In the same article, they acknowledge there are improvements to be made in the testing methodology, and the changes noted would - in my opinion - help FreeSync. But as a general test, it's probably fairly accurate for the current state of FreeSync and G-Sync. FreeSync is still new tech and there are improvements to be made, G-Sync is more matured and currently offers the better experience. The question then becomes is it £150 better experience?
-
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.
Intel plans to support FreeSync.
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
without being there with Linus when he did the testing I can't really answer that - in his video he says that for testing vsync on and off you can do it IN GAME - I already know that this much is false and would give false readings, so what else he might have done to give false readings I don't know
tftcentral tested the *sync off options on both monitors to give a raw input lag of ~5ms - now that was on windows desktop, so yes running it through a game engine is going to increase it - if the game was really running at 200fps (5ms per frame) then you would expect it to be ~10ms
it could be a driver problem, it could be a game problem, it could be a monitor problem... the main issue is that Linus' testing gives us no way of knowing because he only tested one game and he says in his video that he used what we know to be wrong settings for some of the tests
the only thing you can say about Linus' results is that for Crysis 3 specifically, using the settings that he actually used (which don't neccessarily tally with the labels on the graphs), a particular freesync monitor gave better results than a particular gsync monitor... the main problem being that we don't know what settings he actually used as he doesn't appear to know what settings he used
that's how testing works, you your methodology up for review and if there are faults in the method it casts doubt on the results
Last edited:
You cannot discount flawed testing methodology given how some of the tests were configured.
Now, ignoring differences so slight that a human being cannot discern them, it seems people prefer G-Sync in blind testing.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-freesync-versus-nvidia-g-sync-reader-event,review-33278.html
Just read that whole article and well worth it for those interested in what is what. Looks like G-Sync is a clear winner from all of that testing with 48 participants and 34 of the 48 said they would pay a premium for their preferred gaming experience. Tells a story there really. Thanks for that
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,679
- Location
- The KOP
Some testing also shows performance hit between the two. End of the day we can be here all week saying which is better than the other.. Either way these both set out to do a job and both achieve this..
Am sure the Pros and Cons even out!
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/variable_refresh.htm
Am sure the Pros and Cons even out!
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/variable_refresh.htm
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
Some testing also shows performance hit between the two. End of the day we can be here all week saying which is better than the other.. Either way these both set out to do a job and both achieve this..
Am sure the Pros and Cons even out!
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/variable_refresh.htm
that chart was supplied by AMD, it was not tested by tftcentral, by the way
the actual milliseconds difference per frame on the biggest difference there is 0.3ms
they also used a GTX780 vs a 290X (when the 980, TitanX and 980ti had all been released by the time tftcentral posted the news)
Last edited:
Just read that whole article and well worth it for those interested in what is what. Looks like G-Sync is a clear winner from all of that testing with 48 participants and 34 of the 48 said they would pay a premium for their preferred gaming experience. Tells a story there really. Thanks for that
If you have read the whole thing you will know that Free-Sync was disabled in at least one game as it went outside of the Asus Screens refresh-rate and another was running G-Sync with dialed back QI setting to bring the FPS up.
Considering that on some occasions Free-Sync was not running and G-Sync was tweaked its surprising anyone voted for Free-Sync.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
actually, if you read the article you'd know that they ran BF4 with BOTH ultra and tweaked settings and noted the results
Last edited:
Luckily for you the chart I linked was from one of the games where both technologies were working at all times.
Luckily for you the chart I linked was from one of the games where both technologies were working at all times.
From your article in reference to the slide.
Of course and that was something they put to a public vote and what AMD wanted. Effectively that is the way it is meant to be played from AMD's perspective, as that is a characteristic part of the drivers.
I have been a massive proponent of these techs since inception and urge anyone Freesync/G-Sync capable to try it. A game changer for me, just like the SSD was.
Have you tried it Humbug?
Good job I posted the chart where they were both kept below 90fps as to not hamper the limited Freesync display.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
even apples for apples with both hardware running under 90fps, people overwhelmingly chose gsync over freesync for BF4 full ultra
in fact on the tweaked machine, one less person chose gsync, lol, despite the AMD machine next to it running full ultra and the nvidia machine ONLY running lower quality settings
the results were practically identical
Even the ones who set this up acknowledge in the test there are issues with it that slant it in Nvidia's favor.
So its not as you put it "A clear win for Nvidia"
You keep banging on about how you like to be fair to both, so do that.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,679
- Location
- The KOP
I also disagree with there choice of monitors. While both being Asus and IPS is great they is some difference in the refresh rate window of each tech.
30-144 Gsync and 30-90 FS
A better test would have been ROG vs BenQ
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
read it again - on the machines that were running Nvida's prefered lower settings, one LESS person chose gsync, so nvidia's settings actually lost them one user
they did run both apples for apples and one running lower settings (nvidia only) and they put both sets of results in the article, so yes it is fair
There are other monitors that are a Free-Sync - G-Sync carbon copy of each-other, it would be nice to see something like this run again 'like that' and with the same Game IQ settings.
An Apples to Apples test.
One can't make an informed decision from this.
Interestingly, in the test where the quality settings were lowered to push the Nvidia display above 90fps, more people preferred the Freesync setup.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
jesus humbug, honestly read the article, they did both on full ultra ASWELL AS Nvidia machines running lower IQ... the lower IQ test actually LOST them a user, it didn't aid them at all
You keep telling me to read it, it seems like i'm the only one who did, half the users played BL2 with G-Sync running and Free-Sync OFF because of monitor issues.
Last edited: