I want this monitor but in GSync

I have that monitor and it's definitely an ultrawide 21:9 screen. It wouldn't be much use for console gaming, you'd get black bars either side.

It's a great monitor though :)

If it did have gsync, you can bet it would be close to a grand.
 
That's another ultrawide though. Not much good for consoles.

It does look impressive though. Let's hope it doesn't suffer the usual ips backlight bleed issues.
 
IvanDobskey said:
I have that monitor and it's definitely an ultrawide 21:9 screen. It wouldn't be much use for console gaming, you'd get black bars either side.

It's a great monitor though :)

If it did have gsync, you can bet it would be close to a grand.
Click to expand...
so its £750 now, exactly the same thing but gsync instead of freesync it will be a grand? like the gsync part costs an extra £250 quid?

thats why they call it freesync coz its free, no?

(ps 250 quid for the gsync capability, is that right?)
 
Pretty much, yeah. Usually G-Sync price premium ("nVidia-tax") is around £150-£250, but on the higher end, the manufacturers will probably add a little extra.

As for the origin of FreeSync name, it could also be from free-to-use. In essence, there are apparently no royalties for FreeSync, and it doesn't require a separate chip, like G-Sync requires, so that's another factor for why it's cheaper. nVidia is ahead of AMD in the GPU market, and that's pretty much the only viable reason why G-Sync is still around. The price premium has no practical correlation to quality or features. On the other hand, maybe AMD would have liked to set their own premium for FreeSync, as well, but opted not to, so they could entice more people towards their camp.

Anyway, it's quite hard to find otherwise identical monitors, only having the FreeSync vs. G-Sync difference, so direct comparison is challenging. But here are few pairs, good luck finding any other differences between them (other people can list more):

Acer XZ271 vs. Acer Z271 (£340 vs. £570)
Acer XZ321Q vs. Acer Z321Q (£480 vs. £750)
Lenovo Y27F vs. Lenovo Y27G (OcUK doesn't stock Lenovos...?)

At some point, there were HUGE discounts on the 32" Acers, and IIRC, you could get the XZ for £300, and Z for £500. Unfortunately, no such discounts, anymore.

Lenovo's old G-model actually started with a "regular" price premium of ~£200, but it has fallen quite low (or rather it's being discounted quite often), after they released the "Lenovo Y27G Razer Edition". So the difference between the two original models shouldn't be that much, anymore, maybe around £100? Unless you find a similar discount for the F-model, naturally...

Ps. For people listing other pairs: for proper comparison, each pair should be from the same manufacturers, otherwise brand image could be counted as a differentiation factor.
Ps2. There are regular "Wide-screen" monitors (16:9), then there are "Ultra-wides" (21:9), and then there are ... "Double-wide"? "Super Ultra-wide"? I don't even know what they're called, but check Samsung C49HG90 (32:9).
Ps3. For console gaming, you should look at regular 16:9 1080p 60Hz monitors. Anything else, and you're actually more likely to encounter scaling and syncing issues.
 
aatu said:
Pretty much, yeah. Usually G-Sync price premium ("nVidia-tax") is around £150-£250, but on the higher end, the manufacturers will probably add a little extra.

As for the origin of FreeSync name, it could also be from free-to-use. In essence, there are apparently no royalties for FreeSync, and it doesn't require a separate chip, like G-Sync requires, so that's another factor for why it's cheaper. nVidia is ahead of AMD in the GPU market, and that's pretty much the only viable reason why G-Sync is still around. The price premium has no practical correlation to quality or features. On the other hand, maybe AMD would have liked to set their own premium for FreeSync, as well, but opted not to, so they could entice more people towards their camp.

Anyway, it's quite hard to find otherwise identical monitors, only having the FreeSync vs. G-Sync difference, so direct comparison is challenging. But here are few pairs, good luck finding any other differences between them (other people can list more):

Acer XZ271 vs. Acer Z271 (£340 vs. £570)
Acer XZ321Q vs. Acer Z321Q (£480 vs. £750)
Lenovo Y27F vs. Lenovo Y27G (OcUK doesn't stock Lenovos...?)

At some point, there were HUGE discounts on the 32" Acers, and IIRC, you could get the XZ for £300, and Z for £500. Unfortunately, no such discounts, anymore.

Lenovo's old G-model actually started with a "regular" price premium of ~£200, but it has fallen quite low (or rather it's being discounted quite often), after they released the "Lenovo Y27G Razer Edition". So the difference between the two original models shouldn't be that much, anymore, maybe around £100? Unless you find a similar discount for the F-model, naturally...

Ps. For people listing other pairs: for proper comparison, each pair should be from the same manufacturers, otherwise brand image could be counted as a differentiation factor.
Ps2. There are regular "Wide-screen" monitors (16:9), then there are "Ultra-wides" (21:9), and then there are ... "Double-wide"? "Super Ultra-wide"? I don't even know what they're called, but check Samsung C49HG90 (32:9).
Ps3. For console gaming, you should look at regular 16:9 1080p 60Hz monitors. Anything else, and you're actually more likely to encounter scaling and syncing issues.
Click to expand...
holy moly the monitors are the same but with gsync its and extra £250+

wow, who takes the extra money? I assume its nvidia charging monitor manufacturers a price to use their tech, free sync vs gsync, ive got a feeling gsync is better because its got that chip, hardware better than software....

the reason I mentioned console is because I have a PS4, the monitor is mainly for use with my PC, I have a separate TV on my desk for the console, which also takes up a lot of space, thats why I want one one monitor that I can use with my PC and occasionally with the console.

And gsync is a must for 1080ti users, I do have a ROG 27inch 144hz monitor which i will sell, and also i will sell my 3DTV then add the remainder in cash, but Im severely restricted in my monitor purchase.
 
IIRC, the G-Sync chip is some sort of custom ASIC chip, and those are actually quite costly. I'd personally guess it costs nVidia around £50 to manufacture/outsource/prepare them, and then they take a little bit extra margin to cover the initial R&D, as well. Then there's the extra cost for the monitor manufacturer to implement it, as well. And to keep the overall unit margin about the same, they need to increase the price slightly more on the higher end.

Whereas with FreeSync, the core functionality is embedded in the DisplayPort protocols (nowadays also HDMI, though not sure if that's by a standard, or a hack), so there is no need for an extra hardware component, from what I've understood.

But then there's also this:
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-gsync-mobility-confirmed-require-dedicated-module-raises-questions/

Not sure what became of that story.

And with regards to consoles:
http://wccftech.com/amd-freesync-hdmi-playstation-neo-xbox-scorpio/
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/06/xbox-one-x-scorpio-games-explainer-video/

The first article talks about both new consoles, but only Xbox One X is apparently confirmed. Note: the talk is mostly about FreeSync 2, so not sure whether the first gen FreeSync monitors are supported? There are no FreeSync TVs, yet. Not 1st gen, nor 2nd gen.

As for 1440p monitor recommendations, you'll have to wait for someone else, I don't have much experience with them.
 
aatu said:
IIRC, the G-Sync chip is some sort of custom ASIC chip, and those are actually quite costly. I'd personally guess it costs nVidia around £50 to manufacture/outsource/prepare them, and then they take a little bit extra margin to cover the initial R&D
Click to expand...

Obviously more to the cost than just the materials but the FPGA used when bought in bulk now costs just $9/unit or so.

Stu said:
Apparently one size fits all! :eek:

Gibbo reports that the response time and latency are so good that G-Sync and Freesync are unnecessary.
Click to expand...

No amount of response time or low latency can replace adaptive sync functionality - you still have the built in latency of V-Sync if that is used or tearing if not. Not sure off the top of my head how those Samsung monitors work but if they use some built in frame buffering that likely comes with some variable input latency considerations.
 
No proper VA but ideally no LCD, I was on CRT in-between playing the LCD panel lottery over the years and Plasma and still use a Pioneer Kuro 5090 TV right now
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom