Compare Logitech G PRO X Superlight 2 vs Cherry M64 Pro

Fingertip grip comfort was praised by reviewers who found the shape comfortable for fingertip use.

Fingertip grip comfort was weak in the available evidence because reviewers found the curvature or wider dimensions awkward for fingertip use.

Cable quality was a recurring complaint, with reviewers criticizing drag, resistance, and the dated rubber cable.

Cable flexibility itself was generally liked, but flexible cables did not fully solve the awkward side-charging experience.

Charging convenience was praised for USB-C, faster charging, and fewer desk cables.

Charging convenience was the most common drawback, with quick charging and flexible cables offset by an awkward side port.

Customization drew positive comments for granular controls and strong software-hardware integration, though it still depends heavily on G Hub.

Button customization was limited in the one scored review, which said the mouse restricts customization.

Left and right clicks were praised for satisfying tactility, light rapid tapping, and improved main-button feel.

Left and right click quality was mixed because reviewers noted wobble or a stiff right button despite otherwise usable performance.

Scroll wheel feedback was mixed, with some praise for tactility but repeated criticism that it felt stiff, mushy, vague, or less precise.

Scroll wheel quality was well received for tactile steps, satisfying use, granular control, and easy movement.

Glide smoothness was highly mixed: some reviewers praised effortless glide, while others disliked stock-skate drag or control-heavy movement.

Glide smoothness was praised, with reviewers describing the M64 as butter smooth and noting excellent glide across surfaces.

Side button quality was the most contested control area, ranging from well-placed and improved to repeatedly described as mushy.

Side button quality split reviewers: some complained about reach, mushiness, or pre-travel, while others praised the thumb buttons as dependable or exceptional.

Materials quality was praised for a cool, soft matte plastic feel.

Materials quality was mixed, balancing praise for a non-hollow shell and durable finish against complaints about cheap feel and fingerprint-prone coating.

Software usability was split sharply: some reviewers found G Hub easy and powerful, while others called it unintuitive or frustrating.

Software usability was polarizing: no-software plug-and-play appealed to some, while others found manual button combinations annoying or tedious.

Palm grip comfort was limited by one review saying palm-grip players may be better served elsewhere.

Palm grip comfort depended on hand size, with some reviewers able to palm it comfortably while IGN found it cramped for large hands.

Battery life was generally praised as long-lasting, though reviewers noted it drops with higher polling rates.

Battery life was mixed: several reviews found it strong or good, while IGN said peak-performance use drained it unpredictably.

Premium feel was positive overall, with reviewers saying the mouse feels sturdy, premium, and high quality.

Premium feel was mixed: some impressions found it solid and distinctive, while IGN said the ultralight design felt a little cheap.

Grip texture was well received, with reviewers praising the grippy surface, recessed sides, or usefulness for clammy hands.

Grip texture was mixed: reviewers liked the grippy or smooth finish, while one criticized the black coating as a fingerprint magnet.

Durability over time had limited but positive evidence from a longer-use reviewer whose unit remained rock solid.

Durability over time was mixed, with one review praising finish wear resistance and another treating click wobble as concerning.

Claw grip comfort was broadly positive, with reviewers calling the mouse comfortable or easy to use for claw grip.

Claw grip comfort was generally strong thanks to the low button height, but large-hand users may still feel cramped.

DPI coverage was seen as technically strong and granular, but one reviewer felt the extreme ceiling is more marketing than everyday value.

DPI range was mixed: one reviewer found enough presets to settle in, while another criticized the lack of fine granularity.

Lift-off distance control was viewed as useful and noticeably adjustable, especially for players who fine-tune mouse behavior.

Lift-off distance had limited mixed evidence, with one reviewer needing to switch to 2 mm when using hard surfaces.

FPS suitability was one of the strongest areas, with repeated praise for speed, responsiveness, and competitive first-person shooter use.

FPS suitability was generally positive for responsiveness and precision, although one reviewer viewed the M64 shape as better for slower-paced play.

Build quality was repeatedly praised as solid, squeak-free, well put together, and elite despite the light shell.

Build quality was generally solid, with many reviewers reporting sturdy shells and no creaking, though some found flexing or minor creaks.

Click noise was mixed: some liked the satisfying click sound, while others found it loud or high-pitched.

Click noise was acceptable to mixed, ranging from loud in one review to balanced or mellow in others.

Button responsiveness was mostly praised for tactile, responsive clicks, though one reviewer disliked the heavier actuation for spam clicking.

Button responsiveness was mostly reliable, with reviewers saying buttons were fine in game, avoided misclicks, and never misbehaved.

The HERO 2 sensor was widely praised as crisp, precise, fast, and close to flawless, though some reviewers framed the higher specs as incremental.

Sensor performance was consistently positive, with reviewers reporting good tracking, no hiccups, and reliable behavior even on less-than-ideal surfaces.

Wireless latency was praised directly, with reviewers reporting no latency issues or seemingly no latency at all.

Wireless latency was praised, with reviewers reporting no lag, no delays, and no wireless-experience issues.

Wireless performance was praised as seamless and flawless, with no cable-related compromise in use.

Wireless performance was a major strength, with reviewers reporting top-notch, smooth, responsive, and issue-free wireless use.

Surface compatibility was mixed, with good results across many surfaces but complaints on softer pads and warnings to tune surface modes.

Surface compatibility was positive in the scored review, which found the sensor performed well on plastic and wood surfaces.

Connection stability was praised in one review for not faltering even in a difficult RF environment.

Connection stability was strong in the scored reviews, with no hiccups, no stuttering, and no reliability problems called out.

Profile behavior was mixed: app-linked settings were useful, but onboard-profile handling was described as confusing in G Hub.

Profile and setting switching was divisive: on-device presets can be quick, but bottom controls and indicator-light workflows were tedious or problematic.

Value was mixed: reviewers praised the performance tier but often questioned the price and upgrade value from the original Superlight.

Value for money was highly mixed, with praise from some reviewers but repeated concerns about the 8K upcharge and $139 competition.

Reviewers consistently described the mouse as accurate in games, with especially strong praise for tracking, pointer accuracy, and shot control.

Reviewers praised tracking precision for smooth response, aim adjustments, and accurate shots, with one M64 user calling the experience very good.

The 2.4GHz connection was praised through an instant, fast connection experience with the included dongle.

The 2.4GHz connection was praised in one review as both fast and reliable.

Long-session comfort was strongly positive in one review that reported almost no hand fatigue after long sessions.

Long-session comfort had limited but strong evidence, with one reviewer reporting no hand fatigue after long gaming sessions.

Motion consistency was described positively, with reviewers calling motion smooth, sharp, and accurate.

Motion consistency was a strength, with reviewers describing smooth response, consistent tracking, and no wireless tracking problems.

Ergonomics were generally positive for comfort and contouring, but one review noted large hands may find the shape less ergonomic.

The ergonomic design was usually praised for the thumb groove, low profile, and locked-in feel, but it was less successful for larger hands.

Reviewers strongly praised the low weight, calling it excellent, effortless, and well balanced for the mouse size.

Weight was one of the clearest strengths, with reviewers repeatedly calling the mouse very light, impressively lightweight, or easy to maneuver.

Switch feel split reviewers: many loved the crisp, tactile Lightforce feel, while others found the clicks heavier or too tactile.

Switch feel was mostly praised as amazing, fast, snappy, and satisfying, though one early hands-on impression was more reserved.

Weight distribution received positive evidence from a reviewer who specifically praised the balance.

Balance and weight distribution drew positive comments, with reviewers describing the build as well balanced or having good weight balance.

Polling-rate opinions were mixed: several reviewers felt clear responsiveness gains, while others saw 2,000Hz as fine but not industry-leading.

The polling rate was generally seen as responsive and smooth, though IGN found the jump beyond 1000Hz hard to notice and tied it to battery drain.

Shape comfort was broadly praised as safe, familiar, and very comfortable, though a few reviewers disliked the rounded shape personally.

Shape comfort was mostly praised for a natural, distinctive M64 feel, though reviewers also framed it as a less-safe shape for some users.

Acceleration feel received direct praise in one review, where the reviewer enjoyed its smoothness in Diablo IV.

Click latency was praised as very low by some reviewers, though one technical reviewer found it merely good rather than flagship-leading.

Cross-platform compatibility was praised through G Hub support for both Windows and macOS.

Debounce customization received negative evidence from one reviewer, who found the lowest debounce setting caused ghost or slam-click behavior.

PowerPlay compatibility was viewed positively, though one reviewer called the accessory expensive.

Drag click support had limited positive evidence from one reviewer who called drag clicking pretty awesome.

Ecosystem integration was praised for Logitech presets, backward compatibility, and community/profile support.

Firmware reliability had limited positive evidence, with one reviewer calling the dongle and mouse firmware update super easy.

Handedness support was mixed because the symmetrical shape helps lefties, but the side buttons remain left-side only.

Macro support was praised for an easy-to-use macro tool that guides users through setup.

MOBA suitability was weaker because one reviewer found the heavier clicks worse for spam-click games.

Onboard memory was supported by the ability to save multiple profiles, though evidence was more about usefulness than enthusiasm.

Portability was supported by the dongle-storage cover, which one reviewer framed as essential for esports travel.

Programmable side buttons were useful to one reviewer for DPI adjustment, especially because the mouse lacks a dedicated DPI button.

The lack of RGB was generally accepted as a worthwhile tradeoff for battery life, weight, and the mouse’s clean look.

Skate durability was a repeated concern, with reviewers calling the PTFE feet thin, meh, or unlikely to last long.

Software stability had limited but positive evidence from one review calling the G Hub interface stable.

Switch durability evidence centered on optical-switch reliability and reduced double-click concerns, with reviewers treating it as a meaningful benefit.

Weight tuning was weakly received because the swappable cover options were seen as features most people would not find useful.