G-Sync in the house!

Discussion in 'Computer Monitor Forum' started by southamptonfc, Jan 16, 2014.

  1. southamptonfc

    southamptonfc Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    646
    GPU:
    Zotac 4090 OC
    As I said, I had a 120hz monitor before, it's a big upgrage.

    I can and have compared 120hz LB and G-Sync because G-Sync monitors can do ULBM.

    ULBM is fine and nice if you never drop below 120fps but if you can't do that, G-Sync is better and clearer because of the lack of tearing.

    The monitor will automatically switch between ULBM and G-Sync so you can run ULBM at the desktop and G-Sync in games which seems like the best setup at the moment.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2014
  2. Spets

    Spets Guest

    Messages:
    3,500
    Likes Received:
    670
    GPU:
    RTX 4090
    Sounds great southamptonfc, looking even more forward to getting one now.
     
  3. Cyberdyne

    Cyberdyne Guest

    Messages:
    3,580
    Likes Received:
    308
    GPU:
    2080 Ti FTW3 Ultra
    What he is probably experiencing is not 'smooth'-ness. He most likely is benefiting from from the lack of input lag. It wont look any different, sure, but if you ever set a game to use 1/2 refresh rate vsync on a 60hz monitor you know it feel like there is a whole 1 second delay.

    Which arguably could be called smoothness. But it will not look any different, 30fps is going to look like 30fps, and 60fps is still going to look better, which I'm assuming is where the miscommunication comes in.
     
  4. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    ULBM on desktop has close to no value as it reduces pixel persistence (faster transition from one displayed frame to another) and desktop is mostly static.
    Maybe for movies, if there are any faster than 30fps or if played with player which calculated additional frames by shortening motion vectors.

    But while I use LB in games, I do not use it on desktop, as it's color, brightness/gamma and contrast does not match properly calibrated screen.
    And benefit of fast transition on mostly static desktop is so low that I prefer better color.

    As for G-Sync vs ULBM vs LB in games: LB allows you to reduce pixel persistence (transition time from frame to frame) allowing you to see new image faster as it's not mixed with old image.

    As you can see on Blurbusters tests even 144Hz screens blur last 4~5 frames together unless LB is in effect. That is why I question this "the lack of tearing makes the picture crystal clear and buttery smooth"
    As it's hardly "Crystal Clear" without LB/ULBM and part of "butter smooth" is "Blurry transition".

    And is reason why, I would like to see side by side comparison of LB vs GSync. As seeing separate images clearly has for me higher value than reducing frame variance from up to 8ms (120Hz) to virtual 0ms (GSync).
     

  5. southamptonfc

    southamptonfc Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    646
    GPU:
    Zotac 4090 OC
    Fine if you can maintain 120fps and you can handle the noticeable reduction of image quality with LB. Otherwise, G-sync is much better because of the lack of tearing, that is what makes the image clearer, it has nothing to do with frame variance.
     
  6. ---TK---

    ---TK--- Guest

    Messages:
    22,104
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    2x 980Ti Gaming 1430/7296
    how is the image quality running vsync vs letting the card off its leesh and running gsync?
     
  7. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Lack of tearing = VSync-ON
    Lack of tearing and proper frame variance time = GSync-ON

    <Wrote quite an explanation after this on each technology we have here and which deserves comparison in real side by side scenarios. But I removed it due to parts could be taken as insulting.>
     
  8. TheDeeGee

    TheDeeGee Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,634
    Likes Received:
    3,413
    GPU:
    NVIDIA RTX 4070 Ti
    Now all we need is Non-TN Garbage.
     
  9. southamptonfc

    southamptonfc Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    646
    GPU:
    Zotac 4090 OC
    Fixed that for you, OK I will stop responding to trolling now!
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2014
  10. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    To be exact we need OLED screens. Because they have no need for backlight, image to image transition is less than 0.01ms. They can therefore run at 300Hz or 2000Hz without issues as image is persistent till there is new one which requires change.

    In theory it's perfect for GSync, but in reality it by itself eliminates need for it.
    On one side it will kill need for GSync/FreeSync, but will provide clarity for moving images and not blurry transitions while technologically allowing for true timing free frame refresh.
     

  11. slickric21

    slickric21 Guest

    Messages:
    2,458
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    eVGA 1080ti SC / Gsync
    Whats the situation with frame rate limiting and g sync ?

    I'm tempted to get a g sync monitor and im wondering if just limiting fps to say 60fps, to save heat and power etc etc.

    Also is it G sync compatible with Down Sampling ?
     
  12. pbvider

    pbvider Guest

    Messages:
    989
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX
    Buthurt much?Just read the article on Blurbusters and stop trolling this thread.
     
  13. southamptonfc

    southamptonfc Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    646
    GPU:
    Zotac 4090 OC
    I can't really see any differences. What do you mean by quality? The image displayed seems exactly the same.
     
  14. southamptonfc

    southamptonfc Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    646
    GPU:
    Zotac 4090 OC
    According the blurbusters article, you can see input lag if you don't cap the framerate somewhere below 144hz. I've set it to 135 and it seems OK.

    You wont want 60fps once you've used 120hz+ monitor, trust me! :)
     
  15. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Guest

    Messages:
    9,797
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    This I would like to know as well.
     

  16. southamptonfc

    southamptonfc Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    646
    GPU:
    Zotac 4090 OC
    I just tested it, it doesn't seem to work.

    When I created the custom res (2560x1440 144hz) and pressed TEST it said my display didn't support it. I reduced the refresh rate to 60hz and got a black screen.

    I've never done downsampling before so I might be doing something wrong.
     
  17. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Guest

    Messages:
    9,797
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    Looks like it don't work. Maybe something as simple as a firmware or driver update for it to work?
     
  18. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    I've read that article as it got written, just fyi.

    Pointing my answer to this:
    Which clearly stated that improvement comes from lack of tearing (VSync main feature) and not from proper Frame time variance (stutter removal) = main GSync feature over VSync. Is clearly not what you considered it.

    You may feel like you want. I go with tech which makes practical difference where it matters for me. And you may think that stating obvious is trolling, but since it's to correct statements which have no ground or are completely wrong.

    Same goes for FreeSync, it's value will be in few years obsolete as GSync.
    Those technologies were important years ago as we got 60Hz screens, not now when we have 120/144Hz which reduce frame variance time based stutter below 1/2.

    And btw, months before BB review and others, I mathematically explained here best case scenario improvements of GSync over different frequencies from 60Hz to 144Hz. Stating that it's biggest improvement goes against 60Hz and is only minor in comparison with 144Hz.
    This goes for both stutter removal and input lag. (that's for screen refresh rate comparison)
    While considering rendering fps, it's positive impact is biggest on sub 50fps and improvement over 120fps is nearly non existent.
    Another thing is that while 50fps may feel much smoother with GSync, 50 fps player will still get owned in CS by 120 fps player on normal monitor if their skill is same.

    This has been confirmed by BB practical tests.
     
  19. yasamoka

    yasamoka Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,875
    Likes Received:
    259
    GPU:
    Zotac RTX 3090
    Fox2232, let it go. Please.

    Let's discuss theory elsewhere. This is a thread for personal impressions.

    BB's Mark Rejhon did state that there were improvements even at FPS higher than 100FPS. I have recently noticed that I can notice FPS drops from 110FPS to 105FPS and so, much moreso larger FPS drops. Maintaining constant FPS without tearing is only possible with VSync, which induces lag. G-Sync is a win in all cases and this and FreeSync should be the future where regular V-Sync (and lack of it) should be obsolete.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2014
  20. slickric21

    slickric21 Guest

    Messages:
    2,458
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    eVGA 1080ti SC / Gsync
    Ok cool.

    I understand what your saying, but I 'thought' even low fps gaming (45-60fps) was meant to be great with g sync.

    If I could maintain 120+ fps in games I wouldnt really need gsync anyway.

    Thats why I wondered about downsampling aswell, as id want g sync to be able to really crank up IQ and not have to worry about framerate drops.
     

Share This Page