G-Sync with Adaptive V-Sync?

[Mayh3M]

So when you go over your maximum refresh rate G-Sync can no longer help you, in which case you need Nvidia V-Sync enabled too.

But V-Sync introduces additional input lag rendering one of the great benefits of G-Sync useless. So surely the answer is to enable Adaptive V-Sync alongside G-Sync which applies V-Sync ONLY when you hit your maximum refresh rate?

Not seen this recommended anywhere though, but surely this is the optimal G-Sync experience for everyone, unless I'm missing something?

 

[pgi947]

Gsync enabled, vsync enabled in nvcp and disabled in game, automatically caps frames to 0.5-1 frame below your max refresh, i.e. 144hz refresh caps at 143-143.5 fps. At no point does it revert to traditional vsync.

 

[Mayh3M]

Gsync enabled, vsync enabled in nvcp and disabled in game, automatically caps frames to 0.5-1 frame below your max refresh, i.e. 144hz refresh caps at 143-143.5 fps. At no point does it revert to traditional vsync.

So it's only applying itself at 0.5-1 below max refresh? As in the draw back of input lag will only be felt once it's applied at those values?

 

[andybird123]

no, they updated the drivers, with vsync on in NVCP and vsync OFF in game, you don't get input lag

 

[Mayh3M]

no, they updated the drivers, with vsync on in NVCP and vsync OFF in game, you don't get input lag

Was this recent? Because there are people still using frame limiters with G-Sync to avoid input lag, others say enabling V-Sync adds a negligible amount of extra ms, while others say what you guys are recommending.

Lots of conflicting stuff.

 

[Randall8686]

no, they updated the drivers, with vsync on in NVCP and vsync OFF in game, you don't get input lag

Agree i also have this setup with 0 Lag.

 

[Mayh3M]

Taken from pcmonitors.info:

How does G-SYNC act at the refresh rate ceiling of the monitor?

One of the attractions of this variable refresh technology is the low latency compared to using VSync. By using what Nvidia call a ‘lookaside buffer’, it adds very little latency compared to ‘VSync off’ (perhaps 1-2ms). There has been a bit of confusion about what happens when the monitor reaches the upper limit of its operation – 144fps at 144Hz, for example. If you observe an in-game frame rate counter or utility like FRAPS you will see that the frame rate only ever seems to reach 141-143fps rather than 144fps. However; Nvidia’s Tom Peterson has stated in a number of videos (here, for example) that G-SYNC monitors behave like VSync on when it reaches this ceiling. The game queues up frames, which induces similar latency behaviour to VSync on. Either way, interaction with the game world felt very smooth to us on the G-SYNC models we’ve tested even at this ceiling – just be aware of the possibility of a touch of extra latency here if you’re one of those people who swear by VSync off for minimal latency.

Seems like early implementations of G-Sync had V-Sync already enabled, or at least some kind of frame limit imposed.

 

[pgi947]

The first lot of monitors (Asus diy) and accompanying drivers would let frame rates hit max frame rate i.e. 144fps and generate input lag, this was especially highlighted in csgo. Nvidia quite swiftly released a driver that capped below (so no lag) and recently added the vsync option to drivers so players could go over the frame limit and to match an option freesync users were getting.

And tbh, if you want to go over the max refresh/frame rate on a gsync/freesync monitor then you're doing it wrong

 

[Simon Belmont]

Was this recent? Because there are people still using frame limiters with G-Sync to avoid input lag, others say enabling V-Sync adds a negligible amount of extra ms, while others say what you guys are recommending.

Lots of conflicting stuff.

These people are retarded. Since day one with my ROG Swift I've had no input lag. Seems like a lot of people still don't understand G-Sync? Can't people read???

 

[shankly1985]

If vsync really that much a problem with you. Why not just limit your frame rate? You can use msi afterburner that way you can have Gsync enabled and vsync disabled.

I using amd FRTC frame rate target control it's an excellent feature.

 

[Ayahuasca]

If you've got gsync set up the way people told you in the other thread you shouldn't need to worry about vsync or limiting frames.

If you want to run certain games at like 300fps, CSGO for example then ULMB might be better for you but not sure whether that monitor has it as it's 100hz.

 

[Rroff]

These people are retarded. Since day one with my ROG Swift I've had no input lag. Seems like a lot of people still don't understand G-Sync? Can't people read???

Uh while the input latency is relatively negligible at 144Hz there were tests done that showed that capping your framerate at somewhere between 120 and 135fps had a bit less input latency than if you left G-Sync to cap at the max refresh rate. More recent updates have addressed how G-Sync behaves at the lower and upper ends of the ranges but in my experimenting there still seems to be some benefits in terms of input latency with framerate limiting over just letting G-Sync cap at the max refresh rate.

 

[Mayh3M]

If vsync really that much a problem with you. Why not just limit your frame rate? You can use msi afterburner that way you can have Gsync enabled and vsync disabled.

I using amd FRTC frame rate target control it's an excellent feature.

I did try exactly this but capping at exactly 100 doesn't remove tearing. You would need to cap at 90 or 95 to avoid input lag according to some (as Rroff said).

If you've got gsync set up the way people told you in the other thread you shouldn't need to worry about vsync or limiting frames.

If you want to run certain games at like 300fps, CSGO for example then ULMB might be better for you but not sure whether that monitor has it as it's 100hz.

Not really having a problem I just want to improve my knowledge of how the tech works, and yeah no ULMB on this. I will enable V-Sync like you guys said.

 

[shankly1985]

I did try exactly this but capping at exactly 100 doesn't remove tearing. You would need to cap at 90 or 95 to avoid input lag according to some (as Rroff said).

Yeah I cap mine at 140fps 5FPS isn't going to be noticeable but screen tear will be..

Just play at 95fps and enjoy gaming.

 

[andybird123]

I did try exactly this but capping at exactly 100 doesn't remove tearing. You would need to cap at 90 or 95 to avoid input lag according to some (as Rroff said).



Not really having a problem I just want to improve my knowledge of how the tech works, and yeah no ULMB on this. I will enable V-Sync like you guys said.

if you think you are having problems with the settings suggested, with gsync on and vsync set to OFF in NVCP, you can run a frame cap at 99 and you won't get tearing and you won't get input lag

what rroff is saying about capping at 135 to avoid lag is when you have vsync on with gsync on, if you turn vsync off entirely then you'll never get vsync input lag anyway... it is best to run frame rate limiters within the game where possible (like via a user cfg) as using external frame limiters like MSI afterburner can cause its own problems, particularly when run in conjunction with variable frame rate monitors

 

[PCM2]

The first lot of monitors (Asus diy) and accompanying drivers would let frame rates hit max frame rate i.e. 144fps and generate input lag, this was especially highlighted in csgo. Nvidia quite swiftly released a driver that capped below (so no lag) and recently added the vsync option to drivers so players could go over the frame limit and to match an option freesync users were getting.

And tbh, if you want to go over the max refresh/frame rate on a gsync/freesync monitor then you're doing it wrong

That isn't the case. The Tom Peterson quotes and information suggesting VSync is employed came following release of the ASUG PG278Q. Even at that time the frame rate reading would usually be around 143fps even at the maximum, but Nvidia suggested it is something to do with the buffering process that the frame rate reads that and that the value doesn't reflect any sort of frame-rate capping. In other words; VSync is being enforced. And I have seen nothing to suggest any changes to the driver behaviour subsequently.