Between the X2H Mini and EC1-CW, the X2H Mini comes out ahead in max dpi and polling rate, while the EC1-CW wins on several specs. Overall, the X2H Mini scores 88.2 and the EC1-CW scores 54.7 on our Mars Score.
Which should you buy?
The X2H Mini is the clear pick on raw spec strength, leading by 33.5 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 X2H 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 EC1-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 X2H Mini is the safer default. The other model is the right choice only when its specific advantages line up with your priorities.
Why Pulsar - X2H Mini wins
- ▲Max DPI — 900.00% more. 32000 vs 3200.
- ▲Polling rate — 700.00% more. 8000 Hz vs 1000 Hz.
- ▲Weight — 24.00 g less. 53 vs 77.
- ▲Buttons — 1.00 more. 6 vs 5.
Why BenQ - EC1-CW wins
- No decisive advantages.
Spec comparison
Sensor
| Spec | Pulsar - X2H Mini | BenQ - EC1-CW |
|---|---|---|
| Max DPI | 32000lead | 3200 |
| Max IPS | 750lead | 400 |
| Polling rate | 8000 Hzlead | 1000 Hz |
Design
| Spec | Pulsar - X2H Mini | BenQ - EC1-CW |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | 53 glead | 77 g |
| Buttons | 6lead | 5 |
| Shape | Symmetrical | Right-handed |
Connectivity
| Spec | Pulsar - X2H Mini | BenQ - EC1-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.