D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Two 90hz screens does not mean the game needs to push the equivalent of 180 fps.
G-Sync is the god-level gaming upgrade.
- Thread starter Grampa Simpson
- Start date
BoosterDuck
Banned
Guilty Gear is going to look way boss with gsync
Finaika
Member
I feel the same way. No way its a "god level gaming upgrade"; I thought I was going to be blown away, but its just like playing games with v-sync + triple buffer on.
Maybe I'm just not that susceptible to input lag...
It might be the same as VSync triple buffered in terms of screen tearing, it is certainly not the same in terms of smoothness. You cannot avoid stuttering at 40-60fps with VSync. And there are a good deal of games that will stutter even keeping the 60fps 95% of the time.
I do agree that "god-level" is probably too much, but its certainly much closer to reality than "its just like playing with vsync + triple buffer".
I am pretty sure it is 60fps locked since japanese are obsessive about that. Gsync will be useless. ULMB could be the option to use then.
triple buffer on means that you have 3 frames computed in advance, so you have 2 frame delays which is ok for most people. It is a good way to avoid tearing. It will not prevent stuttering. It also has input lag, which some people are sensible or not (people playing with TV are subject to heavy postprocess, meaning abyssimal input lag and they mostly do not care)
G-sync is not god level upgrade or whatever, it is just the next level of hardware for gaming monitors. The reason it was not developed before is that the movie industry do not care about fluctuations. Of course, a classical high refresh (144Hz) vsync monitor is already a good step to avoid stuttering because the interval between two frames is small. Still, gsync is the only option completely adapted to how games produce frames (display frames as soon as they are created and not at a fixed interval).
Some people are not sensible to resolution, aliasing, and so on. Reaction to stuttering and tearing is also very subjective.
Finaika
Member
It might be the same as VSync triple buffered in terms of screen tearing, it is certainly not the same in terms of smoothness. You cannot avoid stuttering at 40-60fps with VSync. And there are a good deal of games that will stutter even keeping the 60fps 95% of the time.
I do agree that "god-level" is probably too much, but its certainly much closer to reality than "its just like playing with vsync + triple buffer".
Granted I've just upgraded from playing on laptop with a dual core CPU + GTX460M for 5 years now to a desktop with an i7 6700K + GTX980Ti so everything is much smoother now lol, so does that mean I would get more stutters if I opted for a non G-Sync monitor?
It means you would have stuttering if your fps go under 60fps while using vsync. I give you its harder to know what the monitor does now that you have top notch hardware but whenever that 980Ti can't keep up, wether its GCs fault or simply a poorly optimized game you will feel the difference between gsync and not.
I, much like you, can deal with some input lag if that's the only issue, but the stuttering under 60 (and sometimes even on 60fps) is something it bothers me to no end and that's where gsync shines.
Hoovering 40-45 fps on Witcher 3 maxed @ 2k on a 970 and the game running smooth is where it gets godlike to me.
Burgess_101
Member
Thats spot on. Thats why if is good. If you have a top if the line card you may not notice but for 970 level and lower its fantastic.
I have a 390 and a 1440p freesync monitor as long as I keep it above 35 its solid. It's added years to my card for sure.
Check if you have caping software running with a special MadMAx profile (nvidia inspector or RTSS).
Check if some option is set in the game (framerate limiter or vsync).
SeeNoWeevil
Member
Personally I think people are insane for choosing variable sync over strobing on a powerful PC with lots of GPU overhead. 60Hz LCD without strobing has awful motion clarity.
60fps LCD without strobing
And with (you'd need 144Hz+ to match this clarity without strobing)
60fps LCD without strobing
And with (you'd need 144Hz+ to match this clarity without strobing)
Gsync solves the endless "no optimisation" syndrome of PC versions, especially for console ports. For constant framerate, ULMB is good but for variable sync, it is good. It also helps to push graphical settings, you do not have to sacrify settings to warrant constant fluidity.
Kssio_Aug
Member
Even when the frame rate drops to something like 20 fps, or even if the frame rate in a certain game is too inconsistent?
20fps is not fluid, thee is no magic. You will not have stutter, but do not expect the game to appear fluid. Gsync is all about minimun framerate. So, yes, for inconsistent framerate it is perfect, as long as the minimum framerate stays above 30fps.
For a game between 40-60fps, you will not "see" any change in the apparent framerate of the game, it will appear smooth all the time, because the monitor will match the changing framerate all the time instead of any kind of forced vsync system.
Kssio_Aug
Member
I think I undersrand now!
It looks very interesting though! May be a good way to give a gaming PC some more years of life.
This may sound like blasphemy, but I actually moved from ULMB to G-Sync on CSGO. I cap the framerate at about 136fps to avoid it hitting 144Hz and introducing input lag. I find that whilst I can see the benefit of ULMB, I find the smoother image more appealing, I just tried going back to ULMB (so without G-Sync) and is very noticeably not as smooth and was actually quite a distraction.
SeeNoWeevil
Member
Well of course strobing makes much less sense at 130fps+. You either run with variable sync and try to brute force your way to good motion clarity with very high framerates. Or, you enable strobing at the lowest refresh where flicker isn't a problem, turn the settings up and brute force your way to as consistent frame times as possible. Both are a compromise but given there isn't a gpu available that can run the most demanding games at 144Hz; I'll take option B.
I really can't see people using VR with strobed displays and then wanting to go back to sample-and-hold either.
Personally I think people are insane for choosing variable sync over strobing on a powerful PC with lots of GPU overhead. 60Hz LCD without strobing has awful motion clarity.
60fps LCD without strobing
And with (you'd need 144Hz+ to match this clarity without strobing)
My BenQ XL2730Z is Freesync or "Blur Reduction" (backlight strobing). The strobing only works at 120hz or 144hz unfortunately, so I can only use it on older games. But it really is amazing what it can do.
It is less necessary, but it is still a huge upgrade. Anyone with a high refresh rate and/or strobing try the map test. Chrome recommended.
http://www.testufo.com/#test=photo&photo=toronto-map.png&pps=960&pursuit=0&height=0
At 144hz the street names are somewhat readable for me. It's hit or miss, and I just can't quite make most of the words out that well. It is certainly is an improvement over when I try 60hz though.
However, when I turn strobing on they become clear as day. Absolutely perfectly clear - even the railroad name over the grey tracks. It's amazing to behold. Anyone else with Blur Reduction / ULMB / Lightboost I'm sure will echo my thoughts.
I'm glad I went with Freesync + backlight strobing as an option. The 144hz to 144hz strobing is a game changer for games like CS:GO even more than 60hz to 144hz was, for me.
i still don't understand what is the best option moving forward? i thought i read that freesync with the next directx and amd cards will be better for the future?
i got my last monitor in 2008 and want a new one. no clue what to go with. i have a feeling it needs to be more than 1080p right now and atleast 27"
i got my last monitor in 2008 and want a new one. no clue what to go with. i have a feeling it needs to be more than 1080p right now and atleast 27"
metareferential
Member
Holy shit, that's true.
SeeNoWeevil
Member
I'm really surprised there aren't more displays that can strobe at lower rates. Obviously flicker tolerance is lower sitting close to a monitor than it is a TV. I imagine ~70Hz is the bare minimum at that range. Running those motion tests and flicking strobing on/off is a real 'holy shit' moment. I can read the street names quite easily on that map test with it on. Off, I can make out the map has roads.
The real game changer is variable sync and strobing combined; as soon as somebody figures out how to do it.
I hope this technology is possible. That is the god-level upgrade for sure.
mr stroke
Member
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00MUT6SLE/?tag=neogaf0e-20
OR the Asus if u dont mind adding your own gsync
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00B2HH7G0/?tag=neogaf0e-20
DirtyManos
Member
I have a feeling I'll need to pick one up at the end of next year to be able to play games like Star Citizen without ripping my hair out....
I have RTSS but never turn it on - that had a 60FPS cap so I've edited that and will see if ti works. Weird though because I do use MSI Afterburner. Does that automatically turn on RTSS?
This is a great example. I can read the words perfectly at 100hz with ULMB while they're still pretty blurry at 144hz without it.
I wish my monitor could handle 120hz + ULMB but I apparently have an earlier model that tops out at 100hz.
Yes, but you should see it in the notification task bar if it run.
Well damn.
Ninja Sharingan
Banned
It might be the same as VSync triple buffered in terms of screen tearing, it is certainly not the same in terms of smoothness. You cannot avoid stuttering at 40-60fps with VSync. And there are a good deal of games that will stutter even keeping the 60fps 95% of the time.
I do agree that "god-level" is probably too much, but its certainly much closer to reality than "its just like playing with vsync + triple buffer".
I bought a rog swift and it's completely mind blowing how good G sync is. I could notice a 5 fps drop in gta v on my old monitor and coukdnt play maxed out. I put pretty much every thing on full and was like wow I can't notice these small fps drops at all thx to G sync this is nuts. Then I activated my fps counter and the game was actually dropping from like 70 to 80 all the way to 42 fps and I couldn't really notice it. It was still completely smooth but I could notice that it wasn't updating as much maybe. It's hard to explain. It's like the game still runs completely smoothly but you can notice something. It's insane tech. I thought I was only dropping 5 fps but it was more like 40
michaelius
Banned
Personally I think people are insane for choosing variable sync over strobing on a powerful PC with lots of GPU overhead. 60Hz LCD without strobing has awful motion clarity.
60fps LCD without strobing
And with (you'd need 144Hz+ to match this clarity without strobing)
Yes I've got S2716DG few days ago and so far I've spent most of my time playing in ULMB mode
DMC at 120 fps with ULMB feels great
But amount of horsepower needed is pretty insane - I'll need to go big Pascal as soon as possible as single 980ti is not enough even for some older stuff.
TheRealJakoozie
Member
I'm still really tempted by g sync. But how do you dual monitor people deal with it? The way I see it, if you buy two identical g sync monitors you're kind of wasting your money since nobody games on two monitors at the same time. So the price premium you pay for the g sync module in the screen you're not currently using for gaming is wasted.
The other alternative is using one g sync monitor and one normal monitor. But that sets off my ocd, since the screens won't be the same design, and will probably have different bezel, stand, color and level of gloss probably.
And even if you can accept the aesthetic discrepancy, if you don't have a second high refresh rate screen, what happens in windows? Will the mouse movement be hitcy in one screen and OK in the other? Or will they both be relegated to the highest refresh rate both screens can output at?
The other alternative is using one g sync monitor and one normal monitor. But that sets off my ocd, since the screens won't be the same design, and will probably have different bezel, stand, color and level of gloss probably.
And even if you can accept the aesthetic discrepancy, if you don't have a second high refresh rate screen, what happens in windows? Will the mouse movement be hitcy in one screen and OK in the other? Or will they both be relegated to the highest refresh rate both screens can output at?
Gunmonkey36
Member
ETA on this tech being < $200.00 USD?
My assumption is forever.
My assumption is forever.
This is my main worry in getting a second monitor. My current one is something cheap I got a while back (two years ago) and it's only 1080p60. I could save up and get a good 144hz G-Sync monitor but the discrepancy between the two might just become annoying after a while.
I might go for 21:9 instead but even then I don't exactly know what size to get so there isn't a height difference between my current 23.5 inch monitor.
I have the Acer XB270HU (1440p, 144Hz, G-Sync) and the Acer CB270HU (60Hz, 1440p). They're basically the same design except the bezels on the CB270HU are a bit thicker, it's not ideal, but they look close enough that it doesn't bother me too much.
As for 60Hz -> 144Hz desktop usage, then yeah, one screen outputs at 60Hz, the other outputs at 120/144hz (I set it at 120 so my GPU downclocks properly at idle). You can tell the difference between the two, in terms of smoothness, but I don't think it's a big deal at all.
Well, 40 FPS doesn't magically become 60 FPS, but there will be absolutely no tearing and no duplicated frames. G-Sync also has a nice habit of eliminating persistent microstutter in a few games.
It has no vsync related stutter, but it can't nullify high frame variance caused by other things, just make it a little less jarring. I think people would be surprised at how many problems are caused by vsync on PC games especially.
Unless there are other things going on that are causing high and inconsistent frametimes, then fps fluctuating from, for example, 50-80fps is stutter free.
Azzurri
Member
I have the Acer x34 which is the 21:9 34" ultrawide 100hz g sync display paired with my older Samsung 27 1440p display, and at first I thought it would bug me that they're 2 different displays, but I got use to it. They actually don't look bad sitting side by side
I do just that all the time
try vsync off on your old monitor and imagine no tearing.
try vsync on on your old monitor and imagine no sync stutter (nobody can do anything against streaming stutter beside faster HDD).
imagine a monitor that does both at the same time.
Understand that most discussions on GAF on stutter and framedrops are a consequence of the forced vsync technology.
Arkham knight and Dead Rising 3 are two games I am playing now, two games criticized for their bad framerate, but this is vsync related and nothing like that is a problem on gsync monitors. At some points, some game reviews like eurogamer are not anymore a game review but a monitor review. I am pretty sure that redoing all these face off with gsync would even more increase the PC/console differences.
I understand that. My question might have been dumb or maybe I'm misunderstanding how gsync works.
Gsync has no stutter/judder because it matches refresh rate to your fps at all times, but can it keep up at matching the refresh rate when the fps is fluctuating wildly? Can it lag behind sometimes etc?
I really need gsync, badly. Vsync even in its best implementation (driver vsync + rtss lock) has crazy input lag and makes FPS games unplayable for me and I can't stand the judder when fps is mismatched with your refresh rate with or without vsync.
Speaking of stutters, on my XB270hu I don't notice much of a stutter drop, I do notice an absolutely lack of tearing, but stutters due caching or a sudden spike in I/O and such will still be noticeable.
Also the frame smoothing and the "50 fps feels like 60fps" is kind of an exageration, as I at least, don't notice it. 50 fps for me still feels like 50 fps, but now with no tearing during the transition from 60.
Also the frame smoothing and the "50 fps feels like 60fps" is kind of an exageration, as I at least, don't notice it. 50 fps for me still feels like 50 fps, but now with no tearing during the transition from 60.
No. The framerate with a G-Sync monitor always matches exactly what the card is pushing.
This is true. G-Sync is better for microstutters. I mean, I've had it correct issues in games where I would see a slight stutter every few seconds regardless of what was happening onscreen.