colorbot vs ai aimbot

[Fezzy3]

Hi, I have a question, colorbot or AI aimbot? which works more efficiently and has fewer problems and is less detectable

[geo1526]

Originally Posted by Fezzy3

Hi, I have a question, colorbot or AI aimbot? which works more efficiently and has fewer problems and is less detectable

both have advantages and disadvantages for different scenarios. it will just depend on your playstyle and preferrence. just get a day key for both and find out which one you like better

[petros2x]

As of now, there is no REAL aimbot that is based on AI. What people call AI at this time is simply the addition of filters or similar stuff. An AI aimbot would actually be able to identify the enemies / targets and act accordingly to it, but the so called AI aimbots you will find on the market are all color based as well. Don't be fooled.

[.KaiZy]

Originally Posted by petros2x

As of now, there is no REAL aimbot that is based on AI. What people call AI at this time is simply the addition of filters or similar stuff. An AI aimbot would actually be able to identify the enemies / targets and act accordingly to it, but the so called AI aimbots you will find on the market are all color based as well. Don't be fooled.

Semi wrong. Most public are hybrids, they use AI for target selection but use color for aim algo's.

AI model finds target - Colorbot aims

Pure AI does exist tho

[The Eternal]

Originally Posted by Fezzy3

Hi, I have a question, colorbot or AI aimbot? which works more efficiently and has fewer problems and is less detectable

It depends on your priority.

2PC AI Aimbot using capture card is the least detectable and most humanize. However, it’s expensive, has higher latency, and requires a beast of a second PC RTX 3060+

2PC Colorbot is much faster and efficient. Easy to setup and works great on low end pc/laptop. While it only detects colors, it’s still safe because nothing runs on your main PC

AI for multiple games. Colorbot for speed, specific game and budget option

[Fezzy3]

Originally Posted by The Eternal

It depends on your priority.

2PC AI Aimbot using capture card is the least detectable and most humanize. However, it’s expensive, has higher latency, and requires a beast of a second PC RTX 3060+

2PC Colorbot is much faster and efficient. Easy to setup and works great on low end pc/laptop. While it only detects colors, it’s still safe because nothing runs on your main PC

AI for multiple games. Colorbot for speed, specific game and budget option

and what is the situation with 1pc?

[.MOON.]

Originally Posted by petros2x

As of now, there is no REAL aimbot that is based on AI. What people call AI at this time is simply the addition of filters or similar stuff. An AI aimbot would actually be able to identify the enemies / targets and act accordingly to it, but the so called AI aimbots you will find on the market are all color based as well. Don't be fooled.

This is completely false lol. We use Yolo, DirectML, TensorRT, Onnx, OpenVINO, etc.. for AI. We spend months (and some years) labeling and annotating data for models. To call these colorbots and be this ignorant is simply a huge insult mr "expert".

Originally Posted by .KaiZy

Semi wrong. Most public are hybrids, they use AI for target selection but use color for aim algo's.

AI model finds target - Colorbot aims

Pure AI does exist tho

As if we haven't been doing pure AI for years tho am I right? XD

Originally Posted by The Eternal

It depends on your priority.

2PC AI Aimbot using capture card is the least detectable and most humanize. However, it’s expensive, has higher latency, and requires a beast of a second PC RTX 3060+

2PC Colorbot is much faster and efficient. Easy to setup and works great on low end pc/laptop. While it only detects colors, it’s still safe because nothing runs on your main PC

AI for multiple games. Colorbot for speed, specific game and budget option

This is kind of false, people can run AI with an rx580 or gtx 1650 GPUs no issues. Other solutions like cphook have developed great pipelines for cpu inference as well that have made it much more accessible. Maybe a few years ago I would have said go colorbot but advancements in the AI space have made it much better.

[Fezzy3]

Originally Posted by .MOON.

This is completely false lol. We use Yolo, DirectML, TensorRT, Onnx, OpenVINO, etc.. for AI. We spend months (and some years) labeling and annotating data for models. To call these colorbots and be this ignorant is simply a huge insult mr "expert".



As if we haven't been doing pure AI for years tho am I right? XD



This is kind of false, people can run AI with an rx580 or gtx 1650 GPUs no issues. Other solutions like cphook have developed great pipelines for cpu inference as well that have made it much more accessible. Maybe a few years ago I would have said go colorbot but advancements in the AI space have made it much better.

Do you know any good AI aimbot for 1pc? I'd like to test how it works because I don't have the 2pc set yet

[petros2x]

Originally Posted by .MOON.

This is completely false lol. We use Yolo, DirectML, TensorRT, Onnx, OpenVINO, etc.. for AI. We spend months (and some years) labeling and annotating data for models. To call these colorbots and be this ignorant is simply a huge insult mr "expert".

I don't think you had any reason to come at me like that, but lets turn the page on this.

I THINK I was careful enough to say "AI aimbots you will find on the market are all color based". Color BASED is not the same thing as a colorbot. Also, I wrote in caps that there are no "REAL" AI aimbot. You said yourself that you used AI to grab data for models, that's not the same thing as having an aimbot that works purely via AI, at least not the way I see it. Maybe we disagree on what an AI aimbot is / should be. TO ME, an AI aimbot "would actually be able to identify the enemies / targets and act accordingly to it", being potentially usable in any game. BTW, that interpretation seems much more compatible with the definition of AI.

[.MOON.]

Originally Posted by petros2x

I don't think you had any reason to come at me like that, but lets turn the page on this.

I THINK I was careful enough to say "AI aimbots you will find on the market are all color based". Color BASED is not the same thing as a colorbot. Also, I wrote in caps that there are no "REAL" AI aimbot. You said yourself that you used AI to grab data for models, that's not the same thing as having an aimbot that works purely via AI, at least not the way I see it. Maybe we disagree on what an AI aimbot is / should be. TO ME, an AI aimbot "would actually be able to identify the enemies / targets and act accordingly to it", being potentially usable in any game. BTW, that interpretation seems much more compatible with the definition of AI.

No, you’re just changing the definition after being corrected.

AI aimbot does not mean “universal human level decision maker that works in every game.” It means the detection side is using a trained vision model, usually object detection, pose estimation, or instance segmentation. More advanced would include AI mouse models trained from a users actual physical mouse input.

YOLO/ONNX/TensorRT/OpenVINO pipelines are not color filters. They are actual model inference pipelines. A colorbot looks for pixel colors. An AI model detects TRAINED targets from image data. That difference is extremely basic.

Your first post said there are no real AI aimbots and that the ones on the market are all color based. That is false. Now you’re trying to say “well, my personal definition of AI is different.” I would suggest not moving the goalpost after being corrected.

You can say some products are hybrids. You can say some products market themselves badly. That’s fair, but saying real AI aimbots do not exist is just wrong.

[The Eternal]

Originally Posted by .MOON.

This is completely false lol. We use Yolo, DirectML, TensorRT, Onnx, OpenVINO, etc.. for AI. We spend months (and some years) labeling and annotating data for models. To call these colorbots and be this ignorant is simply a huge insult mr "expert".



As if we haven't been doing pure AI for years tho am I right? XD



This is kind of false, people can run AI with an rx580 or gtx 1650 GPUs no issues. Other solutions like cphook have developed great pipelines for cpu inference as well that have made it much more accessible. Maybe a few years ago I would have said go colorbot but advancements in the AI space have made it much better.

Running AI on RX 580 or GTX 1650 often leads to inference delay, which is why your own guide recommends an RTX 4060 for optimal results. Plus, the hidden costs of Elgato or AVerMedia cards add another $200-$300 to the bill just to get started

My 2PC Colorbot is designed to be the smart budget choice. You don't need an expensive capture card or a high end GPU to stay safe

[.MOON.]

Originally Posted by The Eternal

Running AI on RX 580 or GTX 1650 often leads to inference delay, which is why your own guide recommends an RTX 4060 for optimal results. Plus, the hidden costs of Elgato or AVerMedia cards add another $200-$300 to the bill just to get started

My 2PC Colorbot is designed to be the smart budget choice. You don't need an expensive capture card or a high end GPU to stay safe

This is not really accurate anymore.

People can still get hundreds of DPS on lower-end GPUs, NPUs, iGPUs, and APUs depending on the model size and pipeline. On my 4070, I see around 0.6–0.8ms inference on 320x320 models, and usually around 0.9–1.2ms on 640x640. Even something like an RX 580 can still be usable at 320x320 or 224x224, usually somewhere around 5–7ms depending on the backend and setup. A GTX 1650 is also better positioned than an RX 580 for this since it has access to TensorRT.

Also, you do not need a capture card for our setup. Capture cards are one option, but people can also use UDP, NDI, Moonlight streaming, or other capture methods. For color, the requirements are even lower since our colorbot mainly needs a decent 4-core CPU.

The realistic target we give people is at least around 120 DPS for decent tracking. More is obviously better, but acting like 2PC AI requires an RTX 3060+ and a $200–$300 capture card just to be usable is outdated.

Colorbot can absolutely be the cheaper/simple option, but AI is not some “beast PC only” thing anymore. Model size, input resolution, backend, and pipeline optimization matter way more than just saying “you need a 4060 or better.” I will say that we list a 4060 as recommended because it is a gpu that you can use pretty much any model on without any compromises.

[The Eternal]

Originally Posted by .MOON.

People still get hundreds of dps with those GPU. For instance on my 4070, I get 0.6 to 0.8ms inference on 320x320 and more like 0.9 to 1.2ms on 640x640 input models. Someone with a 580 might get like 5 or 7ms on 320x320 which is still perfectly usable. Also, you don't need a capture card for ours either. you can use udp, ndi, moonlight streaming, basically whatever you want.

My 2PC Colorbot is for the smart budget user. Using just a spare laptop or a Pi 4, without the $300 hidden costs of Elgato or the network latency and risks of ndi,udp streaming

You get 0ms inference delay and consistent performance without needing to fine tune GPU pipelines or clog your bandwidth

[.KaiZy]

Originally Posted by .MOON.

This is completely false lol. We use Yolo, DirectML, TensorRT, Onnx, OpenVINO, etc.. for AI. We spend months (and some years) labeling and annotating data for models. To call these colorbots and be this ignorant is simply a huge insult mr "expert".



As if we haven't been doing pure AI for years tho am I right? XD



This is kind of false, people can run AI with an rx580 or gtx 1650 GPUs no issues. Other solutions like cphook have developed great pipelines for cpu inference as well that have made it much more accessible. Maybe a few years ago I would have said go colorbot but advancements in the AI space have made it much better.

Ye we have been training massive LLM's that run around for years now, hence why games have felt so low quality.

Agreed, you don't need a crazy GPU anymore as long as you aren't running anything else on it (gaming + inference could get tricky depending on game with a 1650)

Originally Posted by The Eternal

My 2PC Colorbot is for the smart budget user. Using just a spare laptop or a Pi 4, without the $300 hidden costs of Elgato or the network latency and risks of ndi,udp streaming

You get 0ms inference delay and consistent performance without needing to fine tune GPU pipelines or clog your bandwidth

@ ig eternal was in hyperbolic time chamber and invented his own neutral data transmitting protocol that only uses air molecules

[.MOON.]

Originally Posted by The Eternal

My 2PC Colorbot is for the smart budget user. Using just a spare laptop or a Pi 4, without the $300 hidden costs of Elgato or the network latency and risks of ndi,udp streaming

You get 0ms inference delay and consistent performance without needing to fine tune GPU pipelines or clog your bandwidth

“0ms inference delay” is a nice sales line, but it is not how this works.

Color does not have AI model inference, sure. That does not mean the whole pipeline is 0ms. You still have to capture the frame, move it to the second device somehow, process it, make a decision, and send output back.

Also, if there is no capture card and no NDI/UDP/streaming, then how exactly is the second device receiving frames? There is always a transport method. There is always latency. There is always some cost or tradeoff.

Colorbot being cheaper and simpler is a fair argument. Pretending the pipeline has 0ms delay and no real transport tradeoff is not.