• 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.

G Sync monitor and AMD graphics card

MichaelHo

MichaelHo

MichaelHo

Associate
Joined
19 Jan 2006
Posts
1,252
Location
London, UK
Hi All,

I am building a new computer and have just bought this MSI monitor which is G Sync compatible : https://www.msi.com/Monitor/Optix-MAG274QRF-QD

I was thinking if buying a Nvidia 3060 TI as my GPU but now considering 6700xt as reviews seem to say it’s more future proof.

What do you think between the two gfx cards and also would the 6700XT work just as well with the monitor?

CPU will be Intel i5 12600k.

Thanks.
 
Nvidia G-Sync marketing at its finest.

This is actually a G-Sync compatible monitor, which means it is Freesync marketed as G-Sync. So it will in effect do VRR on both AMD and Nvidia (or future Intel GPUs). Nvidia lost the VRR war but their marketing teams likes to act like they didn't :D
 
Last edited:
ICDP said:
Nvidia lost the VRR war but their marketing teams likes to act like they didn't :D
Click to expand...

Aside from G-Sync/nVidia branding is now slapped over everything - even when it is using adaptive sync - and as above results in the general consumer leaning towards nVidia GPUs. And it isn't really a celebratory thing that the inferior tech has become the more mainstream.
 
Rroff said:
Aside from G-Sync/nVidia branding is now slapped over everything - even when it is using adaptive sync - and as above results in the general consumer leaning towards nVidia GPUs. And it isn't really a celebratory thing that the inferior tech has become the more mainstream.
Click to expand...
looks like the marketing got you too :D inferior, vrr can use the whole range :P
 
I have a 32” 4K HDR600 150hz monitor with Freesync premium pro that works perfectly on my PS5 with HDMI 2.1 and on my RTX 3080 on DP. While technically g-sync ultimate is marginally better (for a price premium). It does not have the flexibility of Freesync as it does not work on the Latest gen consoles.

Having VRR on a PS5 at 4K cannot be understated. G-sync does not offer this feature and many Nvidia fans seem to forget, or simply ignore.

There is more to owning a monitor than PC gaming.
 
henson0115 said:
looks like the marketing got you too :D inferior, vrr can use the whole range :p
Click to expand...

I've explained before the technical differences between the technologies but at the end of the day adaptive sync currently still relies heavily on misusing the panel self-refresh (PSR) feature in ways it was not intended to do when originally developed which has several disadvantages, until there is a fully updated implementation of adaptive sync by VESA which there doesn't seem to be much traction on.

Having the G-Sync FPGA also allows the use of additional buffers display side which means better compatibility when using a PC with applications and games which use bodged window/fullscreen modes, etc. which the relatively "dumb" hardware in the average monitor is much more limited in ability to work around.

Not to mention the better control over overdrive.

EDIT: The VRR experience also varies hugely display to display - I use a Philips Momentum 436M6 for big screen gaming which only has a 48-60Hz VRR range and no LFC but is actually well implemented - I've tried other similar displays which have a wider VRR range but much more noticeable lag when frame rates dip a moment within a comparable range.
 
Last edited:
Remember when you could almost DIY the g-sync module. I would have loved to DIY that. All we got were pictures never could buy it. Curses Nvidia.
Almost as satisfying as when I had to create a Linux Boot disc to update the firmware in my Benq monitor via VGA cable.
Ah them were the days.
 
Rroff said:
I've explained before the technical differences between the technologies but at the end of the day adaptive sync currently still relies heavily on misusing the panel self-refresh (PSR) feature in ways it was not intended to do when originally developed which has several disadvantages, until there is a fully updated implementation of adaptive sync by VESA which there doesn't seem to be much traction on.

Having the G-Sync FPGA also allows the use of additional buffers display side which means better compatibility when using a PC with applications and games which use bodged window/fullscreen modes, etc. which the relatively "dumb" hardware in the average monitor is much more limited in ability to work around.

Not to mention the better control over overdrive.

EDIT: The VRR experience also varies hugely display to display - I use a Philips Momentum 436M6 for big screen gaming which only has a 48-60Hz VRR range and no LFC but is actually well implemented - I've tried other similar displays which have a wider VRR range but much more noticeable lag when frame rates dip a moment within a comparable range.
Click to expand...
if you have to explain it :D
edit: question for you, does gsync make your display refresh rate match your frames per second? - we all no the answer is yes and so the frames are variable right? therefor variable refresh rate. :p

just saying you also fell for the marketing :)
 
Last edited:
VRR whether freesync or gsync all feel very good really? Got both gsync ultimate and freesync (not pro) and seems perfectly fine. The gsync display is 1Hz to 175Hz (144 in my case as am running 10 bit colour) but even when games run above 144fps I see no tearing and gsync seems to still be working perfectly.
 
mrk said:
VRR whether freesync or gsync all feel very good really? Got both gsync ultimate and freesync (not pro) and seems perfectly fine. The gsync display is 1Hz to 175Hz (144 in my case as am running 10 bit colour) but even when games run above 144fps I see no tearing and gsync seems to still be working perfectly.
Click to expand...

Tearing is much harder to notice when around 120+Hz but unless you are using FastSync + G-Sync (which can induce some small amounts of stutter), or the display is reverting to V-Sync above the G-Sync range it will still be there when frame rates are above the refresh rate. V-Sync latency is also much reduced in how noticeable it is above 120Hz/FPS - if you have some form of VRR avoiding the way V-Sync drops frame rate through multipliers of the screen refresh when FPS drops then its impact is much less noticeable.
 
Last edited:
I can generally notice tearing fairly easily really on LCD monitors like the MateView GT (165Hz VA panel) but can 100% say there is no tearing I can spot in anything on this QD-OLED in any game I have played so far. Granted most games stay below 175fps when everything is maxed, but some older games like CS:S etc run above 240fps and they're buttery smooth. I never turn v-sync on and the the frames are set to uncapped in other games.
 
mrk said:
I can generally notice tearing fairly easily really on LCD monitors like the MateView GT (165Hz VA panel) but can 100% say there is no tearing I can spot in anything on this QD-OLED in any game I have played so far. Granted most games stay below 175fps when everything is maxed, but some older games like CS:S etc run above 240fps and they're buttery smooth. I never turn v-sync on and the the frames are set to uncapped in other games.
Click to expand...

A surprising amount depends on the quality of the monitor implementation. The Philips Momentum 436M6 I have for instance - should be terrible with its 60Hz refresh, 48-60Hz adaptive sync range, VA panel, etc. but surprisingly it isn't - the latency and pixel refresh, etc. are all very consistent around the average without the highs and lows of many other displays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom