Reaction/input time test

Supamasta94

https://humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime is a website that allows to to get a base line of your input and reaction time. I'd love for people to give their results on their phones and PC and give their phone/carrier information to help the community get an idea of the variations that directly affect their game experience in MCoC. The world standard for fighting games is 60 fps, and 16 frame input, which is just over 250 msecs. The input on my phone is 355 msecs on a Galaxy s9 on Verizon and WiFi, while it's 242 on PC with mouse, so a significant difference of speed.

jdrum663

I tried it 5 times. I think my best was 346 (I didn't pay attention on the first 2) and my averge was 355. I'm on a Samsmug E-tab. I hope that helps, good luck!

Knordy

343ms average on Sony Xperia XZ2 Compact (WiFi)
333ms average on Macbook Pro with trackpad (WiFi)

Odachi

230 on my laptop, 330 on my Samsung Note 9. I did notice on the phone it registered as a double tap a lot and would say 'too soon' whenever I tried to start it.

SpideyFunko

is it better to have a higher or lower number?

Snizzbar

SpideyFunko said:

is it better to have a higher or lower number?

Higher - it's like golf I think

BigPoppaCBONE

Average 244 Best 210

Samsung S20 plus wifi

PsyLife

Snizzbar said:

SpideyFunko said:

is it better to have a higher or lower number?

Higher - it's like golf I think

In golf you want the lowest score. It’s more like every other sport.

Snizzbar

PsyLife said:

Snizzbar said:

SpideyFunko said:

is it better to have a higher or lower number?

Higher - it's like golf I think

In golf you want the lowest score. It’s more like every other sport.

Yes I know. I thought that was so obviously a joke that I didn't need to put an /s

Bawa69

298

SpideyFunko

Snizzbar said:

SpideyFunko said:

is it better to have a higher or lower number?

Higher - it's like golf I think

so 352 is good?

SummonerNR

PsyLife said:

Snizzbar said:

SpideyFunko said:

is it better to have a higher or lower number?

Higher - it's like golf I think

In golf you want the lowest score. It’s more like every other sport.

I hope you are both kidding. Score is measured in millisec time, so obviously lower score is better (faster response).

Unfortunately, while this may also slightly reflect any device-dependent delays, most of the score is reflective of your own physical response time. For those that haven’t done it, it is like a Brain Games type of website, measuring cognitive response.

Would be good to find some other test out there that is much more indicative of the Device itself. Even if it were like a “Countdown” or Progress Bar, that you would know exactly “when” you had to tap. And then it would be a better indication of any device latency that is occurring.

lowlevelplayer

350-ish on Surface Book 2 with microsoft arc mouse(quad core intel i7)
361 on iphone8
376 on ipad air 2
My reaction time is super slow lol

zuffy

291 average, best is 263 on iPhone XS max

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Supamasta94

SpideyFunko said:

Snizzbar said:

SpideyFunko said:

is it better to have a higher or lower number?

Higher - it's like golf I think

so 352 is good?

Can you list your device? Seems iPhones have a lower latency then some Android devices. I'd love to get a baseline so we can let the developers know how to design their games.

Supamasta94

SummonerNR said:

PsyLife said:

Snizzbar said:

SpideyFunko said:

is it better to have a higher or lower number?

Higher - it's like golf I think

In golf you want the lowest score. It’s more like every other sport.

I hope you are both kidding. Score is measured in millisec time, so obviously lower score is better (faster response).

Unfortunately, while this may also slightly reflect any device-dependent delays, most of the score is reflective of your own physical response time. For those that haven’t done it, it is like a Brain Games type of website, measuring cognitive response.

Would be good to find some other test out there that is much more indicative of the Device itself. Even if it were like a “Countdown” or Progress Bar, that you would know exactly “when” you had to tap. And then it would be a better indication of any device latency that is occurring.

Actually this test is device agnostic, so your response is as much dependent on your reflexes as device responsiveness. As a baseline, do the test on your computer and mobile device and see the difference. Please post both. Thank you.

Supamasta94

Bawa69 said:

298

Device please. Thank you.

Supamasta94

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Average 244 Best 210

Samsung S20 plus wifi

That's the best I've seen from an Android. Thank you for your response.

Supamasta94

Odachi said:

230 on my laptop, 330 on my Samsung Note 9. I did notice on the phone it registered as a double tap a lot and would say 'too soon' whenever I tried to start it.

Yeah, I've also noticed about a tenth of a second lag on my s9. It's important to note that typically in fighting games, 1/4 a second response is the standard for designing AI, so a game designer would need to design his game differently for phones if the average was slower then that.

Supamasta94

jdrum663 said:

I tried it 5 times. I think my best was 346 (I didn't pay attention on the first 2) and my averge was 355. I'm on a Samsmug E-tab. I hope that helps, good luck!

Thank you. And double thank you for taking it multiple times. As an added bonus, could you take it on your PC for a baseline to show the difference in latency from your phone?

Supamasta94

Odachi said:

230 on my laptop, 330 on my Samsung Note 9. I did notice on the phone it registered as a double tap a lot and would say 'too soon' whenever I tried to start it.

Yeah, that has been an issue. I noticed a long press remedies that double tap. Thank you.

Supamasta94

Knordy said:

343ms average on Sony Xperia XZ2 Compact (WiFi)
333ms average on Macbook Pro with trackpad (WiFi)

This is very interesting. I wonder if using the track pad gave you more phone Iike results then mouse or game controller. That is definitely something to consider. Thank you.