Active Sync and AMD/NVIDIA Cards

[AndyT]

So...

Having been out of the loop for a long while, I was looking at upgrading, and going the whole hog with new CPU (from I5 2500K, will need new MoBO too), GPU (from ATI 7970) and monitor (from 24", 1920x1200, 60Hz) etc.

Unfortunately, I seem to have got the urge to upgrade at the wrong time as the market looks a bit messy with mining shortages and a lack of competition from AMD etc...

I was wanting to go balls-deep and buy a big 27" + monitor with Active Sync tech at 1440P; however, my options appear to be:

A. Incredibly expensive, but high performing NVIDIA card (1070+) with a choice of a small selection of also *incredibly* expensive GSync screens
B. Less expensive, but somewhat comparatively tepid AMD card (Rx 580 or VEGA) with a larger selection of cheaper FreeSync screens.
C. Stick with what I've got, there aren't that many good games out anyway...

Option A just seems too expensive at this moment in time.
Option B seems like a bit of compromise that will still be very expensive.
Option C - I am talking myself into Option C...

Basicially - Is ActiveSync that good? Would I be seriously missing out by not getting GSync with an NVIDIA card? Is it the case that if you want to go NVIDIA you also just have to suck up the price of a GSync monitor too? If this is the case, then I will probably just wait until the next new big game release (BF5 or something).

 

[LeMson]

If you wait a week you maybe able to pick up a vega bundle, with money off a monitor, and cpu and whatever else is included

 

[opethdisciple]

Yes. No decisions yet until Vega launches on the 14th of August.

 

[AndyT]

OK, cheers; however do you think active sync is no-brainer for a modern card? I.e, would I be missing out on a key part of the gaming experience by not making use of a monitor feature designed for powerful cards? Bit of a tricky question really as you end up tying yourself to a particular OEM by virtue of your monitor...

EDIT: In terms of monitors, I'm actually quite disappointed in what's available in the 27" 1440p, high refresh rate (120, 144Hz) range. Anything affordable, i.e. < 400GBP seems to be adorned with some god-awful red plastic trim or a similar weird gamer style look to it. I was hoping for something a little more subdued for the office. I'd like to avoid downscaling a 4K monitor to 1440P too. I doubt any card I buy will be capable of 4K high/ultra for e.g. BF1/BF5 etc.

 

[nashathedog]

If you do go for a Freesync option make sure to do your homework on Freesync as there are a lot of monitors out there that do not support it properly even though they claim to. The main thing to check is whether a monitor supports LFC (Low framerate Compensator). If it does not support LFC it more than likely doesn't have a wide working range and that means it's one to avoid. How good the Freesync experience is will vary from one monitor to another.

 

[Rroff]

EDIT: In terms of monitors, I'm actually quite disappointed in what's available in the 27" 1440p, high refresh rate (120, 144Hz) range. Anything affordable, i.e. < 400GBP seems to be adorned with some god-awful red plastic trim or a similar weird gamer style look to it. I was hoping for something a little more subdued for the office. I'd like to avoid downscaling a 4K monitor to 1440P too. I doubt any card I buy will be capable of 4K high/ultra for e.g. BF1/BF5 etc.

Sucks that the Dell S2716DG has shot up in price so much - if you are lucky one reputable place has it in the upper 400s now and again - most places that aren't dodgy are at least £500 some north of £600 its a monitor that doesn't look out of place in the office.

It would limit you to G-Sync and nVidia however.

 

[AndyT]

I think I will wait it out for a bit yet. My idea this time last year was to wait for affordable and well supported VR, might stick with that idea and play the long game.

BF1/Witcher/GTA V are still decent enough on the 7970 at 1920 x 1200. Just hope the new middle earth game doesn't suck a Pompey whopper on it.

Question still stands though - how amazing is gsync/freesync and is it worth it?

 

[Rroff]

As always the perception of the benefits of an adaptive sync system are going to vary person to person there is a good video on it here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVNRNOcLUuA

Personally would not want to go back to not having access to G-Sync now.

 

[shankly1985]

I couldn't go back using a display without this technology. The screen tear without is just too annoying.

 

[rtho782]

Yup, would never go back to non-adaptive sync.

As has been stated, while there are good freesync monitors, it's a "buyer beware" deal as many of them suck. GSync has an annoying price premium but there are no utter lemons.

IIRC even first "1440p144" freesync monitor only went up to 100hz or something when freesync was turned on...

 

[JediFragger]

I couldn't go back using a display without this technology. The screen tear without is just too annoying.

I have to partially agree with this. I'm running a 43" 4k LG atm and the only way it's acceptable to me is to lock it to 60Hz. Fortunately it has a low input lag (10.7ms) so that helps a little too.

 

[Ste]

I have a 27 1440p g sync and a 34 1440p ultra wide 60hz.

It's a constant battle between the immersion of ultrawide and the fluidity of g sync.

If you can deal with the input lag of v sync, and keeping settings low enough to get a constant 60fps or more, I would say sync is not essential. However if you don't like the input lag or like to max settings sync is well worth it.

 

[opethdisciple]

Yes. No decisions yet until Vega launches on the 14th of August.

He says and then contradicts himself with a second hand 1080G1. Provisionally bought today.

Haven't paid for it yet tho.

My thoughts are I prefer Gysnc and would rather be in place for Volta and beyond from Nvidia.