• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

A Week With NVIDIA's G-SYNC Monitor

Gibbo said:
It's gonna be on the Asus 27" IPS in a few months, now that will be a nice monitor indeed, even better shall be £499-£599 price.

I've still not seen G-Sync in the flesh but for about £50-£100 more than the regular 27" IPS that does not seem bad, as £550ish is acceptable when it's a top of the range IPS 2560x1440 panel. :)
Click to expand...

I'll start saving :D
 
however you record it, you are never going to get a perfect real life representation because even at 240hz the camera and screen are not going to be in perfect sync, you also then need to factor in any problems that you tube and our own non-gsync screens might be adding in replaying the video

what the videos do show is a comparative, in the 60hz ones you can very clearly see a big difference between no vsync, vsync and then gsync
on the 144hz the effect is a bit more subtle but it is still very clear to me, your own mileage may vary :)
 
You can clearly see the tearing in all of them videos with no gsync. It appears as wiggling in flat surfaces, easy to see in the rocks and city walls as the screen pans round.
 
Skyrim no V-Sync 144Hz

Skyrim V-Sync 144Hz

Skyrim G-Sync 144Hz

Here's the near-perfect experience offered by G-Sync. The tearing is gone, the waggle is banished, and the animation is vastly more fluid. At full speed, the result is glassy smooth perceived motion. Compare this video to the one at 60Hz without vsync, which is how most hard-core gamers tend to play, and the contrast is stark. Good grief. What have we been doing all these years?
Click to expand...

As the videos demonstrate, G-Sync has tangible benefits over a fixed-rate 144Hz monitor, with or without conventional vsync. Nvidia says the improvements will be most easily perceptible at lower frame rates, from 40-60 FPS, and that makes quite a bit of sense. After all, that's where vsync quantization is the worst. I tried several things to put this theory to the test.
Click to expand...

I should note that not even a wicked-fast graphics card, a Sandy-Bridge-E CPU, and a G-Sync display can deliver perfectly smooth gameplay all of the time. You will notice the occasional hitch where a frame or two has taken too long to draw. We measure those all of the time in our performance tests, and the really fast, low-latency nature of G-Sync makes those hiccups keenly felt. G-Sync doesn't solve every problem, even though it's a vast improvement in display synchronization.
Click to expand...

I can tell you what I'd like to see happen. I'd like to see somebody produce a G-Sync-compatible monitor based on a 27" IPS panel with a 2560x1440 pixel grid at a reasonable price. We already know that folks have had some success overclocking their cheap 27" Korean IPS monitors to 85Hz, 100Hz, or better. An affordable 27" IPS monitor with a peak refresh of 85 or 100Hz would be a very nice thing indeed. In my view, a panel of that sort with G-Sync and a low refresh interval would be a vastly superior choice for gaming than even one of the fancy 60Hz 4K panels here in Damage Labs. You're better off spreading your pixels per second across successive frames than jamming them all into really tight pixel pitches, honestly.
Click to expand...

For me, G-Sync on a 1440P monitor would be awesome. For anyone with a 1440P monitor, you will know what I am talking about, as you have a superb image - That either tears (more frames than the monitors refresh rate) or gives input lag (mouse feels slow to respond).

I honestly feel this is far more exciting than Mantle and has so much more potential, it clearly is a 'game changer'.
 
Gregster said:
I honestly feel this is far more exciting than Mantle and has so much more potential, it clearly is a 'game changer'.
Click to expand...

You really sure?

The possibility with Mantle opening up more CPU time is quite interesting for PC gaming.

Think of it this way
PhsyX based on the CPU we all know it kills performance, what about a Mantle game? where all the performance for the game is on the GPU and the CPU can do other tasks like PhsyX Or god knows what else they can come up with.

Yeah Gsync is great helps smooth out game's Frame rate but it's not changing anything the games will offer in the Development cycle.

That's how I see Mantle
Look at it this way also could you have Multi GPU Vram combined with just Gsync? With Mantle we now can 2x 3GBvram =6GB
Edit
Mantle will now allow games to open up more and Add more to them than ever before.
 
shankly1985 said:
You really sure?

The possibility with Mantle opening up more CPU time is quite interesting for PC gaming.

Think of it this way
PhsyX based on the CPU we all know it kills performance, what about a Mantle game? where all the performance for the game is on the GPU and the CPU can do other tasks like PhsyX Or god knows what else they can come up with.

Yeah Gsync is great helps smooth out game's Frame rate but it's not changing anything the games will offer in the Development cycle.

That's how I see Mantle
Look at it this way also could you have Multi GPU Vram combined with just Gsync? With Mantle we now can 2x 3GBvram =6GB
Edit
Mantle will now allow games to open up more and Add more to them than ever before.
Click to expand...

obviously gsync is more interesting to current NVidia users and Mantle is more interesting to AMD owners

in the short term, game support for mantle is going to be quite limited (2 titles in Q1 14, after that?)

neither is in a position where I think it would tempt anyone to swap from a 670/780 to a 280X/290X or vice versa

either could be a deciding factor for someone upgrading a couple of gens though, but I would say there isn't enough confirmed info on mantle to really know what benefit it is going to give, and then there is Maxwell/Denver to consider
 
shankly1985 said:
You really sure?

The possibility with Mantle opening up more CPU time is quite interesting for PC gaming.

Think of it this way
PhsyX based on the CPU we all know it kills performance, what about a Mantle game? where all the performance for the game is on the GPU and the CPU can do other tasks like PhsyX Or god knows what else they can come up with.

Yeah Gsync is great helps smooth out game's Frame rate but it's not changing anything the games will offer in the Development cycle.

That's how I see Mantle
Look at it this way also could you have Multi GPU Vram combined with just Gsync? With Mantle we now can 2x 3GBvram =6GB
Edit
Mantle will now allow games to open up more and Add more to them than ever before.
Click to expand...

Mantle for low end, AMD systems is a good thing. let's say a 7850 gets 35fps average in BF4 and Mantle gives a boost of 50%, that would bring the average frames to 52, so a nice performance increase IMO.

It has been shown previously that games that use CPU PhysX, just can't cope with a decent level of PhysX. It is only recent that we have games that bother to use multi cores and use them well but from recent PhysX games, I have been informed that nVidia have locked out PhysX if it detects an AMD GPU in the machine, regardless if you have a nVidia card in the same system.

I understand the higher IQ and LOD in games with Mantle and this could potentially hit nVidia hard but G-Sync works best when the frames are low (according to various sites and in the quote at the top of this page), so again, it is a win for nVidia IMO.
 
Gregster said:
Mantle for low end, AMD systems is a good thing. let's say a 7850 gets 35fps average in BF4 and Mantle gives a boost of 50%, that would bring the average frames to 52, so a nice performance increase IMO.

It has been shown previously that games that use CPU PhysX, just can't cope with a decent level of PhysX. It is only recent that we have games that bother to use multi cores and use them well but from recent PhysX games, I have been informed that nVidia have locked out PhysX if it detects an AMD GPU in the machine, regardless if you have a nVidia card in the same system.

I understand the higher IQ and LOD in games with Mantle and this could potentially hit nVidia hard but G-Sync works best when the frames are low (according to various sites and in the quote at the top of this page), so again, it is a win for nVidia IMO.
Click to expand...

Yeah understand the low end. Also I did complete Batman AC with PhysX on the CPU some games do allow this Metro games and Arma 3 have CPU physX.
I very interested what the extra CPU use will allow Devs to come up with.
Better AI? I not sure dont understand how game Devs works so what I say might not be true but what I do know is more CPU to play with better games can be. :D
 
shankly1985 said:
Yeah understand the low end. Also I did complete Batman AC with PhysX on the CPU some games do allow this Metro games and Arma 3 have CPU physX.
I very interested what the extra CPU use will allow Devs to come up with.
Better AI? I not sure dont understand how game Devs works so what I say might not be true but what I do know is more CPU to play with better games can be. :D
Click to expand...

Yer, with Mantle allowing the CPU more freedom, it will allow for better IQ potentially but that is down to the devs. If they use super sampling or uber sampling (I think it was in the Witcher 2), then that would be pointless IMO, as it doesn't add to the IQ for me but to bring in other variables like lighting LOD, it could be great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom