Fps Vs freesync?

[Panos]

Being able to go above 60 FPS but not needing to hit 144 FPS constantly is an advantage from a budget perspective (and also allows you to increase image quality settings). I find low FPS very noticeable (I hate watching sport on anything but broadcast TV since essentially every other source is 25 FPS instead of 50 FPS) so I try to keep everything running at 60+ FPS but that's not always possible (one fight in Divinity: Original Sin 2 drops to ~15 FPS for example). It's pretty obvious when I drop below 57 FPS and LFC kicks in too.

Playing games, particularly FPSs, at 100 FPS or more is a fantastic experience and I wouldn't ever go back. The only way I'd accept a setup without adaptive sync would be if the GPU was powerful enough to pump out 144 FPS using V-Sync on a 1440p 144 Hz monitor (or better), whilst retaining reasonable quality settings. Right now that's either impossible or stupidly expensive.

Vsync add lag. I rather have 100hz and Freesync.

 

[loftie]

It's pretty obvious when I drop below 57 FPS and LFC kicks in too.

What screen do you have curiously? Also is it just LFC kicking in you notice or just the fact it's gone below 60fps? So could you run games with a cap of say 55fps with freesync in LFC and not notice? As I said in my post, I don't generally notice down to 48fps, but I avoid the 70fps zone as that's when LFC kicks in and I can notice the transition. Below is fine, above is fine.

 

[DragonQ]

What screen do you have curiously? Also is it just LFC kicking in you notice or just the fact it's gone below 60fps? So could you run games with a cap of say 55fps with freesync in LFC and not notice? As I said in my post, I don't generally notice down to 48fps, but I avoid the 70fps zone as that's when LFC kicks in and I can notice the transition. Below is fine, above is fine.

See signature. It might be just that it becomes more noticeable beyond a certain threshold and that happens to coincide roughly with where LFC kicks in.

Vsync add lag. I rather have 100hz and Freesync.

True, staying in the adaptive sync window is the optimal solution. V-Sync input lag would be less obvious at higher refresh rates though.

 

[CaptainRAVE]

I have a 1080Ti and 144hz Freesync monitor. Works wonderfully.

 

[loftie]

See signature. It might be just that it becomes more noticeable beyond a certain threshold and that happens to coincide roughly with where LFC kicks in.

Bah, yea sorry. I did looked but glossed over it. Ok, was wondering if the LFC transition could possibly be a 'thing'.

 

[LoadsaMoney]

I have a 1080Ti and 144hz Freesync monitor. Works wonderfully.

Yup, i don't get all the 'i can't go Nvidia because i have FreeSync', i find it laughable tbh

 

[DragonQ]

Yup, i don't get all the 'i can't go Nvidia because i have FreeSync', i find it laughable tbh

Well you can claim it "works wonderfully" but unless it pumps out 144+ FPS at all times, it's not going to be as smooth as a less powerful AMD GPU with that monitor. I guess you could cap the FPS at 72 instead and get a good result too.

 

[mediamatt]

Someone told me today that freesync doesn't work on opengl. X Plane 11 uses opengl so this woulw be devastating for my "all AMD" plan. Anyone know if that's true?

 

[Rroff]

Someone told me today that freesync doesn't work on opengl. X Plane 11 uses opengl so this woulw be devastating for my "all AMD" plan. Anyone know if that's true?

Not upto speed on XP11 but last I checked FreeSync + OpenGL borderless "fullscreen" didn't work and/or resulted in flickering on some drivers - older versions of X Plane used borderless hence incompatible but I think 11 has an exclusive fullscreen mode but not sure if that works with FreeSync or not - exclusive fullscreen "should" work but I can't confirm it.

 

[opethdisciple]

Granted I see that Freesync monitors are cheaper... but I argue that Gsync is the superior technology as any monitor with a Gysnc sticker does everything that Gysnc is supposed to do.

That's full 30-144hz refresh rate etc etc etc...

With Freesync, you've got to dig deeper to see what parts of the Freesync spec are implemented by the monitor your buying.

Is it full 30 -144hz, is it 70-100 Freesync range and all the millions of other possible permutations you can imagine.

Gsync. Boom, you know what it does without even needing to look any deeper.

 

[nashathedog]

If you go Freesync ensure the monitor has a wide working range and supports LFC (Low framerate compensator).

https://www.amd.com/en/products/freesync-monitors

I'm running a 3440x1440 Freesync monitor with a working range of 30-75 & LFC support. I'm using a 2700x & an RX480 to run it and it does a great job, So far every game I've tried can be made to run well even though I'm a bit light on the gpu muscle.

I have a 1080Ti and 144hz Freesync monitor. Works wonderfully.

Like this gent I've also run Nvidia gpu's with my Freesync monitor with no issues, Both a 1060 & a 1080 with Fastsync enabled gave me a good experience.

 

[Dicehunter]

Vega64 is quite a bit slower than a 1080 Ti and if you want the best gaming CPU then at the moment it is Intel.

You can always pick up a G-sync monitor in the future, I wouldn't disable my own performance just for Freesync, Quite a silly choice IMO.

 

[mediamatt]

HP Omen 32 48-75 and no LFC

 

[nashathedog]

I so want to go all AMD but on a different forum dedicated to flight simulation EVERYBODY is saying to avoid AMD as the they are rubbish (X Plane uses opengl) and that intel still has far superior IPC which is what XP uses .

Then you'd be better of following their advice if you're a flight sim guy.

It's pretty obvious when I drop below 57 FPS and LFC kicks in too.

Unfortunately it's not a magic fix all it does is double up by showing the same frames twice to lessen the impact from a low frame rate.

 

[Pocah]

Unless you are a confirmed addict of one manufacturer over another ( AMD or NVIDIA ) then honestly I think people are absolutely mad going Freesync or G-Sync. Go on fps and if it just so happens to match your monitor then fine but if not don't worry about it. I mean otherwise you are tying yourself in to a specific manufacturer until you decide to replace your graphics card AND monitor at the same time. And I don't know about you but I never do that. I always replace them at different times and I replace my graphics card five times more often than my monitor.
And I would always say put emotions aside when you make a decision and go with your brain.

 

[DragonQ]

Granted I see that Freesync monitors are cheaper... but I argue that Gsync is the superior technology as any monitor with a Gysnc sticker does everything that Gysnc is supposed to do.

That's full 30-144hz refresh rate etc etc etc...

With Freesync, you've got to dig deeper to see what parts of the Freesync spec are implemented by the monitor your buying.

Is it full 30 -144hz, is it 70-100 Freesync range and all the millions of other possible permutations you can imagine.

Gsync. Boom, you know what it does without even needing to look any deeper.

Well yes, spending an extra £200 on a G-Sync monitor does save you the five seconds it takes to look at the FreeSync range of the monitor in the specs.

On a more serious note, FreeSync 2 should be addressing such issues. If not, they've missed a trick.

If you go Freesync ensure the monitor has a wide working range and supports LFC (Low framerate compensator).

HP Omen 32 48-75 and no LFC

Please stop repeating this nonsense. AMD drivers implement LFC and have done for over a year. You do not need a monitor that specifically supports it.

Like this gent I've also run Nvidia gpu's with my Freesync monitor with no issues, Both a 1060 & a 1080 with Fastsync enabled gave me a good experience.

Of course there are no issues with such a setup. The same as there are no issues in buying an RGB keyboard if you're colour blind.

Vega64 is quite a bit slower than a 1080 Ti and if you want the best gaming CPU then at the moment it is Intel.

You can always pick up a G-sync monitor in the future, I wouldn't disable my own performance just for Freesync, Quite a silly choice IMO.

That's generally true but it's more complicated than that. Say I have a 144 Hz monitor and a Vega 64 can give me 90-110 FPS in a particular game. Let's also assume that a GTX 1080 Ti would give me 120-140 FPS in that game, a significant improvement. However, I would lose FreeSync and thus get stuttering despite the higher frame rate. In that case I'd prefer the AMD card.

Of course, if nVidia had a faster card that also supported FreeSync then it'd be a no-brainer. But they don't.[/QUOTE]

 

[loftie]

Unless you are a confirmed addict of one manufacturer over another ( AMD or NVIDIA ) then honestly I think people are absolutely mad going Freesync or G-Sync. Go on fps and if it just so happens to match your monitor then fine but if not don't worry about it.

I'd kinda disagree, if you're in the market for a new monitor and you've got the option to buy a monitor sans *sync or with *sync and all other things about the monitor are the same including price you'd be daft not to get the one with *sync. Even if your current GPU doesn't work with that tech because you'd be no worse off. However if the monitor is rubbish i wouldn't buy it even if it had *sync and no-one should. With GPUs I agree, I wouldn't suddenly say choose between a 580 and a 1070 and say the 580 is better because I've got Freesync, I'd say get the 1070. However if you match price points and it's between the 580 and 1060 6GB then the 580 instantly has an extra feature that's nice and seriously sway me to getting the 580 - depending on cards available, budget etc.

On a more serious note, FreeSync 2 should be addressing such issues. If not, they've missed a trick.

Yea I'm pretty sure Freesync 2 has to have LFC.

 

[mediamatt]

But freesync 2 has to be on the monitor doesn't it? The cards get it with an update?

Argh so torn. My monitor has 48-75hz freesync range but you can overclock that can't you to say 30-75? Even if not I could put the settings high enough where it looks good but doesn't drop below 50fps and get buttery smooth?

 

[maonayze]

Please stop repeating this nonsense. AMD drivers implement LFC and have done for over a year. You do not need a monitor that specifically supports it.

Well, technically you do. As in, the maximum VRR range frequency must be 2.5x the minimum frequency for LFC to work. Saying that, if it says the monitor supports LFC then you should be able to take for granted that the max is 2.5x the minimum frequency. If not then its fibbing and shouldnt be called LFC compatible.

https://www.amd.com/Documents/freesync-lfc.pdf

 

[Panos]

Someone told me today that freesync doesn't work on opengl. X Plane 11 uses opengl so this woulw be devastating for my "all AMD" plan. Anyone know if that's true?

If you go to XP forums you will find people have no issue with Freesync and that game
https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/137756-performance-comparison-with-xp10-and-xp11/

Even if their monitors at at 48-75 range.