this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
410 points (87.4% liked)

PC Master Race

14970 readers
3 users here now

A community for PC Master Race.

Rules:

  1. No bigotry: Including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
  2. Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. No NSFW content.
  4. No Ads / Spamming.
  5. Be thoughtful and helpful: even with ‘stupid’ questions. The world won’t be made better or worse by snarky comments schooling naive newcomers on Lemmy.

Notes:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mild_deviation@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If you use the gamingest headphones with proprietary dongles, you can get decent latency. But then you're sacrificing on sound quality or ANC, and if you have multiple devices you want to use them with (eg a console and a PC), you have to either physically move the dongle between them, or suffer with Bluetooth lag and connection hassles on one of them.

Bluetooth is still bullshit in terms of latency. It will get better with LE Audio, but whether it will get good enough is anyone's guess, and it's still in its infancy and support is almost non-existent.

[–] maddenim@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

yeah but if we incorporate Bluetooth in this discussion, then Bluetooth mice and keyboards suck for gaming just as much.

I completely agree with you on that, though. It baffles my mind how, in 2023, in the version 5.2, Bluetooth still sucks so hard in terms of latency.

[–] faith@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I wouldn't consider Audio-Technica anywhere "gaming" related, can be pricey though.

I have a ATH-G1WL (wireless) and ATH-AVA400 (wired) and cannot hear any difference in sound quality what-so-ever, except the 3m cable I have to fiddle with now, which I also have to physically move when changing devices.

Bluetooth also sucks for mice and keyboard, so yeah...

[–] wieli99@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I had an error in my calculations, read comments below for correct math

[–] hark@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

1000 (milliseconds in a second)/140(hz) = ~7.14ms per hz

Not sure how you got 30ms being twice as fast as what a 140hz monitor can display.

[–] __dev@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

AptX LL indeed has ~30ms of latency at the cost of bitrate, but last I checked it's not supported by Windows out of the box. It's also been generally dropped in favor of the higher latency AptX Adaptive due to requiring a dedicated wireless antenna. The default experience of Bluetooth is still >200ms of latency. Also 30ms is 4.2 frames at 140Hz.