144hz with or without G-sync?

Yosiah · 23 Apr 2015 at 20:40

I want a new monitor, because the current one I have only does 60hz, which I now realise is absolutely terrible, even with 60 fps. It's the source of all my issues with tearing//V-Sync.

I want to know whether I should buy a 144hz panel without G-sync, and just never turn V-Sync on (I'm never likely to get 100+ FPS) or go for a G-Sync monitor. Benefits of the G-sync would be that it includes 144hz as well, so I can always turn off G-Sync, but they are more expensive.

If I use a 144hz panel with V-Sync off, and was getting say ~80 FPS, would I notice a lot of tearing? I know there is ALWAYS some tearing without V-Sync, but as long as it's smooth/minimal I don't mind too much.

£179.99 is quite reasonable for a standard AOC 144hz panel on a student budget, but if G-Sync is the be all end all, then maybe I should go with the £299 AOC G-Sync?

Poneros · 24 Apr 2015 at 01:30

I think if you can afford to get the G-Sync one then do it. I can't tell you how much I wish I could just disable v-sync in GTA V because it runs so much better without, but I can't 'cause it tears like a mofo. A lot of other games, not so much, but also useful when you downsample because I see a lot of tearing then too. In some games it doesn't matter how much FPS you get, you'll still see screen tearing without v-sync, so if you can get gsync which is even better then... definitely do it.

stylezuk · 24 Apr 2015 at 14:06

No mention of what GPU using since G-sync is nvidia so if you have amd it's pointless, I'm using the iiyama 24" 144hz and with vsync off don't see tearing BF4 90FPS Diablo 3 130FPS and GTA5 about 70FPS. In the end it'll be down to budget.

Poneros · 24 Apr 2015 at 14:11

Really, you don't see screen tearing in BF4? That's one of the most notorious games for screen tearing.

wunkley · 24 Apr 2015 at 14:53

Once you use Gsync, you will never go back to not using it. Never.

CapitalOne · 24 Apr 2015 at 15:03

wunkley said:
Once you use Gsync, you will never go back to not using it. Never.

Seconded. Big investment but worth it.

wunkley · 24 Apr 2015 at 15:06

In real terms Gsync only adds about £100 to a monitor's price (ie for the module and licensing). I guess that's a big percentage for monitors in the £200 range, but when you're forking out for a 'gaming monitor' that's already north of £500+, it's all part of it, and well worth it in my book too.

johnnystuff · 24 Apr 2015 at 16:04

You should ask yourself: g-sync or 21:9? Now you have a tough choice

Yosiah · 24 Apr 2015 at 21:00

Can't stand 21:9 xD Then again I said that with 4:3>16:9, but maybe more support in games is needed first

Yosiah · 24 Apr 2015 at 21:03

I take it back. Jesus they are amazing. Maybe I should wait until there is a higher refresh rate//g-sync version. I see a Freesync is available atm, but I don't have AMD xD

johnnystuff · 24 Apr 2015 at 21:35

Yosiah said:
I take it back. Jesus they are amazing. Maybe I should wait until there is a higher refresh rate//g-sync version. I see a Freesync is available atm, but I don't have AMD xD

Now we start talking :cool:

The only one on the horizon is the Acer Predator but it's coming with many question marks such as bleeding, general constuction quailty, support, higher refresh rate (this should be a pro, but it's still the first ips to have it so who knows).... and one big bold exclamation mark, the price: 1000£!

I'd say if you play mostly super fast paced games or fps in general you should go for gsync, if you play mostly free roaming, sims (car, flight, space) or just MMO/RPG no doubt the 21:9 gives you an amazing experience.

theMilitant · 25 Apr 2015 at 17:31

I have a 120Hz screen and I can't notice tearing on it. The higher refresh rate goes quite a long way towards eliminating the perception of tearing.