Zowie EC3-C Review

EC-C Series Overview

Not much has changed besides a few key features: the EC-C series retains PixArt's PMW3360, Huano main button switches, a matte finish, and on-board configurability. The EC-C series also has two large feet instead of the four smaller ones found on the EC-B series. Additionally, it introduces a more flexible cable that resembles a braided paracord and offers a lower click latency setting. The EC3-C updates the EC series in two significant ways. Firstly, it showcases a new, smaller design; while the width remains consistent at the front, middle, and back, the EC3 is shorter and not as tall compared to the EC2. Established in 2008, Zowie is now part of BenQ and focuses on gaming peripherals and gear, making it a well-known name in the gaming community.

Specifications

Packaging Contents

In the box, there's a set of replacement mouse feet, a sticker, a warranty card, and a user guide, all alongside the mouse.

Mouse Weight Comparison

The EC2-B weighed in at about 91 g, while the VAXEE Outset AX was at 81 g, and the VAXEE ZYGEN NP-01S came in at 68 g. In contrast, the EC3-C isn't overly heavy, but it also doesn't feel super light. My scale registers roughly 78 g (+/- 1 g), whereas Zowie claims it weighs 70 g when the cable isn’t attached, which seems a bit off.

Cable Flexibility

Overall, it represents a significant upgrade. I would place it just under the Xtrfy MZ1 in terms of cable flexibility, but the gap is minimal. The flexibility of the EC3-C surpasses both earlier Zowie and VAXEE cables. The EC3-C also includes a braided, paracord-like cable. Additionally, similar to the latest Zowie and VAXEE mice, the cable exit is designed to angle upwards.

Mouse Feet Performance

Included is a set of replacement mouse feet. The small indentations next to the feet help in removing them easily. Glide performance is excellent. The ring surrounding the sensor guarantees that CPI remains steady even when vertical pressure is applied. The EC3-C features standard black-dyed PTFE (Teflon) feet with slightly rounded edges.

Offering white-dyed pure PTFE feet for a quicker glide as an optional buy, Zowie complements the standard black-dyed feet. Both options share a thickness of about 0.6 mm, ensuring a consistent feel.

Shape Adaptation

The geometry of the EC3-C remains unchanged, maintaining the same shape as the EC2-B. The EC3-C is essentially a compressed version of the EC2-B, with a slightly lower hump. Although the EC3-C is shorter than the EC2-B, the width at the front, middle, and back remains identical. This means that players who felt the EC2 was too long but liked everything else will find the EC3-C to be a solid option. However, those who expected the EC3-C to be just a smaller version of the EC2-B might find themselves disappointed.

In my experience, the EC3-C feels great with a claw grip, especially since my hands measure 19 cm in length and 10 cm in width. It’s a medium-sized mouse with a noticeable hump that tends to fit most hand sizes well. The EC3-C is adaptable, making it suitable for all three main grip styles: palm, claw, and fingertip grip.

Mouse Dimensions Overview

For a complete overview of all the measurements, check out this sheet put together by a respected community member. The measurements that have two decimal points were recorded using a caliper, while those with one decimal were noted with a ruler. Notably, "Front height" refers to the space from the base to the main buttons. This table features the dimensions of the Zowie EC3-C along with various other ergonomic mice designed for right-handed users.

Build Durability

No accidental clicks happen when you slam down the mouse. Excessive force is needed to activate the side buttons by squeezing the sides. There’s no creaking or flexing of the shell when lateral pressure is applied. The mouse doesn't rattle when shaken, and overall build quality is very solid.

Button Performance

The button stiffness is medium, creating a balanced feel. The switches used are Huano types with a black shell and blue plunger. The click feel is snappy and enjoyable, with low post-travel and moderate pre-travel. Overall, the main buttons on the EC3-C perform very well.

The buttons are well-placed and easy to actuate by rolling your thumb across them. They are smaller than those on the EC2-A and sit a bit higher. The back button, however, has a slightly less even pressure point. The click feel is satisfying, with minimal post-travel and a moderate to low pre-travel distance. The side buttons really shine here, providing a good gaming experience. A set of unbranded switches, likely Huano with a white plunger, is utilized.

Both the CPI and polling rate control buttons at the bottom of the mouse function perfectly.

Scroll Wheel Performance

The middle (scroll wheel) click requires high force for actuation. Another Huano switch (red plunger) is used here. Scrolling is notably lighter, which, combined with the stiff wheel click, could result in accidental scrolling when pressing the wheel click. The scroll wheel is decent. Compared to earlier Zowie wheels, this one shows a big improvement, featuring more steps (24-step instead of 16-step), but it's still noisier than most others while keeping most of the tactility. An optical encoder is used.

Coating Quality

Overall, the materials are excellent. After cleaning, there are no signs of wear left, making it easy to maintain. It doesn’t attract fingerprints or dirt, ensuring a clean look. The EC3-C has a smooth matte surface throughout.

Disassembly Process

The datasheet for the Cypress CY7C64356-48LTXC MCU can be found here. Notably, the MCU is located at the back of the device. The main PCB is attached to the bottom shell with two screws, while the assembly, which includes the main and side-button PCBs, is held in place by four screws. The scroll wheel is housed in a casing connected to the bottom shell, pressing down on the wheel click switch found on the main PCB. Inside the EC3-C, a unique design by Zowie is revealed. The top and bottom shell can easily be separated, but this process requires removing a single screw located beneath the large rear skate. Disassembling the EC3-C is quite straightforward.

We can assume that shared tooling is in play for a future wireless version. The main PCB was produced on May 28, 2021.

I'm unable to find any noteworthy flaws regarding the soldering and overall quality of the PCB.

Sensor Performance Overview

The four pre-defined CPI steps available out of the box are 400, 800, 1600, and 3200. The maximum tracking speed of the PixArt PMW3360 is 250 IPS, which translates to 6.35 m/s. This sensor can achieve up to 12,000 CPI. The Zowie EC3-C features this advanced sensor, the PixArt PMW3360.

CPI Calibration Accuracy

In this test, I'm examining whether nominal CPI aligns with actual CPI. Ideally, the difference between nominal and actual CPI should be minimal, but achieving a perfect match is often unrealistic. Several factors can influence this, such as the thickness of mouse feet, the mousing surface, the mounting height of the sensor not meeting specifications, and the firmware. "CPI" (counts per inch) refers to the number of counts a mouse records when moved one inch. However, keep in mind that variance can vary from unit to unit, so your experience may differ.

As you can see, the deviation is minor, marking a very good outcome. The reason CPI accuracy is crucial is due to the EC3-C's limitation in freely adjusting CPI steps. I've focused my testing on the four most popular CPI settings: 400, 800, 1600, and 3200.

Motion Delay Assessment

The G403 serves as our control subject, featuring a 3366 sensor that displays no noticeable smoothing throughout its entire CPI range. This mouse is tested first, giving it a slight advantage. The focus of this evaluation is sensor smoothing, which is the process of averaging motion data over multiple capture frames to minimize jitter at higher CPI settings, resulting in increased motion delay. The primary aim is to achieve minimal smoothing. It's important to note that this test won't capture any additional sources of input delay. The term "motion delay" refers to all forms of sensor lag, and since precise measurement of motion delay isn't feasible, the only method of assessment involves comparing with the G403's performance.

I'm observing two xCounts plots—created at 3200 and 1600 CPI—to assess if there's any smoothing, which would show up as noticeable "kinks." At 3200 CPI, these kinks are clearly evident, while at 1600 CPI, there are none to be found. Additionally, it's worth noting that SPI timing jitter is quite minimal.

To understand motion delay, I'm analyzing xSum plots produced at 1600 and 3200 CPI. At 3200 CPI, a noticeable motion delay difference of about 3.5 ms appears, which aligns with what you'd anticipate from a 3360 sensor. This sensor features 32 frames of smoothing when operating at or above 2100 CPI with SROM 4 or earlier. Interestingly, at 1600 CPI, there’s no variation in motion delay, while the line positioned more to the left indicates the sensor experiencing less motion delay.

Speed-Related Accuracy Management

When discussing "acceleration," what is commonly referred to is speed-related accuracy variance (SRAV). The concept revolves around how the cursor doesn't move the same distance when the mouse is moved the same physical distance at varying speeds, instead of the mouse itself having fixed positive or negative acceleration. A great way to test this is to compare it with a control subject known for its minimal SRAV, which in this scenario is the G403. The plot clearly shows that there's no displacement between the two cursor paths, confirming that SRAV is extremely low.

Optimal Sensor Performance

The sensor shows no indication of malfunctioning, and I've only managed to reach a modest speed of 4.5 m/s, which falls within the stated PCS range. Perfect Control Speed (or PCS for short) refers to the highest speed at which you can move the mouse and its sensor without any issues occurring.

Polling Rate Performance

The performance and appearance of the three available polling rates—1000 Hz, 500 Hz, and 125 Hz—are all satisfactory.

Paint Test Analysis

Lastly, there is no sensor lens movement. At 3200 CPI, the smoothing feature effectively eliminates any jitter that might theoretically occur. No jitter can be seen at 400, 800, and 1600 CPI, and no issues with angle snapping are present. This test is used to indicate any potential problems with angle snapping (non-native straightening of linear motion) and jitter, along with any sensor lens rattle.

Conclusion

Zowie's mice line-up has been updated after years of stagnation, with the EC3-C leading the charge. However, amidst the notable enhancements, a puzzling mistake has slipped through QA.

There is still room for improvement, despite the fact that the scroll wheel is definitely not as flimsy as it once was. With the addition of more steps—24-step rather than 16-step—it shows some progress. However, CS players might still choose the stiffer and more precise scrolling found in earlier models. The scroll wheel on the EC3-C is much better than what was used in previous Zowie versions and the VAXEE mice, but "better" can be a vague term. The noise levels have become more manageable, yet they remain higher than what most other scroll wheels offer. Additionally, the combination of a lighter scroll and a heavy wheel click can result in accidental scrolling when pressing the wheel click. Overall, while the EC3-C's scroll wheel has improved, there's still a way to go for it to reach its full potential.

In terms of buttons, the EC3-C performs admirably overall. While both the main and side buttons have some pre-travel, this is intentional, as Zowie designs their mice mainly for CS players who prefer buttons that aren’t too sensitive. Unlike the EC2-A, which had poor side buttons, the EC3-C excels here, particularly with its impressive lack of post-travel on the side buttons.

Moving on to the mouse feet, they are large, reminiscent of the older EC-A series, and are designed to be a bit slower. However, the glide is quite satisfactory, and Zowie includes a set of replacement mouse feet. For players wanting a quicker experience, a faster set is available for separate purchase. Notably, CPI deviation remains minimal, regardless of whether users opt for the stock or faster feet.

The cable is the next advancement. Previously, Zowie's stiffness in rubber cables was only alleviated by the angled cable exit, which made using a bungee easier. With the EC3-C, Zowie retains the angled cable exit but has finally upgraded to a braided, paracord-like cable, similar to what many competitors use today. While it may not match the flexibility of the best cables on the market, it's a significant improvement for Zowie, outshining VAXEE's still rather rigid braided cables.

The need for Zowie to address this oversight for future batches is urgent, particularly since they typically do not provide firmware updates. It’s puzzling how such an obvious mistake slipped through QA, especially given the very limited configuration options on the EC3-C. It appears that this issue isn't just confined to my particular mouse but is a problem across all units. Unfortunately, on my device, the lift-off distance (LOD) adjustment simply doesn’t function; users are stuck on the medium setting, which is the default.

Unlike VAXEE's more refined design—where a button effortlessly cycles through three latency levels—Zowie requires you to press a specific button while plugging in the mouse to change settings. The EC3-C does introduce a second, lower click latency setting, which has been recorded as the lowest among Zowie mice thus far. However, it still doesn't match the click latency found in VAXEE mice at their lowest settings.

Previously, Zowie mice had no on-device configuration options. The EC3-C marks a shift in this approach, allowing for on-device adjustments, but with some significant drawbacks.

The EC3-C has left me feeling a bit let down. I had hoped for a mouse that was consistently smaller than the EC2, just as the EC2 is smaller than the EC1. Instead, Zowie opted for a different direction with the EC3-C, which feels more like an EC2.5 or EC2*—a rebalanced version rather than a straightforward smaller version of the EC2. This choice makes the EC3-C a viable option for those who find the EC2 too lengthy, but it doesn't quite meet the needs of players seeking a truly smaller mouse. The introduction of a new size option to the EC lineup is interesting, but my initial excitement for a compact EC3 now feels somewhat diminished. Ultimately, my disappointment stems from personal expectations rather than an objective flaw in the mouse itself.

The EC3-C definitely earns our Recommended award, proving itself to be a very solid mouse overall. When it comes to shape, buttons, and feet, the AX prioritizes differently, making the decision a matter of personal preference. While the 3360 in the EC3-C may be less costly than the 3389, it performs comparably in real-world use. However, the price is one point of contention; at $69.99, it is $10 more than the VAXEE Outset AX (or $5 more due to a recent price hike on all VAXEE mice). The most significant criticism of the EC3-C would indeed be its cost. Yet, it’s important to note that the EC3-C is a genuinely good mouse, having received numerous enhancements over earlier models. This conclusion may sound more negative than intended, but it's essential to appreciate the strengths of the EC3-C.