G-Sync is a con?

MOOGLEYS · 2 Feb 2015 at 09:50

I'm surprised tbh how much of a difference it makes. Even Unity is buttery smooth with G-SYNC enabled. I get the very occasional black screen but it's rare and worth the difference it makes to games.

Gaming on the laptop for me now is a much nicer experience than desktop with a 980.

triss · 2 Feb 2015 at 09:53

The entire reason that Nvidia built G-Sync as a specialized solution is because there were no ASICs available on the desktop market that would allow it to synchronize frame display between the GPU and the monitor. Even the FreeSync / Adaptive-Sync standard backed by AMD required modifications to the DisplayPort standard and a new set of supporting monitors. In short, there’s no reason to expect this driver to magically enable G-Sync on any standard desktop display.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/198603-leaked-nvidia-driver-offers-taste-of-mobile-g-sync

GSync as we have had it so far on the desktops isnt a con as as the article states desktop monitors weren't capable of this before gysync... Laptops however are a different kettle of fish.
Which is most likely why AMD choose to demonstrate Freesync that way , yet they didnt release a magic driver that worked on existing desktop monitors

Gregster · 2 Feb 2015 at 09:54

MOOGLEYS said:
I'm surprised tbh how much of a difference it makes. Even Unity is buttery smooth with G-SYNC enabled. I get the very occasional black screen but it's rare and worth the difference it makes to games.

Gaming on the laptop for me now is a much nicer experience than desktop with a 980.

Glad it works for ya bud and yer, G-Sync is awesome in my opinion. I would detaest going back to non G-Sync gaming and don't think I would.

Gregster · 2 Feb 2015 at 09:57

triss said:
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/198603-leaked-nvidia-driver-offers-taste-of-mobile-g-sync

GSync as we have had it so far on the desktops isnt a con as as the article states desktop monitors weren't capable of this before gysync... Laptops however are a different kettle of fish.
Which is most likely why AMD choose to demonstrate Freesync that way , yet they didnt release a magic driver that worked on existing desktop monitors

Good point and there are existing desktop and laptops monitors that can quite easily run Freesync, as proven by the tech show Freesync demo. I am surprised that nobody has come up with a firware/driver that enables it.

kazuya1337 · 2 Feb 2015 at 12:05

Even if this is true why is it an issue? Nvidia have brought this tech to the market first way before free sync so why not make it exclusive to their customers. It just gets tedious listening to people moan expecting things to be free and pointing to AMD without realising that AMD are only offering anything free source because they have such a small market share it's the only hope they have of trying to make it industry standard. no one are the good guys it's just business.

r7slayer · 2 Feb 2015 at 12:21

kazuya1337 said:
Even if this is true why is it an issue? Nvidia have brought this tech to the market first way before free sync so why not make it exclusive to their customers. It just gets tedious listening to people moan expecting things to be free and pointing to AMD without realising that AMD are only offering anything free source because they have such a small market share it's the only hope they have of trying to make it industry standard. no one are the good guys it's just business.

Probably why i like AMD that bit more then. They offer things at a better value

Gregster · 2 Feb 2015 at 12:29

You get what you pay for!

Andygully · 2 Feb 2015 at 12:34

Gregster said:
You get what you pay for!

sure do that's why the 970 was so cheap

Wizzfizz · 2 Feb 2015 at 12:35

Gregster · 2 Feb 2015 at 13:12

humbug · 2 Feb 2015 at 13:34

Father Torque said:
Confirmed. Tech site PcPer tested the leaked driver and says it runs smoothly and GSync is enabled without a special module. They even have the reply of NVidia on the matter:

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Mobile-G-Sync-Confirmed-and-Tested-Leaked-Alpha-Driver

Edit: More sites are on the subject. Extreme tech has a special report too: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/198603-leaked-nvidia-driver-offers-taste-of-mobile-g-sync

Ok, so it’s a popup, could it be a bug? We checked NVIDIA control panel and the options were consistent with that of a G-Sync connected system. We fired up the pendulum demo and watched the screen carefully, passing the machine around the office to be inspected by all. We then fired up some graphics benchmarks that were well suited to show off the technology (Unigine Heaven, Metro: Last Light, etc), and everything looked great – smooth steady pans with no juddering or tearing to be seen. Ken Addison, our Video Editor and jack of all trades, researched the panel type and found that it was likely capable of 100 Hz refresh. We quickly dug created a custom profile, hit apply, and our 75 Hz G-Sync laptop was instantly transformed into a 100 Hz G-Sync laptop!

Ha! Debunked my ####, dear oh dear. Nvidia.

ubersonic · 2 Feb 2015 at 13:39

humbug said:
Ha! Debunked my ####, dear oh dear. Nvidia.

Dude... You actually quoted a link debunking it lol (the extreme one).

humbug · 2 Feb 2015 at 13:52

ubersonic said:
Dude... You actually quoted a link debunking it lol (the extreme one).

Obviously not, it's not perfect, but the fact it with a Driver hack it works without the G-Sync module, i don't see any reason why it wouldn't be just as good if the Drivers had actually been designed to work without the Module in the first place.

It proves the Module is unnecessary, that A-Sync is the right way for the end user.

Freddie1980 · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:02

Ok so when I tried to get this work on my desktop that would explain why the driver wouldn't install because it only works for laptops?

humbug · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:05

Freddie1980 said:
Ok so when I tried to get this work on my desktop that would explain why the driver wouldn't install because it only works for laptops?

Laptop's have the compatible scaler, Some Desktop screens also have that scaler. the problem actually lays in the connection between the GPU and that scaler not being a compatible standardised connection.

It is now, or will be once the Adaptive-Sync screens hit the shelves.

If anyone has this driver hack keep it. i'm willing to bet it will work on Free-Sync Screens.

MOOGLEYS · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:05

I'm pretty sure this is coming to laptops soon anyway and some like the G751 already have the needed screen, hardware etc to run it. It needs to be a laptop screen capable of on the fly refresh rate changes which is part of the eDP specification from what I can gather.....

ubersonic · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:28

humbug said:
Obviously not

No really, the extreme one debunks all the myths that you can run this on a desktop system.

humbug said:
it's not perfect, but the fact it with a Driver hack it works without the G-Sync module, i don't see any reason why it wouldn't be just as good if the Drivers had actually been designed to work without the Module in the first place

Well the big reason is it only works with laptops not desktops, which is something we already knew!

humbug said:
It proves the Module is unnecessary, that A-Sync is the right way for the end user.

It proves that a module is unnecessary on laptops which again is something we already knew, Nvidia even stated it themselves back when AMD used laptops to demonstrate Freesync before Freesync monitors existed.

humbug · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:35

The question is do Nvidia need the G-Sync Module, answer = not a resounding no given the connection compatibility issue that AMD + VESA have/are fixing.

My point is Nvidia could have done it in the same way, instead they went down the extra Hardware + licensing fee's rout. it results in extra costs for the end user, costs that ultimately end in Nvidis's pocket.

Screen vendors now know the module is not needed (Given it was one of Asus's own guy's who did this) Nvidia may be forced to take up Free-Sync, that can only be a good thing.

Reaper123 · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:37

Personally I don't see what the fuzz is about. Nvidia is a business and they want to make money, simple as that. Since there was no adaptive sync monitors and since they were the first to bring this technology to the users, I don't see why they should be flamed for charging a premium to early adopters.

Its a good thing that Freesync came along and because of the new industry standard that came with it there won't be any substantial costs added to the consumers.

What appears to be true is that Gsync can work in some way with the new industry standard and does not absolutely require the Gsync module. It might be that Nvidia has developed a Gsync version that can work with either modules depending on the monitor as not to completely **** up their customers. What we do not know is which of the three is better

A) Gsysc technology running on Gsync monitors
B) Gsync technology running on the new Vesa industry standard without Gsync module
C) Freesync technology running on the new Vesa industry standard

Lets wait and see...

JediFragger · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:39

humbug said:
Screen vendors now know the module is not needed (Given it was one of Asus's own guy's who did this) Nvidia may be forced to take up Free-Sync, that can only be a good thing.

Yup, nVidia are well-known (esp recently) of doing the right thing and fixing their mistakes

You're in dreamland m8, nVidia are only interested in one thing and it begins with a $