ASUS ROG Strix Scope Impact II Moonlight White Review (Page 2 of 4)

Page 2 - A Closer Look - Hardware and Software

The ASUS ROG Strix Scope Impact II Moonlight White has quite an appealing appearance for a gaming peripheral. The color scheme really aids in making it look cleaner. Of course, this is a simple recolor of the original ROG Strix Scope Impact II. There is a bit of branding on the palm of the mouse, sprouting the ASUS ROG logo. This logo is translucent to allow some RGB LED lighting through if you want. The mouse has an ambidextrous design. I personally like the appearance of an ambidextrous mouse as it feels more symmetrical, but I personally prefer right-handed mice more. I will talk about the design throughout this review. The whole body is made of a plastic shell. The durability of this mouse is adequate as it felt quite sturdy, not being too hollow.

As for measurements, the ASUS ROG Strix Scope Impact II Moonlight White measures 120mm in length, 62.5mm in width, and 39.5mm in height. These measurements are about average for a mouse of this design. The peak height sits closer to the back, making a nice curve to better fit your palm. As for the weight, the ROG Strix Scope Impact II Moonlight White is 79g. While this is far from being the lightest mouse we have seen, this still feels pretty agile. There seems to be no sacrifices to the structural integrity of the mouse despite being decently light. This is an ambidextrous mouse, meaning it will fit in either hand with relative ease. Overall build quality is quite good. There were no audible squeaks or noises in the body or the buttons. I have found there to be no flex like some more hollowed-out ultralight mice.

From the left side perspective of the ASUS ROG Strix Scope Impact II Moonlight White, you can see all of the buttons you have access to when holding the mouse. The primary buttons at the top are separated from the rest of the body to ensure a faster clicking feel. Underneath each primary button are Omron 50M switches. As the name suggests, Omron 50M switches are rated for 50 million clicks. I find Omron switches to have a nice click, but feeling a little mushy at times. The mushiness is an extremely small issue as it is not noticeable in practical use. If you want, you can swap out the switches easily by taking apart the mouse, as the ROG Strix Scope Impact II Moonlight White uses an exclusive push-fit switch socket design. This design essentially makes this a hot swappable mouse.

In between the primary left and right buttons, there is a textured scroll wheel. The sides have a thin translucent edge, allowing the lighting to shine through. The scroll and click of the wheel are quite nice, rotating with a good amount of resistance and having a snappy response. On the side of the mouse, we have two secondary buttons mapped to Forward and Back by default. I found these sided buttons to be much squishier compared to the two primary buttons. The side buttons were placed out of the way enough to avoid accidental presses, although this will vary from person to person. Finally, at the top, there are two translucent windows. It is a small but pleasing addition to the ASUS ROG Strix Scope Impact II Moonlight White in my opinion.

Underneath the ASUS ROG Strix Scope Impact II Moonlight White, you will see quite a few important characteristics. We have five PTFE, otherwise known as Teflon, pads with three feet and two strips around the sensor. These feet are intended to provide a good gliding performance. We also have a better view of the cable. This is a USB 2.0 cable that is not braided. I would have appreciated a braided cable ,as they are more durable and would look better when paired with the other Moonlight White peripherals like the ROG Strix Scope NX TKL Moonlight White.

In the middle of the base is the PixArt PAW3327. This sensor is generally used for entry-level gaming mice. This sensor offers 220 IPS of tracking speed, up to 30g of acceleration, and a maximum sensitivity of 6200 DPI. This sensor makes sense in this application, as this is an entry level wired gaming mouse. The minimum polling rate is 125Hz and the maximum is 1000Hz.

As we have seen in our ASUS ROG Strix Scope NX TKL Moonlight White review, the ROG Strix Scope Impact II Moonlight White uses Armoury Crate for modifying settings and synchronizing their lighting effects. The setup process is easy to work through and it automatically adds additional peripherals as you plug them in. There were also many updates for all of my products during the testing process, so they generally do keep this utility up to date. There are other features in Armoury Crate, including Aura Sync, a game library, game deals, and news, but I will focus on the configuration page for the ROG Strix Scope Impact II Moonlight White.

After selecting the mouse to modify, there are several tabs within this configuration page. The first tab is named Buttons and lets you reconfigure all buttons, including scrolling, except for the primary left button. The second tab is Performance, where users can change the DPI sensitivity levels, polling rate, button response time, and angle snapping. The sensitivity can be modified in 100 DPI increments within a range of 100 to 6200 DPI. The third tab is Lighting, where users can modify the different lighting effects for this mouse, choosing between static or dynamic effects, as well as responsive or non-responsive ones. You can also download Aura Creator to gain access to some advanced effects. The last page is Firmware Update, which will give you access to the necessary updates.

In my use of Armoury Crate, I found the software to be a bit overloaded in terms of additional features. Personally, I do not find much use for a game library, game deals, or news in a software designed around configuring peripheral. These additional features just seem unnecessary and unused, but I guess it is better to have more features than not. Other than that, I did not notice many issues while using Armoury Crate.


Page Index
1. Introduction, Packaging, Specifications
2. A Closer Look - Hardware and Software
3. Subjective Performance Tests
4. Conclusion