• 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:
Hi there

Just a question, so don't shoot me guys!

But if you have a really powerful machine, like 780Ti or 290X based or even SLI/Crossfire and your constantly getting 100fps+ in games. Does that not make this technology kind of redundant?

Educate me on how it works, because right now say I have a PC, 4770K/FX-9590 with a pair of GTX 780 or a pair of 290's, attached to a 144Hz / 240Hz monitor, then I am getting no tearing issues anyway, everything is silky smooth. As such would this technology benefit me?


To me this only seems useful for those running more mainstream gaming PC's where minimum FPS drops quite a lot, to say sub 30fps and as such it helps smoothen things out, but if your rig is powerful and your minimum FPS is always above 60 or even 100, then will it offer me any benefit?
Click to expand...

you would have to test it to see... people who have tested it are saying that yes they can tell the difference side by side... do you play with vsync on or off?
with vsync on you are seeing the fps jump in big increments, so at 144hz it will be cutting to 72hz whenever it dips below 144... if it never dips below 72fps and never reaches 144 then you are locked at 72hz... but with triple buffering you are probably getting some input lag, whether or not you notice it or play competitively enough for it to make a difference will be personal to you

for me personally, my interest is for playing 4K on tri titans and running at settings where maybe it does still dip below 60fps - nothing mainstream about my setup :D
I know that I am very sensitive to artefacting, I've tried the "locked to 59fps" type setups with no vsync but it artefacts a lot more than vsync, I dislike input lag but I dislike no vsync more

gsync will give a benefit at any fps that is below the monitors refresh rate, whether or not you notice or notice it enough to buy a new monitor for it is a different matter
 
Last edited:
andybird123 said:
you would have to test it to see... people who have tested it are saying that yes they can tell the difference side by side... do you play with vsync on or off?
with vsync on you are seeing the fps jump in big increments, so at 144hz it will be cutting to 72hz whenever it dips below 144... if it never dips below 72fps and never reaches 144 then you are locked at 72hz... but with triple buffering you are probably getting some input lag, whether or not you notice it or play competitively enough for it to make a difference will be personal to you

for me personally, my interest is for playing 4K on tri titans and running at settings where maybe it does still dip below 60fps - nothing mainstream about my setup :D
Click to expand...

mmmmm will have to see it then.

But from what you say, I'd just rather go Crossfire or SLI and ensure my games are at a setting where they never drop below 120fps, need to see one in action side by side like you say on a very powerful machine.
 
I think it definitely is something that needs to be seen, much like 3D Vision. I think people will be fairly surprised given the feedback so far

You'd think they'd give a rough indication at least of specs in the article.
 
Last edited:
MjFrosty said:
I think it definitely is something that needs to be seen, much like 3D Vision. I think people will be fairly surprised given the feedback so far
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's what I am thinking.

I just re-watched the starcraft demo, and either nVidia chose a really bad example, or G-Sync is not that great. I'm hoping the former.
 
Gibbo said:
mmmmm will have to see it then.

But from what you say, I'd just rather go Crossfire or SLI and ensure my games are at a setting where they never drop below 120fps, need to see one in action side by side like you say on a very powerful machine.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't take my word for it either, I've not seen it yet

I do know that my next monitor purchase is going to be the 39" Asus 4K, and the way that it has been delayed strongly leads me to suspect it will be coming with 4K, so for me it is an added bonus that is being included in something I already have and already intend to buy

BubbySoup said:
Yeah, that's what I am thinking.

I just re-watched the starcraft demo, and either nVidia chose a really bad example, or G-Sync is not that great. I'm hoping the former.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you are going to get much of a sense of it on a video, the camera will still be running a fixed refresh so will be "out of sync" with the gsync demo itself
 
Last edited:
Very excited about this. I just hope they get it in something other the TN displays asap. I'd kill for a 27" 120hz VA display with gsync!
 
MjFrosty said:
I think it definitely is something that needs to be seen, much like 3D Vision. I think people will be fairly surprised given the feedback so far

You'd think they'd give a rough indication at least of specs in the article.
Click to expand...

Well I hope its better than 3D Vision, as good as 3D Vision is, I find its just a gimmick and not something I'd use whilst gaming, more a use once then not use a gain type thing.

So it needs to be way better than 3D Vision ever was. :p
 
:mad: Oh Mr Gibbs. I actually really enjoyed my time with 3D Vision. I did find after several months I couldn't be bothered to set it up for games mind you, but it definitely added something new in an otherwise boring time-frame thanks to lack of PC games. I wouldn't mind giving it another go in fact with the Light Boost kit.

Apart from multiplayer games. Just a big no no IMO!
 
I'm still seriously wondering whether this will be locked to nVidia. Let's not forget the stunt they pull with PhysX where it's disabled if you try to use an AMD card as your main and a nVidia card for PhysX.

Whilst we are all very excited about G-Sync, this is a very niche market and it would do little to no harm in nVidia locking this down - most gamer's eyes will start to glaze over if you talk about frame rates, v-sync, g-sync, n-sync, hell a lot of my friends who game still don't quite get why you would want 2 graphics cards, when 1 "is good enough".
 
Gibbo said:
mmmmm will have to see it then.

But from what you say, I'd just rather go Crossfire or SLI and ensure my games are at a setting where they never drop below 120fps, need to see one in action side by side like you say on a very powerful machine.
Click to expand...

You'd still get tearing, the idea of G-sync is to eradicate tearing without the downsides of when the frame rate drops below 60fps (ie. frame rate locking to 30fps the moment you get 59fps), the traditional triple buffering introduces lots of lag.
 
I would have to see it running before I give up my 2560x1600 Dell U3011 monitor. Some of us are not bothered by slight input lag and if you can put up with tearing you already eliminate VSYNC lag anyway.

So in essence if you want to test G-Sync turn off VSYNC and imagine you are not getting tearing. For me that experience is not worth to asking price of a new monitor.
 
mmj_uk said:
You'd still get tearing, the idea of G-sync is to eradicate tearing without the downsides of when the frame rate drops below 60fps (ie. frame rate locking to 30fps the moment you get 59fps), the traditional triple buffering introduces lots of lag.
Click to expand...

That's the theory. But some people say they don't notice tearing at all.

And some people say they can't tell the FPS difference between 60 and 120.

I guess the problem is, even if you experience a problem such as tearing or input lag, you get used to it.

.. How else would those lowly console gamers play at such crap FPS and graphics ;D

I think Gsync has to be seen in person, not from a video on a regular screen. Then you'll be amazed. Or you'll walk home without seeing the difference.

Reminds me of a funny experience. My first 720p HD vid. I had no idea what HD was. This one video just looked... different. More crisp. Something was wrong. A few months later I noticed I had downloaded a HD video. No, it wasn't porn, it was a music vid.. and so it began :P
 
As I said in another thread, the tech looks brilliant.

But this is NVidia, so they'll screw it up and make it completely unappealing to users somehow.

First step in that process: the Asus exclusivity agreement. I mean what were they thinking?
 
Doubt Gsync would benefit me, I play all games without Vsync so no stutter or frame drops because of vsync. I lock all the game to 120fps and while they is tearing its not something I can see unless I look for it.
On my 60hz TV though that's a different story if I lock the FPS to 60fps screen tear there is very bad, so Gsync here would work great.

But for people running 120hz/144hz and dont use Vsync anyway I can't see this helping much.
 
Last edited:
Hopefully this will increase the rate of adoption for DisplayPort. We all want it and it's royalty-free yet only the most expensive panels have it still?
 
Tute said:
As I said in another thread, the tech looks brilliant.

But this is NVidia, so they'll screw it up and make it completely unappealing to users somehow.

First step in that process: the Asus exclusivity agreement. I mean what were they thinking?
Click to expand...

Wait until end of January. I've got BenQ 24" and 27" models coming, pricing is good too. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom