Was Jon testing against a PS360+ PCB? If not, then of course his results are going to seem lower when his control has more delay than the control I’m using.
And I think you’re confused about the aim for my tests. It’s not to test the absolute lag of any stick. It is to test the extra lag between different types of sticks when used on a given console. An oscilloscope test wouldn’t be useful for my purposes, as I’m determining the time it takes for the PS4 (or PS3/360) to read and interpret the inputs, not an external device.
Void warranty? Dude, the TE-S+ opens from the top giving you full access to inner parts without voiding anything. Does the TE2+ even come with a tamper-proof sticker?
They only have one pcb each so far (that we know of), it would be wise to take note of their current print codes for future reference, along with photos.
Warranties are horse shit anyway. I straight up called madcatz and told them I fried a pcb while modding and they sent me a new one. Please don’t make these tests more laughable than they are.
I’m 99% sure he tested a native stick in ps4 mode and then the very same stick in ps3 mode with the adapter on it. It was what i suggested when he asked for testing setup advice.
You don’t honestly think we’re stupid enough to test a different stick with an entirely different pcb vs a completely different one with a random converter on it, do you?
If you aren’t attempting to test the absolute lag of a stick, then why are you assigning absolute numbers? Why do you pass your “information” along as absolutes and buyer bewares? Why don’t you step in and explain your results are not absolute when people are freaking out that their sticks might cost them wins?? Would appreciate some consistency here. FWIW a PS4 or any other console is an external device the PCB in question would be hooked up to, soooo…
These aren’t absolute numbers. If you read the overview you’ll see that all of the results are relative lag compared to the best performing stick which is ranked at +0 ms.
To test accurately for input delay on a console you should be testing both the control and the test stick simultaneously. Using just 20 samples and relying on a camera and estimating to the nearest half frame of lag really isn’t accurate enough imo.
So you listing the lag time down to the ms isn’t absolute?? Get the fuck out of here!! It’s this guy for real?
As for the testing method, when the board is the same with the only difference being an added adapter, the method is accurate enough to give us a quick and dirty idea of how much lag we’re looking at. We aren’t telling people an absolute number (I’m starting to wonder if you know what that means?) Only that the lag on a native controller bounced from 4 frames to 5 frames and when adding the converter it was a consistent 5 frames. If 10 of the samples is 4 frames and 10 is 5, we end up with an average of 4.5. When all 20 is 5, the average is 5 which is only a .5 difference. Considering the camera wasn’t in sync with the display the test isn’t absolute, but it was good enough to get an idea of roughly how much additional lag the converter added. Enough to know if isn’t a lot by any stretch of the imagination.
We never ever told anyone the test was highly scientific, nor any ansolute frame number, only the results. It’s enough to know your numbers are horse shit.
I can’t wait for all the people who were happy using their Brook converters to now whine about all of a sudden lag and start looking for alternatives because of this highly accurate and scientific test.
Hey guys remember when PS360+ had hundreds of happy customers and consistently sold out, then all ofna sudden they were laggy and everyone could all of a sudden feel it?
What is the matter with you? Take a deep breath and look at how you’re coming across.
Here’s a video from a few posts up that you’re ignoring https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw2oNESnMAI
If you can’t watch it, use a VPN but the gist is that it shows the Brooks Converter (PS3 to PS4, and 360 to PS4) lagging compared to a HRAP4H.
No one said that it’s shit, Snake Eyez winning 3 WNF in a row with a converter shows that it’s fine.
Instead of tearing down someone’s efforts because you forgot to take your meds, feel free to video your own tests and show us the results. Oscilloscopes are available on amazon.
@Teyah, thank you for the work. Do you plan to test the Brooks Universal Fighting Board or the updated Hori RAP4 Kai(hayabusa+xinput)?
I don’t get why people are so bent out of shape over a dude who decided to run some tests. I’m thinking that since this is tech talk, this is a really great starting point for this type of thing? shouldn’t we be interested in conducting different tests in different ways since we’re all pretty much here for reasons like this? Until someone else wants to take a stab at testing, I can’t see why we’re going to crap all over some work that someone in the community took their time to try.
It doesn’t matter if someone thinks there is a flaw in his method. That’s no excuse for the offensive attitudes here. The guy made a website resource for the community and a set of tests that he’s clearly spent a tonne of time on. His theory and method sounds fairly sound to me and he’s clearly outlined it for everyone whether you agree or not. He’s made a better start on finding and sharing this info than anyone I’ve seen and that should be applauded.
If there is a flaw or better way, why don’t one of you start testing , make a simple website to thoroughly explain your methodology and show us your more accurate results. Until then I will happily follow teyah’s tests.
You guys telling us to do a better job if we don’t like teyahs work have obviously not read the thread in which we state multiple times the equipment is very expensive. Perhaps you may have also missed where many of us would be happy to test this in a much more controlled environment, but again it boils down to costs and needing a supply of pcbs. If people are willing to donate the funds to cover the costs of the equipment I’m sure there are people here who’d be more than willing to settle this scientifically.
Unless some of you feel like putting some cash up front, then don’t get mad us for pointing out the numerous problems of this testing and the inaccurate results.
It does if all the information is incorrect, and people are making their investment choices on that incorrect information.
We already explained time and time again all the faults in this thread, read the thread.
I said it before this thread needs to get locked.
There is nothing scientific about the claims here, its misinforming people and the information is based on terribly incorrect and it creates alot of misnomers for the larger community.
Well for one there poor documentation on what actually been tested. The same stick can have many different revisions of the board inside.
Science is on the big part documenting everything you can. Teyah admits at no time did he open up a stick and document what board is inside for fear of voiding the warranty.
The original Xbox version of the Mad Catz TE Street Fighter IV Round 1 has at least 2 revisions of the board, the PS3 version had 3.
Those revisions will have different Latency times.
The equipment involved for that would be pen and paper, and maybe a magnifying glass.
I suggested a method using a oscilloscope and a logic probe. Even if I was wrong, no real reason was ever presented how that could be wrong other than stanch opposition.
Now we are hearing from Teyah
At no point on his original post is the disclaimer that these numbers aren’t 100% accurate. Even with scientific testing you report your margin of error.
And if you don’t know the margin or if the results are relative it is your obligation to report that.
I could say the same thing to you, do not get mad at Teyah for posting this information, as you have said you have raised your opinions on this, do you really need to discuss and repeat the same cycle.
Lets just say Teyah used the confirmed hit count method and then charted those, the s tier would be 0 and the f tier would be 85 hits taken from the s tier.
We would get people like you and say it is not scientific enough, add some numbers and retest.
Then Teyah, uses his current method, “it is still not scientific enough” - we want the time the pcb takes to send data packets, not actual time it takes for the pcb + ps4 + game + display to translate that packet into an action.
Lets just say Teyah uses the “More scientific approach” you guys just going to try and find something wrong with the data or the method he uses.
Cannot please everyone can we?
Mad Catz also used Teyah’s information and methodology to product test the new sticks, which is pretty good, bigger companies are using this information to create products with lower latency.
Since there is loads of videos on youtube testing product A against product B and the results matches up to this chart, I am happy with that, because one of them is going to be better than the other one.
Mad Catz was at a position where they had to at least take a look and address the issues as one of their products was being labeled as the worst rating for latency.
What was done was a PR decision not a engineering decision. Coming out as defensive would cost Mad Catz so they decided to be diplomatic. And I am sure their own engineers are looking into the issue on their own for product refinement (and to see if their is any validity of the claims here).
I as a private individual and a member of this larger community decide to take a stand, if part of the information is faulty and everything is relative then how much of this info is skewed.
I looked at the raw data and feel that the charts on page one no way reflects on the raw test data. The charts make an assumption that every stick been compared to every other stick in multiple testing, and that is far from the case. And there never been a satisfied explanation how millisecond results are given when milliseconds measurements were never made. I am sure someone at lets say a Aerospace Engineer with electronics engineering background who knows how controller latency really effects performance can but everyone here (both sides of the debate) to shame with actual citable sources.
My saying its not scientific enough comes from people taking this testing as 100% truth and taking everything at face value which is happening and been happening rather than seeing everything being relative and more transparency was shown for the entire method.
