Macro Detector — input pattern analyzer
A macro detector analyzes controller input statistically to identify patterns inconsistent with typical human input — the signatures of turbo controllers, macro firmware, and auto-fire mods. Our free browser-based detector runs three sub-tests over 30 seconds (rapid-fire trial, held-button trial, and combo trial), measures press rates, timing variance, rhythmic pulses during holds, and cross-button timing consistency, then produces a statistical signature report with confidence bands for each finding. The report is designed for tournament organizers and esports compliance staff who need defensible data — not for accusations. The tool cannot prove cheating; what it can do is identify patterns worth investigating further. No download required.
How the input pattern analysis works
Trial 1 — Rapid-fire (10 seconds)
The user presses a single button (face button A is recommended) as fast as possible for 10 seconds. The tool records every press and release timestamp at frame resolution and computes the press rate in Hz, the mean interval between presses, the standard deviation of intervals, the coefficient of variation, and the mean press duration. Press rates above 25Hz sustained are mechanically infeasible for humans. Coefficient of variation below 0.05 indicates unnaturally regular timing — the signature of turbo or macro firmware. Human rapid-press typically lands at 6 to 15Hz with 15 to 40 percent variation.
Trial 2 — Held-button (10 seconds)
The user holds any button continuously for 10 seconds. A normally functioning controller registers exactly one press event and one release event. Turbo-enabled controllers generate rhythmic on/off pulses while the button is held — typically 10 to 30Hz cycles. The tool measures the total pressed duration, the number of release events that occurred during the held window, and applies autocorrelation-via-coefficient-of-variation analysis to detect rhythmic patterns. A pulse strength above 0.7 with detectable frequency is a strong turbo signature.
Trial 3 — Combo (10 seconds)
The user performs a 4-button sequence (A → B → X → Y) five times in 10 seconds. The tool extracts each completed combo, measures the total combo duration and the inter-button gap at each step, and computes the standard deviation across all combos. Sub-frame timing across multiple buttons (inter-button gap standard deviation below 5ms across 3+ combos) is extremely difficult for humans and a signature of scripted macro replay. Natural human combos vary by 30 to 80ms between attempts.
Per-trial interpretations with confidence bands
Each sub-test produces a plain-language interpretation paired with a confidence range — for example, "Press rate exceeds human range, confidence 85 to 95 percent". Bands rather than point estimates reflect that the underlying analysis is probabilistic, not absolute. Confidence is calibrated against data quality (sample size, trial completion) as well as how cleanly the pattern fits a known signature. Insufficient data results in a 0 to 30 percent confidence band and an "ambiguous" classification.
Copyable plain-text report
The results panel includes a Copy Report button that exports a plain-text version of every metric, every interpretation, every confidence band, plus a timestamp and the controller identifier. The format is designed for tournament organizers attaching evidence to rulings, esports compliance staff documenting their analyses, or content creators verifying their own setups before streaming. No images, no logos, no styled output — the report is functional, not promotional.
Statistical signature ranges
Each sub-test uses thresholds calibrated against published human-input research and known turbo-firmware behavior. The ranges below represent typical bounds rather than absolute limits — outliers exist in both directions, which is why the tool reports confidence bands rather than verdicts.
| Metric | Typical Human Range | Non-Human Signature |
|---|---|---|
| Press rate (rapid-fire) | 6 to 15 Hz sustained — typical engaged rapid-press | Press rates above 15 Hz sustained are difficult for most humans. Above 25 Hz is essentially impossible without assistance. Skilled speedrunners and arcade-game players can briefly hit 12 to 18 Hz, but sustaining it for 10 seconds is rare. |
| Coefficient of variation | 0.15 to 0.40 — natural timing jitter | Human input shows 15 to 40 percent variation between successive presses. Coefficient of variation below 0.05 indicates timing precision typical of firmware, not muscle. Below 0.10 is suspicious. Above 0.50 may indicate inconsistent effort rather than non-human input. |
| Release events during 10s hold | 0 to 1 — expected for a properly functioning controller | A normally functioning controller registers one press event and one release event during a continuous hold. Multiple release events while supposedly holding suggest turbo firmware, a failing switch, or accidental finger lift. Rhythmic patterns (5+ releases at consistent intervals) point specifically to turbo. |
| Combo inter-button gap std dev | 30 to 100 ms — practiced human variation | Even skilled players vary their inter-button timing by 30 to 100ms across attempts. Standard deviation under 5ms across 3+ combos indicates timing precision inconsistent with manual input. Macro firmware replays the same gaps exactly each time; humans cannot. |
| Confidence bands | Ranges, not point estimates | Each interpretation reports a confidence range like "70 to 85 percent" rather than a single number. Bands reflect that the analysis is probabilistic and depends on data quality. A wide band (e.g., 40 to 65 percent) signals that the data was inconclusive and further investigation is warranted. A narrow high band (85 to 95 percent) signals strong evidence within the limits of what browser-resolution timing can capture. |
Compatible controllers
Any controller the browser recognizes as a standard gamepad can be analyzed. The tool measures timing patterns rather than hardware features, so the analysis is consistent across major brands.
Esports fairness and input integrity
Related diagnostics
Macro Detector questions
No. The tool identifies patterns inconsistent with typical human input — it cannot definitively prove that any specific behavior was the result of cheating, firmware modification, or assistive input. Skilled humans can produce statistics that overlap with macro firmware on some metrics. Certain games introduce timing artifacts that mimic non-human patterns. The output is a signature for investigation, not a verdict. Use the report as one piece of evidence in a process that includes context, history, and judgment — never as a sole basis for accusation.
Three audiences. Tournament organizers running events where turbo controllers and macro firmware are banned and need a way to verify competitors' controllers before matches. Esports compliance staff investigating reports and documenting their analyses for rulings. Content creators and competitive players verifying their own setups before streaming, so they can demonstrate publicly that their input pattern is consistent with manual play. The tool is intentionally not designed for angry players trying to prove a rival is cheating — that use case invites false accusations.
Because a "Human Plausibility Score" being shared on social media is dangerous. Either people brag about being human (strange) or about being suspicious (which fashion-codes cheating). And a shareable image with a verdict label is the perfect tool for false accusations. We made a deliberate choice to break the pattern from our other tests here — this tool serves a different audience with different needs. The output is functional data, not viral content.
For obvious cases, very accurate. Clear turbo patterns (rhythmic on/off during a held button at 10 to 30 Hz with low timing variance) are essentially unmistakable, and the confidence bands reflect that. For borderline cases — sub-15Hz rapid-press, single mid-hold release events, mildly consistent combo timing — the tool is honest about uncertainty and reports wider confidence bands. The hard distinction between "skilled human" and "assisted input" at the margins requires more than statistical analysis. The tool will not pretend to make that distinction.
It depends on how fast and how consistent. Press rates of 12 to 15 Hz with natural timing variance (above 15 percent coefficient of variation) will land in the "consistent with human rapid-press" interpretation. Press rates above 18 Hz with low variance may land in "borderline" — neither human-affirming nor non-human, with a wide confidence band. The tool will not declare you a cheater for being fast; it will say what your data is consistent with.
Yes. The tool reports the input pattern, not its legal status. Turbo controllers are legal in many contexts (casual play, some game genres, accessibility setups) and banned in others (most fighting-game tournaments, competitive shooters with anti-cheat). The tool tells you the pattern is present; the legal interpretation is for the tournament rules and the user to decide.
Sometimes. Input-modding devices like the Cronus Zen and XIM convert mouse/keyboard input into controller signals, which often produces unnaturally consistent timing patterns the tool can detect. However, these devices also include human-randomization features designed to defeat statistical detection, and skilled users can tune them to produce more human-like outputs. The tool may flag obvious cases but cannot reliably detect well-tuned setups. Hardware inspection remains the most reliable detection method for these devices.
No. All input capture and analysis happens locally in your browser tab. Nothing is sent to a server, nothing is stored across sessions, and the report exists only in your browser until you copy it or close the tab. The report you copy is a plain-text string in your clipboard — share it where you choose to.
How we analyze input patterns
Three sub-tests run sequentially over 30 seconds total, each producing statistical metrics on different aspects of input behavior. Rapid-fire: press rate (Hz), interval mean, interval standard deviation, coefficient of variation, mean press duration. Held-button: total pressed duration, count of release events during the held window, detected rhythmic pulse frequency (Hz) via autocorrelation-by-coefficient-of-variation, pulse strength (0 to 1). Combo: completed combos, mean combo total duration, combo duration standard deviation, mean inter-button gap, inter-button gap standard deviation. Each metric is interpreted against thresholds calibrated from published human-input research and known turbo/macro firmware behavior. Confidence bands rather than point estimates are reported because the underlying analysis is probabilistic and depends on data quality (sample size, trial completion, environmental noise). The tool deliberately does not produce a score, grade, or share card — this is a verification tool, not a benchmark, and producing shareable accusation-shaped content would be irresponsible. Methodology published by GPADLAB Engineering.
Run the full Controller Health Score
This test is one of six diagnostics in the composite score. See how your controller stacks up overall.
Run the Benchmark