Hello, I'm planning on getting a new monitor once DP 1.3 become more common and I get my next NVidia card once the new TI becomes available. I keep reading in some forums that they hate gsync and others love it. I'm hoping someone will come out with a 16:9 144hz 34" or a 21:9 144hz 50" as I currently have 2 30" monitors.
EDIT: I actually have no performance loss, wrong info, my bad Can only speak for my Acer XB270HU 27". [...], and is actually mostly useful when you're between 30-60FPS where the most tearing occurs. With current high-end graphic cards, you mostly achieve 60 or 60+fps at 1440p on most recent games. G-Sync means you're also stuck with Nvidia for a while, i don't know for you but i change my monitor not so often, and GPU market is gonna change a lot this year: i guess it should be taken into account. AMD so far is ahead on DX12 and might be ahead of Nvidia on High-end GPU from early 2017, their freesync techology is also more affordable.
There is no performance penalty for using G-Sync. Initially it was like ~1%, with Maxwell it's 0. And while Freesync is affordable, it's inferior in a number of different ways. Most panels have a smaller sync window, most freesync panels are inferior to their g-sync counterparts, when operating under the sync window g-sync behaves better and gsync can overdrive the pixels in the window, freesync can't, or at least couldn't when PC Perspective tested it, which means that those monitors are prone to ghosting when inside the window. That being said Nvidia is dumb for not supporting Adaptive Sync. They should support both and just sell G-Sync as a premium monitor badge. Force manufacturers to make certain guarantees on panel quality + add features to the chip as they have been doing. I'm going to be really disappointed if Pascal doesn't support adaptive sync.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9097/the-amd-freesync-review/4 If you're losing performance your doing something wrong. I have the same monitor and a 980 and I don't lose any performance turning it on.
I just ran 3Dmark Extreme Firestrike With/Without: With: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8318759 Graphics Score 10 051 Without: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8318726 Graphics Score 9 668 Lol, Opposite of what i expected, so i guess i'm not even close of being right lol. My bad. edit: i re-ran without G-Sync and still got around 9600. Well... G-Sync doesn't seem to take any perf. Was wrong .. This is insane, i was sure of getting lower FPS! Just ran Ashes of Singularity and had better FPS with G-Sync?!! What the hell?!
With G-Sync: 1080p Score with original voltage 1.193 V, Core clock 1442Mhz (no overclock, it straight go to this frequency), Memory 3671Mhz (factory was 3645Mhz as far as i remember): 17569 total, 20246 graphic score (please note that i have a BIOS that give an extra Power to the card now, not the original, don't feel like flashing original BIOS): http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8321389 And from what i assume has been a straight 1080p run with no oc and original BIOS: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8258716 17272 total, 19769 graphic score
If this is true, it's minimal lost if any at all. I've been using G-Sync for a year now and haven't noticed any loss in image quality.
I think he's talking about the variable refresh rate causing variable amounts of blur as it adapts to your frame rate. Normal v-sync on normal displays do not have variable refresh rates, which translates to predictable and consistent amounts of blur during heavy movement. G-sync can look quite blurry at 40Hz (40fps), but crisp at 120Hz (120fps). Sometimes the backlight in the monitor also can't keep up with the sudden changes in refresh rate, which results in mild, temporary flickering. All should be easily solved by capping your frame rate manually and by making sure it never drops too low. I love G-sync and Freesync! My new monitor will definitely support one of those features, but I'm still waiting for new hardware to arrive so I can be sure to hit that 60fps minimum target on the most demanding games.
Looks like I'll need a new monitor pretty soon. It seems like my u3011 is on the fritz. I have no idea what I'll end up with but I'll be looking at that 49" Samsung when it comes out.
I have the Acer X34 21:9 3440x1440 100hz G-Sync monitor (mouth full) and its epic. At around 45fps it feels like gaming at 60fps, and at 60fps it feels like 120fps. So smooth. I had a Asus VGH236 1080P 120hz (3) monitor for 5 years and been gaming close to 80fps and higher so im really used to smooth gaming but G-sync is on another lvl. No need for 120hz or 144hz anymore a 100hz with Gsync is the best.
Yes you want G-sync. I personally think it works best above 75fps and makes camera panning so very very smooth. Had both the Asus TN and now the Acer IPS (XB270HU). Acers monitor is superior in many ways.
proof or trolling. From my experience Gsync has nothing to do with image quality, it's only for a better way (when supported..very few apps don't supported yet) on your PC experience,no negative effects in ANY way.
Thanks so much for the feedback on the gsync - I think you guys have sold me I'm going to start a new thread about upcoming monitors but it will start out nearly the same. I'm hoping someone will have heard about some monitors coming out I haven't yet.
Not trolling its very minimal but still noticable for me. Gsync is like vsync off then without tearing. vsync on vs vsync off quality is also better with vsync on if u dont count the tearing. Graphics look more defined with vsync on compared to g-sync. I dont mind a bit of input lag i mostly play only singeplayer games and sometimes coop games.
