monitor distance 56.25% or 75%, which one can give better match?

[cchhqq]

if 56.25% is 1:1 match for monitor with 16:9, why people ususally use monitor distance 75% to match sensitivity?

[DPI Wizard]

I guess for historical reasons, when 100% match at 4:3 was the "norm", this translated to 75% on 16:9.

[cchhqq]

@DPI Wizard but why 4:3 was the norm? does it because people usually aim on  the 4:3 area in middle of the monitor? (or enemies in game usually appear on 4:3 area in middle of monitor?) or because old monitors usually use 4:3? according to the oldest post i found, seems like that this amazing website started in 2013 when there were a lot 4:3 monitors (not so sure, long time ago.) if 4:3 cannot match the whole area of the monitor, does it mean using 56.25% should give more precise same sensitivity?

[Skwuruhl]

50 minutes ago, cchhqq said:

if 56.25% is 1:1 match for monitor with 16:9

The name "1:1 match" is super misleading for this reason precisely. It's not actually a 1 to 1 exact match as implied. Drimzi or whoever came up with it called it that because it's horizontal match as if you had a 1:1 aspect ratio (or vertical match since it's a square). Since FOV is generally horizontal+ instead of vertical-, it's vertical match for any aspect ratio.

People on this forum have a strong tendency to give their method some super misleading name. Viewspeed is another example. It has literally nothing to with "viewspeed" (which is ill defined to begin with). It's literally dividing the sines of half vertical FOV. i.e. sin(vADS/2)/sin(vHIP/2). I've seen no concrete reason for doing this.

Edited February 3, 2018 by Skwuruhl

[cchhqq]

@Skwuruhl Ok. you say that it is not 1:1 match. But if it is horizontal match, under 56.25%, vertical matched, why this is still not 1:1 match. This sounds like 1 :1 to me. Or what should a real 1:1 match look like?

and do you mean  that viewspeed is not a feasible way to converse sensitivity?

[Skwuruhl]

44 minutes ago, cchhqq said:

@Skwuruhl Ok. you say that it is not 1:1 match. But if it is horizontal match, under 56.25%, vertical matched, why this is still not 1:1 match. This sounds like 1 :1 to me. Or what should a real 1:1 match look like?

and do you mean  that viewspeed is not a feasible way to converse sensitivity?

It is a match to a side of a 1:1 (i.e. square) aspect ratio. It is not a 1 to 1 match of sensitivity. Similarly 75% is a match to the left or right side of a 4:3 aspect ratio. This doesn't make it a 4 to 3 match of sensitivity.

You can't have a perfect 1 to 1 match in terms of screen distance, 56.25% isn't any more or less correct than 75% outside personal preference (which still matters). I personally like 0% for several reasons. Primarily because it feels to best to me, but also it's being scaled based on zoom ratio https://imgur.com/hBN7fdT https://imgur.com/a/szjlq and also matching mouse movements near the crosshair most accurately.

[cchhqq]

@skwuru how about transfer sens from windows to games, can 56.25% works perfect in this situation? 

[Skwuruhl]

31 minutes ago, cchhqq said:

@skwuru how about transfer sens from windows to games, can 56.25% works perfect in this situation? 

That will make it so if it takes say 4 inches to move your mouse .5625*1920=1080 pixels, then it will also take 4 inches to aim at a target 1080 pixels from your crosshair at any zoom level. The further from 1080 pixels you get the less "matched" it is between zoom levels and desktop.

Edited February 3, 2018 by Skwuruhl

[cchhqq]

9 minutes ago, Skwuruhl said:

That will make it so if it takes say 4 inches to move your mouse .5625*1920=1080 pixels, then it will also take 4 inches to aim at a target 1080 pixels from your crosshair at any zoom level. The further from 1080 pixels you get the less "matched" it is between zoom levels and desktop.

how about 75% in this kind of situation? I once saw that dpi wizard told someone to convert their sens in games like osu! to 3d games with 75% distance. But since osu! is 2d game, shouldn't 56.25% works better?

[Skwuruhl]

1 minute ago, cchhqq said:

how about 75% in this kind of situation? I once saw that dpi wizard told someone to convert their sens in games like osu! to 3d games with 75% distance. But since osu! is 2d game, shouldn't 56.25% works better?

Then it'd just be 1920*.75=1440 pixels. One isn't better than the other. It's just what screen distance you match.

[cchhqq]

1 minute ago, Skwuruhl said:

Then it'd just be 1920*.75=1440 pixels. One isn't better than the other. It's just what screen distance you match.

Make sense. Thank you so much for your help

[Drimzi]

Sure, 56.25% is just distance matched to the 1:1 aspect ratio, and yes, it can be misinterpreted as 1:1 movement instead of 1:1 aspect ratio, but that misinterpretation may not matter much if this theory is correct.

If you can measure the degrees per pixel by dividing the vfov by the screen height (not sure if it is this simple?), then it would mean 56.25% also results in an angle increment equal to 1 pixel. Since that happens at any fov, it makes all fovs have a consistent pixel/count ratio. If the angular increment is equal to 1 pixel, and a cursor increments by 1 pixel, then it wouldn't be too far fetched to say that it is also a 1:1 match in movement as well.

 

Here is 56.25% and 90 fov, it gives the same sensitivity used to demonstrate the 1 pixel per count rotation here.

 

If it is this simple to measure degrees per pixel, then this is how you would find the pixel/count:

(sensitivity * m_yaw) / (vfov / screen height)

 

Example with two different fovs using 56.25% sensitivity in a unity game:

54 vFOV = (1 * 0.05) / (54 / 1080) = 1

81 vFOV = (1.5 * 0.05) / (81 / 1080) = 1

Example with two different fovs using 56.25% sensitivity in an id tech/source game:

54 vFOV = ( 2.2727272727272730 * 0.022) / (54 / 1080) = 1

81 vFOV = ( 3.4090909090909090 * 0.022) / (81 / 1080) = 1

 

This formula can also be rearranged to find the correct sensitivity for a given fov if you supply the fov and m_yaw of the game, or to find the m_yaw of a game if given the sensitivity and fov, which is pretty handy.

Like this to find sensitivity:

Overwatch = ((360 arctan(9/16 tan((π 103)/360)))/π)/(1080 * 0.0066) = 9.89517...
CSGO = ((360 arctan(3/4 tan((π 90)/360)))/π)/(1080 * 0.022) = 3.10353...

 

Yes, I know the formulas will also work when using the widths, but 100% 4:3 / 16:9 monitor match fail to return the same value used by DPI Wizard. He said he used 90 FOV, only 56.25% gives that value for 90 FOV.

 

With 1:1 monitor match (or vertical monitor match, or 56.25%, or whatever you want to call it), you can also just measure the distance to rotate to the top or bottom of the screen and adjust your sensitivity until it matches. This can be perfected with a simple MouseMoveRelative(x,y) script in Logitech Gaming Software. Vertical monitor match works for any aspect ratio. This convenience means you don't have to depend on this websites calculator and can be more beneficial to most in the long run.

 

In conclusion, I think 56.25% can give a better match than 75%. Based on realworld tests, the stuff above is just a bonus. Plus the convenience alone is enough to switch. Finding the sensitivity is just as easy as the archaic 360 distance match.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Drimzi

[cchhqq]

@Drimzi kind of complicated. so now 56.25% is the best way to transfer sensitivity for both from 2d to 3d and 3d to 3d? how about viewspeedv2? I heard that viewspeed2 is very close to result from 75%. If I want to transfer sens from aimbooster to overwatch, which should I choose?

[Skwuruhl]

Without personally testing I believe the "counts per pixel" will vary depending on where you measure on screen due to distortion.

Nevertheless matching sensitivities so that counts per pixel is constant is definitely interesting. I'm inclined to believe that 56.25% is coincidentally close and not actually how you'd scale this way though. (edit: I was partly wrong here, explained below)

I think first finding the relation of 1 degree being 12 pixels would help. Unfortunately it's not as simple as 

resolution / FOV 

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F121.28449291441745508564048889760143255593023726841*1920

Even though 1080/90 is 12, if you do horizontal resolution/horizontal fov it is not 12. Counts/degree aren't going to be different in the x & y axis (at the same location) unless the sensitivities are different.

If we can scale down to the center of the screen to find pixels/degree there then this should work: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=lim+x->0+[1080*x+%2F+(360%2Fpi*arctan(x*tan(90*pi%2F360)))] meaning in this case it's 3pi or about 9.42 pixels per degree. Meaning that a single count would need to turn 1/(3pi) or about 0.1061 degrees to move a single pixel at the center of the screen.

If we do that for Overwatch instead http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=lim+x->0+[1920*x+%2F+(360%2Fpi*arctan(x*tan(103*pi%2F360)))]

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=360%2F.0066%2Fx+%3D+360*16%2F3+π+tan((77+π)%2F360)

we'd use a sensitivity of 11.37, which is also 0% match distance.

From here I assume you can partially scale down to match pixels/degree at other points on the screen. So vertical fov and resolution: 

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1920*9%2F16+%2F+(360%2Fpi*arctan(9%2F16*tan(103*pi%2F360)))

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=360%2F.0066%2Fx+%3D+360*15.31202494968535790047025243653122732396104184666230688031

9.9 sensitivity which is predictably 56.25% match distance.

If you use 1080 pixels and vertical FOV as you did in your calculations it's no surprise that you came to the conclusion that 56.25% provides 1 counter per pixel. And I mean you're not wrong because it does, it's just that it's only when you're measuring 540 pixels away from the center of the screen.

I will point out that this doesn't like up perfectly with DPI wizard's gifs but the difference is less than 2 pixels which imo is within a human margin of error along with distortion.

Edited February 10, 2018 by Skwuruhl

[espe89]

so 56.25 is the new thing to use ? 

 

I keep changing sensitivity on a daily basis, so I can switch again to another one lol

 

I'm playing 2560x1440 btw

Edited February 8, 2018 by espe89

[Skwuruhl]

16 hours ago, espe89 said:

so 56.25 is the new thing to use ? 

 

I keep changing sensitivity on a daily basis, so I can switch again to another one lol

 

I'm playing 2560x1440 btw

There's nothing inherently special about 56.25%. I'd advise picking a sensitivity and getting used to it though.

75% or anything below should generally be pretty good. I like 0% the best because of feel and also imo it's the most mathematically sound, but some find it too slow.

From the perspective of match distance it largely depends on your playstyle. If you do a lot of large flicks while in ADS then something like 50-75% will be better. If you do smaller flicks and spend more time tracking targets while in ADS then 0-50% will be better.

0% matches sensitivity by zoom ratio which I like.

Edited February 9, 2018 by Skwuruhl

[espe89]

Dunno why you state that 0% is too slow when 0% is in fact the fastest and 100% the slowest, I'm using 100% which is the exact distance to reach the edge of my screen

When using 0% convert from windows on csgo the sensitivity is around 2.7, when using 100% it s 1.88.

I agree about the 0% to be more precise for small flicks and 100% for long flickshots.

At this time I feel more consistent using 100% to convert windows to csgo, then using csgo 360 to other games.

 

The only one question I'm still asking myself is should I lower or raise my sensitivity, the eternal question for me because it seems I can adapt from 30cm/360 to 105cm/360..

I'm playing 55cm/360 now and seems to be a correct compromise to do everything

Edited February 9, 2018 by espe89

[Drimzi]

Check 0% scaling for 3D, not for 2D to 3D. It's a whole different story.

[Skwuruhl]

10 hours ago, espe89 said:

Dunno why you state that 0% is too slow when 0% is in fact the fastest and 100% the slowest, I'm using 100% which is the exact distance to reach the edge of my screen

When using 0% convert from windows on csgo the sensitivity is around 2.7, when using 100% it s 1.88.

I agree about the 0% to be more precise for small flicks and 100% for long flickshots.

At this time I feel more consistent using 100% to convert windows to csgo, then using csgo 360 to other games.

 

The only one question I'm still asking myself is should I lower or raise my sensitivity, the eternal question for me because it seems I can adapt from 30cm/360 to 105cm/360..

I'm playing 55cm/360 now and seems to be a correct compromise to do everything

I was referring to hipfire to ADS. For example in OW 0% would mean you set your zoom sensitivity to 38, and 75% would mean you set it to 45. Meaning cm/360 is ~18% longer when using 0% over 75% while in ADS (if hipfire cm/360 is equal). Match distance is more about converting between zoom levels. The desktop thing is kinda just a secondary thing you can do but isn't super necessary.

cm/360 depends on the game (and role in said game) that you play. CS:GO and the like 40-60cm is usually pretty good, or even higher if you have the desk space.

In faster paced games like overwatch or quake then 30cm/360 is pretty good. If you play roles that don't require aiming as much like tank then 20cm/360 could be used. I'd pick just one and stick to it though.

[espe89]

Yes but I want to be the more consistent I can with my sensitivity, I like to have the same feeling and flickshots in all my games

I was a longtime low sensitivity player 80cm+/360 but it's exhausting in the long run and when I watch my demo I'm moving like a bot, I can deal with it on csgo because my crosshair placement is okay after more than 15 years playing counter strike, but when playing paladins (overwatch like) or h1z1/pubg.. another story because you cant predict where the ennemy will be and you have to react faster (imo).

What are the best settings to convert windows to csgo ?

I'm playing all my game 16/9 on 2560x1440 resolution

This is currently what I'm using and maybe they are not the optimal settings :

Windows/Desktop - 2560x1440 - 27 inch - WPS6 - DPI 400 - Config File

Convert : Monitor distance

Counter Strike Global Offensive - Aim : Hipfire - Match at 100% - DPI 400 - Raw Input : On - 2560x1440 -Hdeg 4:3 - Config File

 

Thanks

 

 

[Drimzi]

1 hour ago, espe89 said:

Yes but I want to be the more consistent I can with my sensitivity, I like to have the same feeling and flickshots in all my games

I was a longtime low sensitivity player 80cm+/360 but it's exhausting in the long run and when I watch my demo I'm moving like a bot, I can deal with it on csgo because my crosshair placement is okay after more than 15 years playing counter strike, but when playing paladins (overwatch like) or h1z1/pubg.. another story because you cant predict where the ennemy will be and you have to react faster (imo).

What are the best settings to convert windows to csgo ?

I'm playing all my game 16/9 on 2560x1440 resolution

This is currently what I'm using and maybe they are not the optimal settings :

Windows/Desktop - 2560x1440 - 27 inch - WPS6 - DPI 400 - Config File

Convert : Monitor distance

Counter Strike Global Offensive - Aim : Hipfire - Match at 100% - DPI 400 - Raw Input : On - 2560x1440 -Hdeg 4:3 - Config File

 

Thanks

 

 

The answers have been provided, test each one and see what one you like best.

[Skwuruhl]

16 minutes ago, espe89 said:

Yes but I want to be the more consistent I can with my sensitivity, I like to have the same feeling and flickshots in all my games

I was a longtime low sensitivity player 80cm+/360 but it's exhausting in the long run and when I watch my demo I'm moving like a bot, I can deal with it on csgo because my crosshair placement is okay after more than 15 years playing counter strike, but when playing paladins (overwatch like) or h1z1/pubg.. another story because you cant predict where the ennemy will be and you have to react faster (imo).

What are the best settings to convert windows to csgo ?

I'm playing all my game 16/9 on 2560x1440 resolution

This is currently what I'm using and maybe they are not the optimal settings :

Windows/Desktop - 2560x1440 - 27 inch - WPS6 - DPI 400 - Config File

Convert : Monitor distance

Counter Strike Global Offensive - Aim : Hipfire - Match at 100% - DPI 400 - Raw Input : On - 2560x1440 -Hdeg 4:3 - Config File

 

Thanks

 

 

75% will be the same as default CS:GO. In general 100% is too high because it matches distance to the very edge of your screen, which imo is kinda useless.

[espe89]

On CSGO 16/9 res from windows 75% means you reach 1:1 at 75% from the center to the edge right ? Or should I use the 56.25%  ? I heard 75% is for 4/3

 

edit : 75% give me 2.13 sens, viewspeed v2 give me 2.17 and 56.25% give me 2.3.. I've set it to 2.2, should be "ok"

Edited February 11, 2018 by espe89

[Drimzi]

Edited September 10, 2018 by Drimzi

[Drimzi]

In regards to this post: https://www.mouse-sensitivity.com/forum/topic/3340-monitor-distance-5625-or-75-which-one-can-give-better-match/?do=findComment&comment=13211

0% is actually better for 2D conversion.

 

1. The rotation increment is equal to angle being displayed by the exact center pixel.

https://www.mouse-sensitivity.com/forum/topic/3340-monitor-distance-5625-or-75-which-one-can-give-better-match/?do=findComment&comment=13239

 

2. At 1080p and 90 (1:1) FOV, it will be 540 counts to rotate 1 radian. It matches the radius of the desktop, i.e. 540px, to 1 radian of rotation.

1920x1080, 90 FOV = 0.1061...° increment
1 radian = 57.2958...°
57.2958 / 0.1061 = 540

 

3. The ratio between the distance to rotate 1 radian, and the circumference is 2pi. 360 degrees is equal to 2pi radians.

CPI = 400
Increment = 0.1061°
Circumference = 2.54 * 360 / (0.1061 * 400) = 21.5... cm
Distance to rotate 1 radian = 2.54 * 540/400 = 3.429... cm
Ratio between circumference and 1 radian = 21.5 / 3.429 = 2pi

 

4. If you make the mouse and cursor have an exact 1:1 physical relation, i.e. a control-display gain of 1.00, then the ratio between the focal length and the circumference at any fov is also 2pi.

1920x1080, 24.5", 90 FOV
1:1 ratio = (sqrt(1920^2 + 1080^2))/24.5 = 89.9... CPI
Focal length = 2.54 * ((24.5 / sqrt(1920^2 + 1080^2)) * (1080/2)) / tan(90 * pi/360) = 15.25... cm
Circumference = 2.54 * 360 / (0.1061 * 89.9) = 95.87... cm
Ratio between circumference and focal length = 95.87 / 15.25 = 2pi

Again at 50 FOV
Focal length = 2.54 * ((24.5 / sqrt(1920^2 + 1080^2)) * (1080/2)) / tan(50 * pi/360) = 32.7... cm
Circumference = 2.54 * 360 / (0.0495 * 89.9) = 205.5... cm
Ratio between circumference and focal length = 205.5 / 32.7 = 2pi

 

Edited September 10, 2018 by Drimzi