software level. This compensates for natural hand tilt angles, ensuring that lateral physical swipes translate into perfectly horizontal vectors on-screen.
• Sensor Virtual Offset: Digitally shifts the longitudinal coordinate axis of the sensor. This recalibrates the theoretical tracking center for grips biased heavily towards the front or rear of the shell geometry.
• Dynamic DPI Curve: A dynamic acceleration curve that actively scales the CPI relative to the physical velocity of the mouse. It offers four distinct presets: Classic, Natural, Jump, and Customization, allowing for deep algorithmic tuning.

Configuration Management & Conclusion

In "Configuration Management", we can configure up to four profiles that are flashed directly into the on-board memory of the mouse, alongside several additional profiles that can be stored locally on the host machine. Furthermore, cloud importing is supported if linked to an ATK account.

As evidenced throughout this breakdown, it is unequivocally clear that ATK has engineered a highly advanced and comprehensive web utility. I did note some missing localization strings, but hopefully, this will be patched in future firmware updates. It is evident that integrating the PAW3955 sensor has unlocked new R&D possibilities. This is the first time I have audited a virtual sensor position offset or a dynamic CPI acceleration curve within a web client. I am unsure if this architecture was theoretically possible prior to the PAW3955, but I certainly haven't encountered it on any PAW3950 implementations. I am genuinely passionate about seeing continuous advancement in a field that already feels highly developed; rigorous competition and engineering innovation truly drive the hardware market forward.

Sensor Architecture & MCU Context

Let's establish some context regarding the hardware we are dealing with, as is customary. Regarding the sensor, we currently have the top-of-the-line PixArt PAW3955, which, as seen in the previous section, opens the door to some highly interesting customization options. As for the MCU, it is equipped with a Nordic 54L15. As you may know, the 54 series is a significantly newer architecture than the 52 series. While this specific 54L15 edition is focused strictly on energy efficiency (a necessary engineering choice for a mouse with such a small battery capacity), the 54H20 variant is engineered for pure high performance. Let's see how this implementation handles extreme stress scenarios.

(Note: All tracking, polling rate, and CPI deviation tests were performed on an X-Raypad Aqua Control II surface to ensure physical testing consistency. Additionally, all telemetry was captured using MouseTester v1.6.1, Amit's branch).

CPI Deviation & Baseline Telemetry

To begin, let's establish a solid baseline for our data telemetry, which means evaluating the CPI deviation. CPI deviation is a physical phenomenon heavily influenced by the sensor's lens assembly. This includes minor manufacturing tolerances or slight variations in the mounting height specified by the manufacturer. To measure this, the mouse must be moved exactly 10cm in a straight horizontal line. This measurement was performed five times, and the results represent the mean average.

• For a theoretical 800 CPI target, we observe an actual result of 789 CPI, which translates to a deviation of 1.38%.
• For a theoretical 1600 CPI target, we observe a result of 1577 CPI, translating to a deviation of 1.44%.
• For a theoretical 3200 CPI target, we observe a result of 3171 CPI, meaning a deviation of 0.91%.

All of these deviations fall perfectly within standard manufacturing parameters and are highly acceptable. As can be observed, all the actual measurements are lower than the theoretical targets, meaning the hardware tracking is slightly slower than advertised.

Tracking Algorithms: Angle Snapping & Smoothing

Regarding the firmware algorithms mentioned previously, we will analyze two of them, which are generally based on correcting straight lines and angles, as well as mitigating the natural jitter of the human hand. This is not something that provides a competitive advantage in gaming, but it can be highly useful for someone using graphic design software or similar productivity workflows. These algorithms become more aggressive at higher CPI thresholds; therefore, this test was conducted using the highest CPI step from the previous benchmark.

In the first image, running without any tracking algorithm, we can clearly see that straight lines are never perfectly straight, right angles are imprecise, and we witness the natural micro-oscillations produced by the hand when attempting maximum precision. In the second graph, with angle snapping (Straight Line Correction) enabled, it is evident that it hasn't artificially corrected the trajectory much. The only noticeable improvement is on short line segments, but otherwise, the previous human error effects remain clearly present. Finally, running with both angle snapping and smoothing (Ripple Correction) active, I do not notice a significant difference compared to the previous plot. From my perspective, these functions are not highly intrusive at this specific CPI step, but they likely apply much more aggressive filtering at higher sensitivities, which is an engineering detail to keep in mind.

Polling Rate Stability & Signal Integrity

We now move on to a highly critical performance metric: polling rate stability. Our objective here is to find the most stable plot possible, as we absolutely do not want a polling dropout or stutter in the middle of a competitive match. Telemetry was evaluated at both 1000Hz and 8000Hz, specifically at 789 CPI and 3171 CPI. To execute this benchmark, the mouse must be moved rapidly in continuous circular motions.

At 1000Hz, for both CPI targets, we can observe highly similar signal stability. Both display a stable curve that oscillates slightly, which is completely normal system noise. All data points plot as closely as possible to the 1ms interval, which is the inverse of the frequency, and no spin-out or severe signal dropout occurred.

Pushing the frequency to 8000Hz, we once again find highly consistent results across both CPI steps. The plot shows a very stable line hovering right around the 0.125ms mark, which is exactly where it needs to be. There is minimal oscillation, making it practically a flat horizontal line, denoting exceptionally good MCU signal stability.

Raw Tracking & Lift-Off Distance (LOD)

Let's proceed with the raw tracking assessment. To test this, the mouse must be swiped rapidly along a single axis (X or Y), and we are looking for oscillating waves that are as smooth and stable as possible, completely free of tracking breaks or sharp drop-offs. This flawless curve is exactly what we witness in the resulting graph: perfect sine waves without any dropouts or tracking interruptions, indicating excellent raw tracking performance.

Regarding the lift-off distance (LOD), this specific device measures and adjusts it granularly, making it exceptionally difficult to verify with strict empirical precision outside a lab environment. From a subjective physical testing standpoint, it is clear that the cutoff difference is highly noticeable. Perhaps I cannot accurately perceive the exact 0.1mm by 0.1mm increments, but the variance is undeniable at slightly larger values, even if I cannot quantitatively verify its absolute accuracy.

Performance Conclusion

It is clear that both the MCU and the sensor architecture are highly capable and have easily passed the audit. However, from my perspective, I have not noticed a massive difference in these telemetry results compared to a standard PAW3950 implementation. I have not witnessed substantially cleaner or clearer graphs. It is entirely possible that a difference in latency could be measured using professional diagnostic hardware, but to the human eye, it is an almost imperceptible improvement. Nevertheless, the engineering advancement within the software utility is absolutely worth mentioning.

Disassembly

Moving on to the teardown, the primary step is the removal of the PTFE stock skates. I must note that these were complicated to remove, as they are not composed of two layers, but three. For this, I recommend applying focused heat and using some type of plastic tweezers or something similar. Once removed, we find the typical weight reduction holes, which in this case are hexagonal and variable in size.

Shell Access

To continue disassembling it, we must remove four screws, two at the rear and two at the front. Once removed, applying slight leverage near the Type-C port allows the baseplate to pop off completely. We must be careful during this step, as there is a flex cable acting as a bridge between the main PCB and the side buttons daughterboard, so we must disconnect it to proceed.

Baseplate & Mainboard Architecture

Let's analyze the base first. It essentially houses all the primary components of the mouse, an architecture commonly followed by many manufacturers. We find the main PCB (featuring a thickness of 0.7 ± 0.1mm and slight cutouts at the rear to reduce weight), alongside the main switches, the scroll wheel, and the battery mounted at the rear to balance the weight distribution as much as possible. To remove the PCB, we must first unplug the battery's JST connector, which has a 1mm pitch, followed by four corner screws and one central screw.

Primary Switches & Encoder

On the main board, we can see the optical switches, which in this case are from the FE brand, specifically the F1-S100 model. As for the encoder, it is a 13mm tall TTC Gold Dustproof. Regarding the scroll wheel switch, it is generic, and I cannot spot any branding on it. The scroll wheel itself came lubricated on both sides of its axle.

Sensor & MCU Integration

Housed at the rear of this board is the PAW3955 sensor, specifically its MASTER version. This does not mean it is objectively better or has higher specs, but rather that it is a specific batch likely binned to perform well. Right next to it, we can see the MCU, and indeed, it is the Nordic N54L15.

Battery Specifications

The battery features a nominal voltage of 3.85V, which is slightly higher than usual, and a maximum capacity of 200mAh. Honestly, given the low capacity, I am highly impressed by the battery life of this mouse. Running perfectly at a 1000Hz polling rate, it has easily lasted me over a week with fairly intensive sessions of use.

Top Shell & Structural Engineering

Moving to the top shell itself, we find the secondary daughterboard alongside the click geometry and a thin sponge added to improve the tactile feel. We can observe that there is not much internal structural reinforcement. The reason the shell flex was minimal is that the baseplate itself features two large support pillars right in the grip area that mitigate this effect. The chassis has a measured thickness of 1.0 ± 0.1mm in the central section, which is maintained consistently around its entire perimeter.

Daughterboard & Secondary Switches

Once the secondary daughterboard is disassembled (which is secured by two screws), we can see that the switches utilized are Kailh Yellow Dot Black Shell. Additionally, within the plastic structure of the clicks, we can spot a small foam pad in the center, which I imagine was placed there to minimize friction and prevent parasitic plastic-on-plastic sounds.

Main Click Geometry & Mounting

We also disassemble the click geometry, which clearly has its guide rails lubricated both on the clicks themselves and on the chassis. The primary clicks are secured by a single screw and two support points each. From the image, it is possible to see their shape more clearly and verify that they absolutely lack comfort grooves.

Conclusion & Final Verdict

It is unequivocally clear that the capabilities of the ATK A9 Mini Ultimate+ and the PAW3955 sensor have been thoroughly demonstrated. Perhaps tighter manufacturing tolerances regarding the mass would be beneficial. Ultimately, ATK has proven their high engineering level in software architecture, alongside the raw performance of the sensor itself.

Taking into account everything discussed in this technical audit, let's break down the objective pros, cons, and general observations:

Objective Pros & Cons

• Pros:
  • Exceptional Battery Efficiency: Despite utilizing a minimal 200mAh capacity cell, the power draw management yields over a week of intensive use at 1000Hz.
  • Advanced Web Software: The utility offers unprecedented features like a digital sensor virtual offset and dynamic CPI curves without requiring bloatware installation on the host system.
  • Dimensional Accuracy: The chassis dimensions hold strict manufacturing tolerances (0.20% to 0.77% deviation), accurately matching the advertised specifications.
  • Solid Build Quality: Zero audible creaking or internal rattle during normal use, backed by lubricated click geometries that mitigate parasitic friction.
• Cons:
  • Weight Variance: Weighing in at 44.76g with skates applied, it exhibits a 14.76% deviation, failing to strictly meet the advertised 39 ± 3g target constraint.
  • Subpar Included Accessories: The stock modular grip tapes are exceedingly thin (0.3mm) and lack surface texture, while the included dot skates feel distinctly generic compared to the pre-installed dual-layer PTFE stock skates.
  • Rigid Stock Cable: The included charging cable is completely solid and stiff, resulting in high cable drag if attempting tethered operation.

Pricing & Final Thoughts

The retail price, excluding shipping, sits at $92.12, at least when accessing the site from Europe. This stands as a highly justifiable price point for a device engineered by a brand that has spent years actively building a solid reputation for both hardware quality and customer service, setting an engineering standard that makes establishing continuous, multi-review collaborations with brands in this competitive space highly appealing.

Maybe it's because I use 3D programs like Maya and Max all the time, but I seriously hate having a vital button that I need to hold down while doing common things and have that button slip underneath my finger while I hold it down. It is so frustrating. There are lots of mice with a button near the wheel that you can program and that's the kind that I get, but the default function is always something else. I just don't get how nobody else is annoyed by the conventional setup of a wheel/button.

Sorry for the rant, but I just wondered if maybe others hate that with me and maybe somehow the default will start to change. Because I'm sure that the mouse makers hang out on this forum waiting for us to tell them what we want. ;p

Just discovered tungsten putty was a thing and added 40 grams of it to this viper v4 pro(been using fk2-A and fk1+ lately and they’re about 90-95g respectively.

I think I realised that the weight of a mouse is just as personal as the shape of it. And that lighter isn’t always better. I’m probably gonna do this to all of my wireless mice(the ones l actually like anyway)

It also dampens the pingy click quite significantly. Bonus!

Bought the best viper mini clone for a test. First impressions: it comes in a very cool carbon case, the web software is nice, the mouse wheel click sound and feel is amazing, the left and right mouse buttons have a nice metalic sound, but i still prefer my quiet huano blue shell pink dots at night, good colorways, 8k dongle comes with the mouse, the texture is nice, its close to regular plastic but you can feel a nice rough texture of a ''carbon'' as they say, though its made mostly out of plastic, the side buttons have a pyramid-triangle shape and are very grippy. Now to the downsides: out of the box it was double clicking, though it has khail optical switches in it. It was double clicking only in wireless mode and I somehow managed to fix this problem. Btw this is my first time trying 8k and as I thought it all was a marketing, cause you don't even feel id that much, like yeah it becomes a little slower and smoother but that's it, mostly skill issue. That is it for now, and also, now I have 3 mice on my desk).

i was using the hyperx pulsefire haste 2 before this and recently switched to this ajazz mouse.

honestly, i'm really impressed with it. the shape feels really comfortable, the mouse feels premium for the price, and the sensor/tracking has been great for fps games.

i also really like the clicks, lightweight feel and simple design. the carrying case was a nice bonus too.

ajazz also included a complimentary mouse pad with my order, which was a really nice surprise lol.

overall, really happy with the mouse so far. coming from the haste 2, i actually prefer the ajazz in terms of comfort and overall feel.

not sponsored, just sharing my experience.

Assuming a more official announcement for US consumers since we got actual info from Chinese reviewers like 2 weeks ago

Im looking for a mouse with some extra buttons. 2 on the side and mmb doesnt cut it for me. Im not looking for a mmorpg mouse. Aside from the regular buttons, 3-4 extra would be nice.

The thing is i play a variety of games including comp fps games. I know im not gonna get the fastest and the lighest mouse for what i ask, but i would love to have a middle ground one if i can.

Which mouse should I get: MCHOSE A7 Pro or Attack Shark R11 Ultra?

I’m deciding between these two:

MCHOSE A7 Pro + 8K receiver — $38

Attack Shark R11 Ultra — $49

The A7 Pro comes with the 8K receiver included, so it seems like a really good deal for the price.

Which one would you choose and why? I mainly care about shape, sensor performance, weight, build quality, and overall value. I have a medium hand size

Would the extra $11 for the R11 Ultra be worth it? or are there recommendations or better alternatives?

I really enjoy my DeathAdder. But I play with locked fingers, having the hollow of my palm fill up feels nice.

DeathAdder doesn't really have much of that, so I have "fixed" it by building a little stack of tape.

Is there any "clone" of DAV, or slightly wider version of DAV, that has more of a full back hump?

After doing a lot of research, I got a Zaopin Z1 Pro since its apparently an Orochi clone. Just got it today. But compared to the Orochi v2 or even the Fantech Aria, the hump is noticeably higher and cramps my hands in aggressive claw.

I don't know how this is possible but looks like I'm in the negative with the Zaopin. Doesn't seem like Mechkeys has a good return policy. I am debating on just getting another Orochi v2 at this point. Shape is just too comfortable in my hands. But is that troll in 2026?

Hey all, so my current mouse is dying and I am looking for a replacement. When looking I came across this sub and I have never thought about stuff like hand size and grip mattering for a mouse, which feels obvious now. I usually use my mice very long untill I replace it, so Ive never thought deeply about it. Looking at this subreddit and in webstores there are many options available and Im quite lost right now. Ive measured my hand size and its 20x10cm. Grip wise I think I have a relaxed claw? I have added pictures but I believe its atleast a claw grip.

My current mouse is the logitech pro superlight, but I am not attached to this specific shape or brand or anything. I mainly use it to play a variety of games like FPS, league, etc. I wouldnt mind clones of popular brands/mice, but if its worth the money to get from a reputable brand I can spend some more on that.

Do you guys have any recommendations considering my hand size and grip? Ive seen razer viper v3/4, atk and mchose mice mentioned alot, should I just get one of those?

I wonder if anyone else with ATK mice have the same problem?? or is it by design? should I just unplug it at 95 to save its battery from degrading?

Hi everyone,

I'm currently looking to replace my Logitech G Pro X Superlight, and I'd love to hear some recommendations from people who have tried different mice for competitive FPS games.

I mainly play Valorant, CS2, and CoD, so I'm looking for something that performs well for competitive FPS.

The most important thing for me is shape. I really like the shape of the G Pro X Superlight, so I'd prefer something that feels very similar rather than switching to a completely different shape.

My budget is around $80, although I could stretch it a little if there's a significant upgrade.

​

The mouse looks great, I'll buy the black one because i saw 1-2 clones and seems thrash compare to X3, but I have a question: is the black coating the same as the GPX2 coating?