The sole purpose of the monitor would be for gaming. I won't be getting rid of my 144hz monitor either, it would just go down the line of my other monitors connected while getting rid of the oldest one.
I do like my 60+ smoothness mah games now.
G-Sync is the god-level gaming upgrade.
- Thread starter Grampa Simpson
- Start date
The sole purpose of the monitor would be for gaming. I won't be getting rid of my 144hz monitor either, it would just go down the line of my other monitors connected while getting rid of the oldest one.
I do like my 60+ smoothness mah games now.
G-Sync won't affect your perception of frametime, rather it prevents a particular visual artifact from manifesting. If you're interested in 4k and own an Nvidia GPU, I'd suggest that G-Sync is a very worthwhile option to consider since all 4k are limited to 60hz.
Crazymoogle
Member
Not yet. I think only BenQ has multiple inputs but it's a 1080p panel. I think the upcoming 21:9 panels have multiple inputs but uh...they are not cheap.
Is there some sort of cable wizardry I can pull to plug both the console and the PC in through a DP switcher or something?
Like:
console (HDMI) -> DP converter -> DP switcher
PC (DP) -> DP switcher
DP switcher -> monitor
Not yet. The only attractive choice is Asus PG279Q, since the other models only output 24Hz on HDMI (4K) / 30 Hz on HDMI (1440p 21:9).
I don't think this is possible. A capture card in your PC would be a possibility though.
The upcoming version of nVidia's Gsync module features a secondary (non-Gsync) HDMI port, in addition to DisplayPort - this means future (holiday season 2015) Gsync monitors (Asus, Acer have already announced some models) are going to feature two inputs.
Felix Lighter
Member
Yes, It's dynamic refresh rate up to it's max. At max refresh rate it essentially works as normal vsync. You can disable GSync on game by game basis if you'd like but it will result in tearing.
I've got a weird problem happening in some games. I've seen it happen in Elite: Dangerous and Batman: Arkham Knight so far. If I boot up the game, the framerate is much worse than it should be (around 20-40 lower than it should be). But if I alt-tab out and back to the game it'll become normal again. If I run the game without g-sync, I don't need to do any alt-tabbing to get correct performance.
Anyone experienced anything similar?
Edit: This issue got fixed when I updated to latest hotfix: https://forums.geforce.com/default/...vers/announcing-geforce-hotfix-driver-358-59/
Anyone experienced anything similar?
Edit: This issue got fixed when I updated to latest hotfix: https://forums.geforce.com/default/...vers/announcing-geforce-hotfix-driver-358-59/
Soodanim
Member
You choose. If you have G-Sync on and V-Sync turned on in the Nvidia settings, you won't exceed 144. If you turn V off, it will. I just use Rivatuner to cap at 142 (I don't do any competitive stuff, but apparently it helps with input lag).
TheRealJakoozie
Member
I've been bitten by the gsync hype and so I'm considering buying the new Rog Swift on black friday. But I live in a small country where it's not really possible for me to actually try out Gsync. Question: If I'm a person who doesn't really care much/notice input lag and stuff like that (I'm fine playing on my five year old Samsung led TV), is Gsync pointless? (I can just turn on vsync). Or does it give any other advantages? (I've read that it makes the picture smoother overall, and that you notice dips in framerates less)
My current screen is a Dell U2713HM, and I'm running a GTX 970/i5 3570K.
I've tried reading about the technology myself, and I think I understand the basics, but it's tough to understand the practical applications of the technology.
My current screen is a Dell U2713HM, and I'm running a GTX 970/i5 3570K.
I've tried reading about the technology myself, and I think I understand the basics, but it's tough to understand the practical applications of the technology.
TheRealJakoozie
Member
Ok. But vsync usually eliminates tearing well enough that I can't spot it anyway. So the remaining advantage is no stuttering? Can't say I notice stuttering on my PC now very often. Do you still think it's worth it?
Are there anyone in here who bough/tried a Gsync monitor and wasn't blow away?
Vsync requires that you remain at 60fps (or 30, I guess) all the time, else you get tearing and stuttering. With gsync it can drop below that and you won't even notice. That let's you bump up settings higher, since any performance issues are going to be much less noticeable.
If the games you are playing never dip below 60 fps (or whatever your vsync is set to) then there is little to no benefit from GSync.
The most obvious situation where you want GSync or FreeSync is if you have a game running, let's say, in the 45-55 fps range because maybe you want it to be maxed ou or you want to use DSR. In this case, you cannot win with traditional display options.
Ultimately GSync allow you to choose the image quality / framerate combination you prefer by removing tearing and stuttering from the equation.
The benefit is very real, but I am still on the fence about recommending a proprietary solution.
The most obvious situation where you want GSync or FreeSync is if you have a game running, let's say, in the 45-55 fps range because maybe you want it to be maxed ou or you want to use DSR. In this case, you cannot win with traditional display options.
Ultimately GSync allow you to choose the image quality / framerate combination you prefer by removing tearing and stuttering from the equation.
The benefit is very real, but I am still on the fence about recommending a proprietary solution.
Finaika
Member
Oh shit, so G-Sync is wasted on high end GPUs?
loganclaws
Plane Escape Torment
Yes and no. If you have a 60hz monitor and you always get 60+ fps then it's wasted yes. If you game on a 144hz monitor then it's not wasted because most of the time you won't be achieving 144fps with new games even with a good rig.
Hitting 60 FPS at 1440p isn't always easy.
No tearing, ever
Minimized input latency
Smooths out persistent microstutter in lots of games
Rramerates between 30 and 60 FPS are particularly impressive when compared to traditional monitors
High-end G-sync monitors often run at ~144hz so you get a benefit even when you can break 60 FPS
loganclaws
Plane Escape Torment
G-Sync now has an option to work in windowed mode so I believe that it should fix your issue. Don't quote me on that though.
Just to keep expectations realistic, if you have a sudden large drop in framerate it will still be noticeable. It's just that dropping, for example, from 60 to 55 won't be nearly as harsh as without it. If you drop to 40 it's still very noticeable.
Usually GSync monitors are 144Hz so a beefy GPU will not be wasted, unless we are talking about some very low demanding games like LoL or CS.
GSync is useless if the the games you are playing never dip below the maximum refresh rate of your monitor.
But this situation is not really realistic as you can always make your game more demanding through downsampling.
Cannon Goose
Member
Yeah, that's what I kept reading before I bought my G-sync monitor and now that I've experienced it FPS drops are still noticeable. The real difference is that when the FPS does drop below 60 the motion on the screen remains smooth instead of stuttering or tearing.
ChoklitCow
Member
Do we know of any deals? Just dropped money on a ti so cash is kow. Was thinking about waiting until next year, but if a food BF or cyber Mon deal shows up I might bite.
So, from what I understand : Gsync is close to be useless if your fps are perfectly synchronized with the refresh rate of your screen ?
Let's say I always play at 60fps and my screen is 60hz. G sync would be useless for me.
Same goes for locked 144fps with a 144hz screen. That seems quite important to know.
I am used to play my game at 60fps locked with a 60hz screen and I am close to make the jump to 144hz, but is there any way to lock games at 144fps like we can do it with 60fps thanks to v sync ?
Let's say I always play at 60fps and my screen is 60hz. G sync would be useless for me.
Same goes for locked 144fps with a 144hz screen. That seems quite important to know.
I am used to play my game at 60fps locked with a 60hz screen and I am close to make the jump to 144hz, but is there any way to lock games at 144fps like we can do it with 60fps thanks to v sync ?
The only way you are getting a smooth (tear and judder-free) video on your display is if you run the game with v-sync on and never drop frames. V-sync introduces very noticeable input lag no matter the situation. Multiplayer FPS games are basically unplayable with v-sync, for example.
Without g-sync/freesync, your only options are to deal with this input lag or deal with tearing. So it's far from useless if you ask me and worth the extra cost just for this reason.
144hz works the same way as 60hz in that you still need to use v-sync for smooth video. Thanks to the higher refresh-rate, however, playing without v-sync isn't as painful as on a 60hz monitor due to the tears being less noticeable.
Consider this, though. Getting a constant 144 FPS in games is pretty rare in my experience. Even triple Titan X's trying to run maxed out modern games can rarely do the job. Many of these games are definitely going to be running at less than 144 FPS. You can sync to half the refresh rate (72 FPS) as an alternative but then you're just wasting the opportunity for smooth motion on a higher refresh rate monitor. On a more standard rig, the variable 90-110 FPS you might get in a specific game will be a far more pleasant experience on a g-sync monitor than on a regular one as you either will get tearing or have to deal with a locked 72 FPS. There's also flexibility in what you may want to do. On the g-sync monitor you can lock this same game to 90 FPS without incurring any input lag due to v-sync and get very smooth video. On the regular monitor you'd have to add a 90hz profile just for this game and use laggy v-sync.
So no, it's far from useless both in your hypothetical situation and in actual practice.
Without g-sync/freesync, your only options are to deal with this input lag or deal with tearing. So it's far from useless if you ask me and worth the extra cost just for this reason.
144hz works the same way as 60hz in that you still need to use v-sync for smooth video. Thanks to the higher refresh-rate, however, playing without v-sync isn't as painful as on a 60hz monitor due to the tears being less noticeable.
Consider this, though. Getting a constant 144 FPS in games is pretty rare in my experience. Even triple Titan X's trying to run maxed out modern games can rarely do the job. Many of these games are definitely going to be running at less than 144 FPS. You can sync to half the refresh rate (72 FPS) as an alternative but then you're just wasting the opportunity for smooth motion on a higher refresh rate monitor. On a more standard rig, the variable 90-110 FPS you might get in a specific game will be a far more pleasant experience on a g-sync monitor than on a regular one as you either will get tearing or have to deal with a locked 72 FPS. There's also flexibility in what you may want to do. On the g-sync monitor you can lock this same game to 90 FPS without incurring any input lag due to v-sync and get very smooth video. On the regular monitor you'd have to add a 90hz profile just for this game and use laggy v-sync.
So no, it's far from useless both in your hypothetical situation and in actual practice.
144fps is easily attainable with older titles. The one that regularly go back to is Portal 2, I can get 120fps+ constantly on a GTX-680.
So far it's been my observation that it's best to simply let the monitor do its thing on newer titles. Fallout 4 fluctuates pretty wildly on my rig between 40-70fps, and I really don't notice until it gets down into the thirties, and only then because of the visible gaps between animation frames.
So far it's been my observation that it's best to simply let the monitor do its thing on newer titles. Fallout 4 fluctuates pretty wildly on my rig between 40-70fps, and I really don't notice until it gets down into the thirties, and only then because of the visible gaps between animation frames.
Thanks for the explaination. So yes, I understand it's still quite usefull for input lag. But maybe that would be better for me to understand if you put valors on your words (no offense, I am just sincerely curious about it). What would be the difference in numbers regarding input lag on let say a classic Asus VS278Q and the PG278Q ?
Second question : Just to be sure I understand your explaination about your point, if I have a 144hz monitor and use vsync, it would lock the game at 144fps in the same way Vsync lock 60fps on 60hz screen ? Is it true ? Because if it is I would immediately make the jump to 144hz.
I've said it before, but I'd love to see a 1080p G-Sync monitor that isn't TN-based. I semi-recently upgraded from a TN-based Dell monitor to a PLS-based Samsung monitor and the difference in colour reproduction quite literally amazed me. G-Sync would be a nice cherry to have on top.
If the game can hit 144fps, yes.
D
Deleted member 325805
Unconfirmed Member
My dream is the 144hz Gsync BenQ but it's £400 so it'll have to stay a dream!
Wow, that's huge deal for me. I thought V sync only locked 60fps regardless of the number of your refreshment rate. So, in fact, vsync lock fps to the number : If I have a 50hz screen, it would lock it to 50fps, 120hz : 120fps and so on. Neat.
Is G sync demanding performance wise ?
Dictator93
Member
It has no perceptible effect on performance (it is a hardware option), it should have increased average framerates and minimum framerates in comparison to a vsync'd display.
You really should be comparing g-sync's additional input lag to v-sync's additional input lag. Most high-end TN displays will have around the same level of base input lag. G-sync monitors aren't going to be inherently worse with regards to input lag while using regular v-sync vs regular monitors running v-sync. There is a "base" level of input lag and then additional input lag depending on whether you are running v-sync/g-sync/etc.
http://www.displaylag.com/reduce-input-lag-in-pc-games-the-definitive-guide/
Look at the numbers at the bottom comparing v-sync and g-sync. G-sync is pretty much the same as no v-sync while v-sync incurs quite a bit of lag. If you want to know how this "feels" you should hit up a game and feel it out while toggling vsync on/off. It's big enough that even the casual FPS player on PC always disables it.
So basically, if I trust your source (wich seems very professional and trustworthy) it's almost 50% less of input lag with G sync compared to V sync. That's great.
That's not really what the numbers mean in general (just for this game). The combined base lag on the monitor + the base lag on this game (at 60fps since it's locked by the engine itself) is 59ms. G-sync adds almost nothing to this (1ms) while the best v-sync solution for non SLI users adds a whopping 37ms for a total of 96ms. The base lag from game to game may differ but there will always be a huge lag differential like this.
The Lamonster
Member
I've never experienced G-sync or even >60Hz. Does a higher refresh rate like 144Hz/165Hz make a big difference on regular desktop browsing? What about watching videos like Blu Rays?
Also, has anyone experienced Hearthstone at a high refresh rate?
Also, has anyone experienced Hearthstone at a high refresh rate?
Hmm, from what I saw in specialised store (the guy was nice and let me tried a lot of things with the store's screen), 144hz is a bliss compared to 60hz. In fact, it's much MUCH smoother. If you have a 60hz monitor right now, try to scroll down and up a text (with your mouse clicked on the scroll bar) and you should see that it's a bit blurry when put in movement and quite a pain on the eyes : 144hz make it smooth and you won't notice the blurry at all. Wich is a really plus for me since I can see the blurry side of 60hz. But I guess it's all up for people and their perception. If you can see the blurry with the scrolling text I talked about, then 144hz will be a huge step forward for you.
I'm just speaking about 144hz, I've yet to see Gsync in action.
Chance Hale
Member
Been playing Axiom Verge which I bought in the steam sale and the game is a real show case for ULMB tech, crazy how clear everything is with that on. Hopefully Pascal will let me run more advanced games at 120 FPS.
Would ULMB work for Mega Man as well which is capped at 60 FPS?
Would ULMB work for Mega Man as well which is capped at 60 FPS?
Just moving the mouse arrow in 120+ Hz is a revelation.
Sure, just use the 120hz mode so 60 FPS will divide even.
So I ordered a GTX 980 TI last night, and the last thing I want to get for my new PC is a G-SYNC monitor to go with it. Having trouble deciding which one to get. I'm currently using a cheap old 24" LED monitor, so anything would be a drastic improvement. There's just so many differing opinions on the different monitors!
I've also considered just getting a nice IPS 144hz monitor and ignoring G-SYNC for the time being, to save some money. I've heard a lot of good things about the LG 24GM77 monitor and I've found some nice sales on it for the weekend. Decisions!
I've also considered just getting a nice IPS 144hz monitor and ignoring G-SYNC for the time being, to save some money. I've heard a lot of good things about the LG 24GM77 monitor and I've found some nice sales on it for the weekend. Decisions!
TVs will never have G-sync because they'll never need it. The input they receive is always constant. TVs ≠ monitors.
The input my TV receives comes from a Nvidia GPU, and unfortunately is not always constant. It will be even less constant once I upgrade to a 4K TV.
Amen to that. And the clarity when dragging windows around. I was converted before I fired up a game.