EVGA’s Torq X5 and X10 mice reviewed

What’s the first product that comes to mind when you think “mouse?” For me, it’s one of Logitech’s G-series clickers. Others might name classics like Microsoft’s IntelliMouse Explorer or Razer’s DeathAdder. But we might be hearing EVGA’s name from mouse fanatics soon, too. Yeah, that EVGA. Say hello to the company’s Torq X10 (left) and X5 (right):

Why mice? I’m guessing EVGA has its eye on the burgeoning e-sports market. It’s hard to show off a graphics card or power supply on camera at the International, but mice, keyboards, and headsets are much more visible—and personal—devices. Getting the EVGA brand in front of gamers through peripherals makes a lot of sense.

Brand visibility is all well and good, but input devices need to do more than look pretty. I’ve spent some quality time with the Torq X5 and X10 over the past couple of weeks to see if they’re as functional as they are sleek. Let’s take a closer look.

The new breed

The Torq X5 and X10 share a lot of features, but the X10 has a couple goodies the X5 lacks.


A screw at the back of the X10 allows the user to change the profile of the mouse from a flatter shape to a higher, more arched one. As a result, the X10 can accommodate a variety of grip styles. I can get a comfortable hold on the mouse with a palm, claw, or fingertip grip. The bump at the rear nestles nicely into my palm, and the matte surfaces and dimpled buttons feel like they’ll offer good grip even under sweaty hands.

Although the X5 feels like a smaller mouse in the hand, it’s actually larger than the X10 all around, at 4.6″ long, 2.6″ wide, and 1.5″ tall. For comparison, the X10 measures 4.5″ x 2.2″ x 1.2″. Despite the X5’s extra size, I don’t feel comfortable holding it in my palm—the front-to-back curve is too flat for me. A fingertip grip feels great, though.

The X5 trades the X10’s matte, dimpled finish for a glossy white upper shell and rubbery, textured sides. The upper shell isn’t as grippy as on the X10, but the pebbled sides feel even better than the smooth plastic body of its ritzier sibling.

Both designs are ambidextrous, with symmetrical shapes and pairs of function buttons on each side. Lefties, rejoice. Out of the box, the Torqs are configured for right-handed use, with the buttons under the right pinky finger disabled. This configuration can be reversed with the included software, which can also enable both sets of side buttons.

The Torq X10’s top plate pops off to reveal silos for any two of six included tuning weights. At 4.3 ounces (121 grams) out of the box, the X10 is already pretty hefty for a mouse, so I didn’t bother to add more bulk. If you prefer more weight, the X10 can be beefed up to 4.7 ounces (or 134 grams.) The X5 weighs in at a svelte 3.0 ounces (85 grams), despite its more generous dimensions, and it lacks provisions for weight adjustment.

Turning these mice on their backs reveals part of the reason for the X10’s extra bulk: its solid metal baseplate. The X5’s body, on the other hand, is 100% plastic. Each mouse sits on low-friction feet, and EVGA includes an extra set of adhesive sliders in the box. The non-stick surfaces are a little larger on the X10.

Each mouse’s underbelly also has a button for cycling through five different onboard profiles. This location might seem a little strange, but it prevents gamers from accidentally changing profiles, which could lead to frustration and fumbling during critical moments. I’ve bumped the top-mounted profile button on my Logitech G502 before, so I’m OK with making the switching process more deliberate. Those who want to jump between profiles quickly might be disappointed, though.

What you can’t see from the outside is the different sensor tech employed by each rodent. The Torq X10 uses an Avago ADNS-9800 laser sensor that can resolve a nosebleed-inducing 8200 DPI, while the X5 taps a Pixart 3988 optical sensor that tops out at a slightly less stratospheric 6400 DPI.

Optical and laser sensors both track changes in position by monitoring the light reflected by a surface. Optical mice typically rely on an LED light source, while laser mice use, well, infrared lasers. Laser sensors tend to be capable of higher resolutions than their optical counterparts, as demonstrated by the X10’s higher DPI spec. I didn’t notice any difference in accuracy or tracking between the two mice.

The X10 supports five levels of on-the-fly DPI adjustment, and you can step up or down through those options. Only four DPI levels are available on the X5, and a single button cycles through them, which means you have to go through all the options to get back to the first one.

Differences aside, the X10 and X5 both feature clicky scroll wheels, Omron switches for the left and right mouse buttons, and customizable LED illumination. The X10 has one LED under the mouse wheel and one behind the EVGA logo, while the X5 relies on a single LED. Don’t expect Corsair K70 RGB levels of customization here; EVGA’s accompanying software, dubbed Unleash, only offers a handful of color options.

Unleash can be used to reassign button functions, adjust DPI settings, create macros, and change the operating system’s mouse acceleration settings. Custom profiles are saved to one of five onboard slots. Each profile has room for up to 11 macros, and each macro can be saved to the host system and moved in and out of the mouse’s internal memory using the management tab.

Macros are built by clicking the record button in the macro tab, pressing the desired sequence of keys or mouse buttons, and then ending the recording. The duration of each press and release can then be modified prior to saving. I tested the interface by creating a Save-for-Web macro for Photoshop and assigning it to one of the pinky buttons, which worked like a charm. Although I’m not a big macro user, the interface is fairly straightforward and easy to use.

For easy reference, here’s a table of the key specifications.

  Torq X5 Torq X10
Dimensions (LxWxH) 4.64″ x 2.55″ x 1.53″

(117.9 x 64.8 x 38.9 mm)

4.50″ x 2.25″ x 1.25″

(114.3 x 57.1 x 31.8 mm)

Weight 3.0 oz (85 g) 4.3 oz (121 g)
Adjustable weight No Yes
Max DPI 6400 DPI 8200 DPI
Sensor type Optical (Pixart 3988) Laser (Avago ADNS-9800)
Switch type Omron Omron
Switch life 20 million actuations 20 million actuations
Programmable buttons 8 9
Max polling rate 1000Hz 1000Hz
Onboard profiles 5 5
DPI switching levels 4 5
Shape Ambidextrous Ambidextrous
Price $49.99 $64.99

At about $65, the Torq X10 sits comfortably in the middle of the range of gaming mice available at Newegg. For $75, EVGA also offers a version with a carbon-fiber veneer on some surfaces, appropriately called the X10 Carbon. Aside from that cosmetic difference, the X10 Carbon should be identical to the standard model. The X5’s $50 street price reflects its more streamlined feature set.

Now that we’ve examined the Torq X5 and X10, let’s see how well they work.

 

The competition

For a comparative reference, I used my own G502 Proteus Core, one of  Logitech’s latest gaming mice.

The G502 has a few features missing from the X5 and X10. Most notably, it includes Logitech’s trademark clutched scroll wheel, which can be switched from clicky to free-wheeling modes on demand. There’s also a “sniper” button that drops the mouse tracking sensitivity to its lowest setting. The G502 weighs the same as the Torq X10, but it’s longer and wider than both EVGA mice. At $68, it’s priced to go toe-to-toe with the X10.

The setup

The Torq X10 and X5 are billed as gaming mice, so what better way to evaluate them than to play a game? I tested with Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, which requires precise mouse movements to be competitive. (I’m usually not, but one can dream.)

I discovered early on that the Torq X5’s optical sensor doesn’t track well on the white melamine surface of my desk. I normally don’t use a mousepad, but to make the X5 usable, I pulled out the super-cool mouse mat that Asus includes with its Crossblade Ranger mobo. I used the same mat while testing all three mice.

To eliminate as many software variables as possible, I disabled Windows’ “enhance pointer precision” setting. I also turned off the acceleration features in each mouse’s driver, and I disabled CS:GO‘s built-in acceleration, as well. After making these tweaks, I tuned each mouse’s DPI settings for comfort, settling on 800 DPI for all three.

Putting the PTFE to the mousepad

Going into this review, I wasn’t expecting to find a whole lot of difference between these mice. I’ve always used Logitech mice without complaint, so I figured the G502 would emerge the uncontested favorite. Boy, was I wrong.

The Torq X5 was the surprise favorite in my tests. This featherweight mouse feels a bit insubstantial out of the box, but it’s brilliant to use. The lack of weight makes the X5 easy to flick around, and the light touch of the buttons lets me quickly translate enemy sightings into semi-accurate bursts of bullets. At my best, I felt like I was wielding a wickedly precise rapier, compared to the more broadsword-like X10 and G502.

The X5 wasn’t without its downsides, though. Its glossy finish can get slick with sweat after long gaming sessions, and the pearl-white paint quickly becomes grimy with skin oils. The grime is nothing a microfiber cloth won’t fix, but it’s not pleasant to look at. At least the X5’s textured, rubbery sides provide a sure grip.

The Torq X10 was my second-favorite of the three. Even though it weighs the same as the G502, most of its mass is concentrated in its metal base, giving the mouse a very low, stable center of gravity. It’s an exotic sports car next to the more truckish G502.

Although the X10 and X5 both use the same Omron switches, the X10’s buttons have a small amount of dead travel before they register a click. As a result, they felt less sure in CS:GO, and they seemed to tire out my hand faster in general. Those who prefer more deliberate-feeling buttons may prefer the heavier touch required by the X10, though.

As it happened, the G502 ended up being my least favorite. Its center of gravity feels weird compared to the EVGA mice, probably due to the elaborate scroll wheel mechanism inside. The positioning of this mechanism seems to shift the center of gravity up and toward the front of the mouse. The relatively thin left mouse button isn’t as easy to hit as the more generous buttons of the EVGA mice, either, though Logitech’s switches do feel light and responsive.

The G502 could also do with fewer grams of weight to start. Adding some of the optional weights seemed to lower the Proteus Core’s center of gravity, but it also made mouse the heaviest of the bunch, at 4.5 oz (127 grams). That may not sound like a big deal, but loaded with weights and stacked up against the lighter Torqs, the G502 felt less nimble all around.

Mice get used for more than just games, of course. Pushing pixels around in Photoshop and selecting reams of data in Excel are considerably less taxing than fragging enemies in CS:GO, and the perceived differences between the mice narrowed as a result. The lighter Torq X5 is easier on my RSI-prone wrist, but the X10 and G502 aren’t burdensome. All three handle the slow, precise movements of my non-gaming work with equal aplomb.

 

Conclusions

Despite being a new entrant to the mouse market, EVGA is on the right track with its Torq mice. As a long-time Logitech fan, I was expecting my G502 to remain the king of my desk, but I was pleasantly surprised by the Torq X5 and X10.

Each Torq has its own quirks. The X10’s slightly deliberate buttons don’t feel great in the heat of battle, and its heavier body takes more effort to muscle around. The X5’s glossy finish can get slippery and grimy with use, and its sensor can’t reliably track my white desk without a mousepad. For $10 more, EVGA also makes a laser version of the X5 with the same sensor as the X10.

If you like heavier mice, the X10’s metal baseplate and low center of gravity make it feel planted on the desk, and one can add even more weight if needed. The X10’s adjustable shape also works for a variety of grip styles. Both Torqs have large, inviting buttons, and their ambidextrous nature means that anybody can use them. The included Unleash software works well, too.

Between these two mice, the X5 is my favorite. I love its feathery weight and light button response. The X5’s $50 price tag is quite reasonable, as well. With all of that goodness going for it, I’m happy to call the Torq X5 TR Recommended, and I’m looking forward to future gaming sessions with this mouse at hand.

The Torq X10 is a good mouse, to be sure, but its button feel and weight may not be for everybody. The $65 asking price isn’t that big of a step up from the X5, so if my complaints sound like positives to you, give this mouse a go. I doubt you’ll be disappointed.

Enjoy our work? Show your appreciation by becoming a TR subscriber today.

Comments closed
    • shaq_mobile
    • 5 years ago

    why do most of the new mouse designs look like they let fast and furious honda fans on the marketing team?

    i still use an mx500 and all i want are conservative, clean, sturdy, simple designs with a scroll wheel, resilient buttons and shell, 2-4 programmable buttons, and chassis that’s well weighted for my next purchase.

    i dont want ground effects, fog machines, spoilers, 10 keys, horsepower stickers, body kits, weight trays, drop kits, low profile tires or highly contrasting colors on a mouse.

    • njoydesign
    • 5 years ago

    hummm… the X5 looks tempting, I quite like it. May be it’s time to replace my 6 y.o. Lachesis…

    edit: OOOOHHH damn you shipping costs!!!

    • sweatshopking
    • 5 years ago

    I HAVE A MOUSE THAT SAYS CM DEVASTATOR, AND I GOT IT CAUSE IT WAS ON KIJIJI AND IT HAD A [i<] BLUE [/i<] LIGHT AND A MATCHING KEYBOARD!! AMAZING! AMIRITE?!

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 5 years ago

      BUT WHAT COLOR ARE THE CASE FANS??? #TheFans

        • sweatshopking
        • 5 years ago

        Black
        No leds.

          • zqw
          • 5 years ago

          NOOice! Murdered out fans, word brah

    • Bensam123
    • 5 years ago

    Like the review, I hope we get a variety of mice reviews since they’re so cheap. Also hope there are some plans for objective testing using a actual test setup. I assume something similar to what Logitech has built for testing their mice (at some level) would be reasonably doable for some independent testing.

    [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwrkXSO4788[/url<]

      • Meadows
      • 5 years ago

      Inside the second: Mice on TR.

        • Bensam123
        • 5 years ago

        I think there are a lot of people that would read it… Peripherals are mad rage and most people don’t take time to actually benchmark them besides writing up a subjective review. A lot of the tools Logitech is using to benchmark mice look like they could be made relatively easily. Some of the more advanced stuff, probably not though.

          • Meadows
          • 5 years ago

          It was actually I who mentioned reviewing gaming-related peripherals to TR back when they were looking for freelancers, but our email exchange was short-lived.

          In fact, I’ve become convinced that they all silently hate me but keep it to themselves.

            • Bensam123
            • 5 years ago

            Not sure what bit of my response was looking for who mentioned what. I’ve pointed this out to TR numerous times in a few different rants and posts, especially relating to mice, headsets, and sound cards (as they’re relatively cheap and there are a lot of different ones). I’m sure you and I are not the only ones.

            But if it makes you feel better, your epeen just grew 12 sizes as the only reason this article was done was because you suggested it. ><

            • Meadows
            • 5 years ago

            No, that’s not what I meant. That was two and a half years ago, if the timestamp on my email archive is right.

            Since then, they’ve had a whopping 2 mouse reviews(!), and [i<]altogether[/i<] 5 reviews of gaming gear if you count the 3 G-Sync articles. In two years and a half. That's not exactly a fast ramp up and I doubt either you or I had too much of an influence on it.

    • Meadows
    • 5 years ago

    Well, it’s hard to go wrong with the ADNS-9800 regardless of what kind of mouse you build around it.

    I’ve tried a number of sensors and ADNS-9800 is my favourite by far. I’ll continue to stick with it as long as there’s nothing better.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 5 years ago

      Umm…there are many objectively better sensors.

      Since I know you are knowledgeable, it makes me think you are being sarcastic.

        • Meadows
        • 5 years ago

        I would probably consider trying the ADNS-3090 sometime, I haven’t tried that yet. Other than that, the 9800 does what I expect it to do and flawlessly. I use it with tracking aides disabled and 800 dpi, by the way.

        I’m not entirely sure what you mean by “objectively” better. My criteria include no tracking or angle snapping, as little acceleration as possible (prefer none if possible, to set it in software when needed), no jitter, no random walk, no jumps at all in the sensor input, and proper behaviour in sudden or high speed (“flick”) movements.

        Some of those depend on a pristine (and appropriately fixed) lens or some particular type of mousepad, but I’ve tried a number of mice (both optical and laser, both cheap and expensive) on cloth, plastic, and aluminium pads, before settling on laser using the 9800.

          • boberson105
          • 5 years ago

          If you were actually serious about looking for sensors that minimize jitter, acceleration or jumps, you would know already to just stay away from any laser mice in general. The 3090 or 3310 are probably the best sensors I’ve ever used in my life and are worth using over any laser engine.

          On another note, I know the techreport doesn’t focus on mice but It disappointed me to not read anything about perfect control speed, inherent laser engine acceleration, or lift off distance. Maybe these are things to look into for future mouse reviews. If the site is going to be recommending peripherals I would hope they would be as informed as possible.

            • Meadows
            • 5 years ago

            They don’t review mice often, let them warm up.

            As for the 3090, I will eventually try it out, but believe me when I tell you my current choice of mouse is still the best I’ve had yet. It’ll take something truly impeccable in a design form that’s just right to sway me.

            • auxy
            • 5 years ago

            “perfect control speed” and “inherent laser engine acceleration” sound like snake oil/FUD nonsense to me. ( `ー´)ワ

            • Meadows
            • 5 years ago

            The first one may be, but the laser acceleration thing happened with several sensors.

            For example, the predecessor to the ADNS-9800 sensor was the ADNS-9500, which in gaming circles was widely known to have a tiny amount of acceleration at all times (i.e. fast flicks registered a greater distance input than the same movements did when tracked slowly).

            The 9800 sensor doesn’t seem to have that anymore, as far as I’m concerned. (If it still does, then it’s been reduced to such a degree that I can’t tell it anymore.)

            • auxy
            • 5 years ago

            It definitely doesn’t in my M95 (which uses the ADNS-9800.) I tested it using MarkC’s Mouse Movement Recorder, which reports 1:1 at all times.

      • anotherengineer
      • 5 years ago

      What mouse are you using?

        • Meadows
        • 5 years ago

        Roccat Kone XTD.

        I also like their driver and the ergonomy of the mouse itself. Most comfortable mouse I’ve had yet.

          • anotherengineer
          • 5 years ago

          Thanks

          • Metonymy
          • 5 years ago

          The laser or the LED version?

          Thanks

            • Meadows
            • 5 years ago

            Laser.
            The LED one has the word “Optical” in its name.

      • Vergil
      • 5 years ago

      Sensor doesn’t make a good mouse, most people don’t even need anything above 1000 DPI.
      What makes a good mouse is: utility and comfortability. Sensor comes in third, actually thinking about it; I think build materials come in third and the sensor comes in 4th place. Hold on, on a third thought, I think that the price comes in 4th place and the sensor in 5th. Wait, ahh… Nevermind that’s it.

        • Meadows
        • 5 years ago

        It’s okay if you know nothing about mice. The sensor has almost nothing to do with the DPI.

        Any mouse worth its salt will let you set a proper DPI value, which is between 400-1600 depending on the type of game and personal preference. Nobody *actually* uses 8200 DPI, trust me.

        The maximum value is still useful in suggesting precision tracking in general, that is, chances are an 8000 DPI mouse used at 1000 DPI will track more precisely than a 2000 DPI mouse used at 1000 DPI.
        To set your preferred DPI in the above sane range, you also need to know the sensitivity step of the sensor: for example, you can set the ADNS-9800 in DPI steps of 200. If the driver lets you set strange values, e.g. 500 or 900 DPI, then you should never use those because they will be interpolated in software. (This is only a problem with more exotic sensors that may have DPI steps of 90 or 150 or something else and which the driver insists on rounding anyway.)

        In fact, a really cheap 1000-1200 DPI mouse will often perform much worse because they often use 800 DPI sensors from twelve years ago and put a multiplier on it in firmware, leading to [i<]actual jumps[/i<] in input when you draw arcs (or anything else), even if the Windows sensitivity is left at 6/11. I've seen those first-hand and kindly reject them, but it's your call.

    • anotherengineer
    • 5 years ago

    [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2AitTPI5U0[/url<] couldn't resist 😉

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 5 years ago

      lol weirdo <3

    • The Dark One
    • 5 years ago

    [quote<] Out of the box, the Torqs are configured for right-handed use, with the buttons under the right pinky finger disabled.[/quote<] Under the pinky? Now I wanna see your mousegrip!

      • Jason181
      • 5 years ago

      Probably three middle fingers on the left, middle/scroll, and right mouse buttons (that’s how I do).

        • derFunkenstein
        • 5 years ago

        same here. That’s something that has subconsciously changed over the years because I remember the first scroll-mouse I had, I still used index and middle, and moved my middle finger to scroll.

        • Jeff Kampman
        • 5 years ago

        This is basically what I do: I hold the sides of the mouse between my thumb and pinky finger, and the index/middle/ring are handling left/middle/right duties, respectively. I’d post a picture, but you don’t want to see what several days of clearing honeysuckle have done to my hands.

          • auxy
          • 5 years ago

          Is honeysuckle bad for your hands? (´・ω・`)

          I used to suck on honeysuckle right off the vine outside my parent’s old house , never had a problem.

        • HisDivineOrder
        • 5 years ago

        Wow, that’s going to hurt you in the long term. You might want to pivot your wrist and put your index finger on the left mouse button.

      • Vergil
      • 5 years ago

      At least they realized their mistake and disabled those buttons. SMH

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This