Page 3 - Subjective Performance Tests
After installing and properly configuring the Corsair Gaming Harpoon RGB to my liking using the software, I put the mouse through our series of standard tracking performance tests. This includes normal office usage in the Windows environment, as well as gaming within first person shooter games such as Counter-Strike: Source. Graphics work is done in addition to the regular office usage with Adobe Photoshop CS6. Mousing surfaces used includes the Func F-Series 10 L and XTracPads Ripper XXL. Please note that these are subjective tests, but we attempt to make it as objective as possible with our cross reference testing methods.
Personally, when I use my mouse, I prefer to establish a palm grip rather than a claw grip. What this means is that I prefer to cover the whole mouse with the palms of my hands, therefore a comfortable ergonomic fit is a priority preference. However, the Corsair Gaming Harpoon RGB, mainly due to its size, is probably better for those who like claw, finger, or a semi-claw-palm-hybrid grip. However, for those who like claw or finger grips and its variants, its lightweight design makes it excellent for first person shooter games, especially for those who commonly engage in swift, quick actions. Its lift off distance is about average, but this is not a performance mouse.
During usage, I have never accidentally pressed any buttons I did not intend to click. Obviously, there are not a whole lot of buttons on the Corsair Gaming Harpoon RGB in the first place, but at the same time, this is only made possible considering the few that are there are very well placed when it was designed. That said, any feature I need is always well within reach of my thumb, so props to Corsair coming up with a great placement. I am also a fan of the soft touch paint and molded rubber grip. The Corsair Gaming Harpoon RGB generally grips well in my hand, even if it a little bit small for my personal preference.
The primary purpose of Corsair Gaming's Harpoon RGB is intended for the budget enthusiast crowd. It is primarily made for gaming, but this does not exclude graphic professionals and office users demanding the edge in tracking precision, and do not want to spend an exuberant amount of money at the same time. Unlike some gaming oriented products, I found the Corsair Gaming Harpoon RGB to be pretty good for both everyday office work in addition to performance demanding applications. The sense of control and the smoothness of its glide over most tracking surfaces was very good at lower sensitivities, and the pointer goes exactly where I want it to go combined with the precision I want up to around 1500 DPI. At 2000 DPI and above, it seems to me the Harpoon RGB starts to drop off quite a bit in cursor precision. At 6000 DPI, you will definitely notice the jitter and skipped frames.
Set to 1000Hz polling rate with the optical sensor, the Harpoon RGB is a generally precise and quick responding mouse, which is impressive, considering it is only $30 at press time. It is not nearly as sharp as my favorite mouse, the Sensei Wireless, but the Sensei Wireless is a whole different class of product -- not to mention it is several times the price. What we should really be comparing it to is the SteelSeries Rival 100, and let me tell you this: The Harpoon RGB is much better for 75% of the price at press time. The Harpoon RGB's lightweight build and excellent grip works well in tandem with its internal hardware. No input lag was noticed; response time was consistently very good from the lowest sensitivity setting all the way to its upper 6000 DPI limit. The Corsair Gaming Harpoon RGB is also much more customizable than the Rival 100 in desired tracking resolution, while retaining generally responsive, virtually lag free, and comparatively sharp handling characteristics at the same sensitivity settings. It glides very smoothly thanks to its PTFE feet too.
I noticed no tracking problems with the Corsair Gaming Harpoon RGB on all surfaces I have tested it on.
Page Index
1. Introduction, Packaging, Specifications
2. A Closer Look - Hardware and Software
3. Subjective Performance Tests
4. Conclusion
