| Main > Main Forum |
| Best-Performance Keyboard Encoder |
| << < (2/4) > >> |
| RandyT:
--- Quote from: Lotus on December 07, 2003, 07:55:44 am --- The features the Keywhiz has which the I-PAC doesnt are: Cheaper 4 more inputs and a dedicated shift button input --- End quote --- You forgot some: - Jumperless operation - Instant switching between default and custom set - +5v access at a screw terminal, instead of a jumper pin. - Key sets can be reprogrammed an infinite number of times - Double sided circuit board with plated through holes for highest reliability - More advanced software support with integrated application launching which requires no keyboard - Larger input buffer - Easier implementation of single button shifted commands. .. and it's 5 more inputs that are usable for player controls. ;) Anyone who is looking for comparisons should take a look at TigerHeli's excellent comparison page to make sure you get accurate info. --- Quote ---So it depends on what features you need/don't need. --- End quote --- Absolutely :) RandyT |
| Gideon:
--- Quote from: RandyT on December 07, 2003, 12:43:58 pm ---Anyone who is looking for comparisons should take a look at TigerHeli's excellent comparison page to make sure you get accurate info. --- Quote ---So it depends on what features you need/don't need. --- End quote --- Absolutely :) RandyT --- End quote --- Hey, thanks for the link! |
| JoyMonkey:
I must have been asleep or something, I seem to have completely missed the announcement of the KeyWiz Max 1.5. When did these come out? I've been using standard KeyWiz's in the past and am 100% happy with them, but I guess in future I'll be going with the Max1.5 model. Good job RandyT! You truely are a god amongst us nerds. |
| SirPeale:
You weren't asleep, there was no announcement that I'm aware of. |
| Tiger-Heli:
--- Quote from: Elias on December 06, 2003, 09:35:46 pm ---Functionality aside, what is the best-performing keyboard encoder? This would include the obvious no-ghosting/blocking/etc., and also speed and reliability during gameplay. Or do the top encoders all handle this the same way? --- End quote --- Feature wise, RandyT covered most of the differences and linked to my comparison, so I won't repeat that data. IMHO, Hagstrom is a little pricey, good quality, but not specifically designed for arcade controls. No one mentioned the MK64. Either this, the Keywiz, or the I-PAC are all good options. I don't know that you'll see an actual performance problem (at least in PS/2 mode) with any of these encoder, and I can't provide details, but if you look at the overall design and the tech data provided on each encoders page www.groovygamegear.com, www.ultimarc.com, www.mk64.com/ron, I would rate the performance as (Worst to Best) MK64, I-PAC, KeyWiz. Technically, the MK64 is a Multiplexed unit, with separate chips reading a group of inputs and a central processor sequentially scanning each of these chips. I'm not saying there are performance issues with it, but it's not a very efficient process, but I'm not sure it needs to be. The I-PAC/2 and KeyWiz are both single-chip encoders. RandyT has very detailed information on his site about the performance advantages of the KeyWiz (see http://www.groovygamegear.com/Page3.html#13 about the "Single button Test". How much difference any of this makes in practice is hard to say. The example I like from when the KeyWiz was released was "What difference does it make if I'm driving a Ferarri or a Focus, if I'm going to the grocery store on 35 mph streets. But if the Ferarri cost 10-15% less than the Focus, the speed can only be an advantage. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |