Тоглоомын хулганы үнэ, жин болон чанарын үзүүлэлтийг нэгтгэсэн шинэ судалгаагаар төсөвт ээлтэй загварууд хамгийн өндөр үнэлгээ авчээ.
Зах зээлд худалдаалагдаж буй тоглоомын хулгануудыг үнэ болон жингийн харьцаагаар нь ангилах туршилтыг PC Gamer-ийн тоймч Жэймс хийжээ. Энэхүү судалгаанд зөвхөн өмнө нь хянагдсан, үнэлэгдсэн загваруудыг хамруулсан бөгөөд “PC Gamer price-to-weight-to-value-to-quality score” буюу “Жэймсийн оноо” хэмээх үзүүлэлтээр эрэмбэлсэн байна. Уг аргачлал нь хулганы жинг үнэд харьцуулж, түүнийг тухайн бүтээгдэхүүний чанарын үнэлгээтэй нэгтгэн дундаж оноог гаргадаг.
Судалгааны үр дүнд Glorious Model O Eternal загвар 93.5 хувийн оноогоор жагсаалтыг тэргүүлсэн бол 8BitDo Retro R8 хулгана 92 хувиар хоёрдугаар байранд оржээ. Гуравдугаар байрыг Mchose брэндийн хоёр өөр загвар хуваан эзэлсэн байна. Энэхүү үр дүн нь өндөр үнэтэй, хэт хөнгөн загваруудаас илүүтэйгээр сайн бүтэцтэй, боломжийн үнэтэй төхөөрөмжүүд илүү өндөр үнэ цэнийг санал болгодог болохыг харууллаа.
Жэймсийн тэмдэглэснээр, ихэнх тоглоомчид аль болох хөнгөн хулганыг сонгохыг илүүд үзэж, түүнийхээ төлөө илүү их мөнгө төлөхөд бэлэн байдаг нь энэхүү хэмжүүрийн онцлог тал юм. Хэдийгээр үнэ болон жингийн харьцааг тооцох нь зарим талаараа ер бусын мэт санагдаж болох ч, уг судалгаа нь чанартай төсөвт хулганууд хэрэглэгчдийн хувьд хамгийн оновчтой сонголт байж болохыг баталж байна.
Дэлгэрэнгүйг эх сурвалжаас харах
↓Эх сурвалжийг нээх ↓
You may know the trick of checking price in relation to weight, rather than full price, at a supermarket, to account for different pack sizes, but have you ever thought of applying that same metric to gaming mice? Me neither, until our Dave spotted such a rubric on Amazon. The Turtle Beach Burst II Air Amazon listing has a price-to-ounce ratio, and that got me thinking: which mouse would offer the best price-to-gram ratio?
Yes, it may be a bit silly to value price relative to weight, as it’s favouring cheap but heavy mice, and it might mean that some ultralight mice get the short end of the stick, and some might argue that price-to-gram tells you less about whether you should buy the mouse than price by itself, but you’ve gotta take that one up with Mr Bezos. I’m just the messenger, and as we all know, the messenger never gets shot.
And most scientists are unappreciated in their time.
As a fierce rodent scientist, I fear this specific study needs much more than just working out the weight-to-price ratio. Thus, my own personal rubric was born, an unholy alliance of two different scores that are then averaged together.
First, the price-to-weight ratio. Here, I grabbed the weight of the mouse and the MSRP, then assigned it a grams-per-dollar value. Some mice have slightly different weights (like the SteelSeries Rival Pro white and black models, which are one gram different), so I took the lowest available. From here, I graphed every pick on a scale and assigned a value based on how well they rank. The mouse at the very bottom of this graph would be assigned 100%, and the mouse on the total opposite end would get 0%.
In the name of unadulterated overkill, for science, my method was to get the difference between the highest- and lowest-value mouse, then divide that difference by 100 to get 1% (0.034), and then calculate the difference between either end and the scored mouse in measures of 0.034.
Finally, to account for quality, I would grab our review score (which does mean this specific study can only happen with mice we’ve reviewed). The combination of these two gets you what I am tentatively calling the PC Gamer price-to-weight-to-value-to-quality score, or the James score for short. Catchy name, I know.
Yes, this does mean that the data is held back specifically by mice we’ve reviewed, but I can live with that. Anyway, here are the numbers.
|
Price ($) |
Weight (g) |
Cost per gram |
Price-to-weight value (%) |
Review score (%) |
Final Score (%) |
|
|
180 |
53 |
3.4 |
16 |
89 |
52.5 |
|
|
189 |
47 |
4.0 |
0 |
88 |
44 |
|
|
180 |
112 |
1.61 |
69 |
84 |
76.5 |
|
|
260 |
82 |
3.17 |
23 |
72 |
47.5 |
|
|
180 |
73 |
2.47 |
44 |
73 |
58.5 |
|
|
89 |
59 |
1.51 |
72 |
89 |
80.5 |
|
|
100 |
100 |
1 |
87 |
71 |
79 |
|
|
80 |
79 |
1.01 |
87 |
65 |
76 |
|
|
80 |
59 |
1.36 |
76 |
70 |
73 |
|
|
100 |
66 |
1.52 |
72 |
72 |
72 |
|
|
50 |
90 |
0.56 |
100 |
40 |
70 |
|
|
150 |
60 |
1.67 |
67 |
82 |
74.5 |
|
|
100 |
68 |
1.47 |
73 |
84 |
78.5 |
|
|
160 |
49 |
3.26 |
21 |
95 |
58 |
|
|
34 |
59 |
1.74 |
65 |
84 |
74.5 |
|
|
156 |
43 |
3.63 |
10 |
89 |
49.5 |
|
|
200 |
55 |
3.64 |
9 |
68 |
38.5 |
|
|
60 |
43 |
1.40 |
75 |
85 |
80 |
|
|
99 |
62 |
1.6 |
69 |
86 |
77.5 |
|
|
180 |
59 |
3.05 |
27 |
95 |
61 |
|
|
50 |
77 |
0.65 |
97 |
87 |
92 |
|
|
100 |
36 |
2.78 |
35 |
92 |
63.5 |
|
|
170 |
56 |
3.04 |
27 |
90 |
58.5 |
|
|
40 |
55 |
0.73 |
95 |
92 |
93.5 |
So, if you are looking to pick up a new gaming mouse and want the most grams for the least amount of money, and want something that we have personally tried and recommend, the Glorious Model O Eternal has placed at the very top of the PC Gamer. price-to-weight-to-value-to-quality score table. That’s funny timing, as I happen to have recommended that exact mouse as a good budget buy this week.
Second place is the 8BitDo Retro R8, which coincidentally happens to be the mouse I keep on my desk, and joint third place is two different Mchose mice.
As time has gone on, many gamers are looking for the lightest mouse possible and are willing to pay more for the privilege, which shows how strange this Amazon measurement is. And as such, I thought this test would show how silly the weight-to-gram ratio is, but my super fancy, very scientific analysis shows that solidly built budget mice are the best out there. And yeah, for most people, I think that’s bang on. Thanks, Jeff.
