Boomslang Performance

Get accustomed

Once we accepted the fact that the Razer Boomslang isn't a typical mouse, we hooked it up and used it for a few days, in Windows and with Q3A and UT. Shape aside, performance is the defining factor in a rodent, and Karna makes some pretty bold claims with the Razer Boomslang. The Boomslang 2000 is designed to be "five times as precise" as a traditional mouse, sampling internally at 2000 dpi. The Boomslang 1000 samples at 1000 dpi (no surprise there), still significantly higher than a "standard mouse."

It is important to note that the external sampling rate (what actually goes out to your computer) is limited by your port: USB samples at a constant rate of 125Hz. The PS/2 port's limit is 200Hz, and also supports polling rates of 10, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100Hz as well. The mouse hoopla people might remember from nearly a year ago arose with the introduction of the Microsoft USB mouse, when most Windows drivers had a mouse sampling rate set locked at a paltry 40Hz.

Feeling it out

OK, the shape certainly is a little strange, and takes much more getting used to than any normal mouse! Is there an advantage to this? One comes right to mind - the gummy non-slip buttons are enormous, and incredibly light-touch. In fact, you can easily trigger the primary left/right buttons with hardly a touch. This was disconcerting at first, as simply resting our fingers on the button caused it to trigger. Eventually, we got used to it, and double-clicking became noticeably faster, and completely effortless. Ironically, the guys with big hands had the hardest time getting used to the light touch, but in the end it was just a matter of familiarity.

The mouse itself is well constructed, out of translucent smoke-grey plastic, and intelligent use of rubberized non-slip material. It's also more solid (and heavier) than an average mouse - not at all like a budget component out of Taiwan (which is ironically where the Boomslang is made).

But is it more precise?

Microsoft's Intellieye technology (used on the Intellimouse Explorer and the new Intellimouse) uses a CCD camera and a bright red LED to capture images off the mousing surface at 1,500 times per second. This is of course a different unit of measure, so moving at one inch per second, the Intellieye captures at a higher rate than the Boomslang 1000. However, at higher speeds (primarily for the "flick" shots and quick turns associated with FPS games), the Razer mouse will remain consistent at 1000 dpi, whereas the CCD will only track a fraction of that (based on the speed of your flick). It's no secret that the Intellieye is still easily confused by quick turns, and can become momentarily unresponsive, or even worse, erratic in its movement.

Whether in Windows or in Quake 3, I have to say that I've never had a problem with tracking or precision on any Logitech or Microsoft ball-mouse, be it a First Mouse or a top of the line $70 retail Intellimouse. With a limited port sampling rate and finite number of pixels on screen, you should never have a problem with skipping or lowered precision while using a clean, functioning mouse.

Smaller feet, less friction

The Razer Boomslang however, felt much smoother and precise than most any of the name-brand mice we have in-house. Why was this? Because of the smaller Teflon feet - by ignoring current convention and shunning the large horizontal strips used on standard mice, the Boomslang kept a more consistent and smooth feel than any of our regular production mice, save the Logitech Gaming Mouse, which is based on the old Mouseman 96 "bear claw" 3-button mouse. The smaller feet are vastly superior, and due to this, the Razer Boomslang moves with a velvety smoothness that translates into higher physical preciseness, if not mechanically so.