Between the X2V2 Mini and EC3-CW, the X2V2 Mini comes out ahead in max dpi and polling rate, while the EC3-CW wins on several specs. Overall, the X2V2 Mini scores 86.7 and the EC3-CW scores 55.2 on our Mars Score.
Which should you buy?
The X2V2 Mini is the clear pick on raw spec strength, leading by 31.5 points on the Mars Score. The margin is wide enough that the underdog only makes sense if its individual strengths line up with what you specifically need.
Pick the X2V2 Mini if you carry the device everywhere and weight or thickness has been the deciding factor before. The biggest gaps in its favor are max dpi, polling rate, weight, among others.
The EC3-CW similarly doesn't carry a headline advantage on the popular specs — look at the full table for category-specific deltas.
Both ship with comparable wireless, battery, so those specs don't separate the two — focus on the differences below.
Bottom line: the X2V2 Mini is the safer default. The other model is the right choice only when its specific advantages line up with your priorities.
Why Pulsar - X2V2 Mini wins
- ▲Max DPI — 712.50% more. 26000 vs 3200.
- ▲Polling rate — 700.00% more. 8000 Hz vs 1000 Hz.
- ▲Weight — 23.00 g less. 52 vs 75.
- ▲Buttons — 1.00 more. 6 vs 5.
Why BenQ - EC3-CW wins
- No decisive advantages.
Spec comparison
Sensor
| Spec | Pulsar - X2V2 Mini | BenQ - EC3-CW |
|---|---|---|
| Max DPI | 26000lead | 3200 |
| Max IPS | 650 | 650 |
| Polling rate | 8000 Hzlead | 1000 Hz |
Design
| Spec | Pulsar - X2V2 Mini | BenQ - EC3-CW |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | 52 glead | 75 g |
| Buttons | 6lead | 5 |
| Shape | Symmetrical | Right-handed |
Connectivity
| Spec | Pulsar - X2V2 Mini | BenQ - EC3-CW |
|---|---|---|
| Wireless | true | true |
| Battery | 70 h | 70 h |
Frequently asked
Spec-level deep dives
More from the same brands
vsMars is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you. Learn more.