Is there a major difference between gsync and freesync?

lawrence281

lawrence281

lawrence281

Associate
Joined
30 Oct 2014
Posts
2,081
Location
Norfolk
Just sold my g sync monitor aoc. Thinking about rebuilding a ryzen/Rx build at some point and would need a good monitor for competitive gaming as csgo etc and other high end games .
What are the differences with the two types of monitors or are gsync just the expensive take on freesync!
 
No major difference - some FreeSync monitors have more restrictive refresh ranges where FreeSync works, G-Sync still has slightly better low framerate behaviour and slightly better support for games that use odd fullscreen mechanisms.

One potential advantage of going the nVidia route is access to FastSync - though its usefulness is hit and miss - this basically lets a game or program run as fast as possible ignoring any V-Sync or refresh rate, etc. settings that might be in effect and then tries to tie up the results with V-Sync or whatever afterwards which can reduce latency and how responsive a game feels while still preventing tearing, etc. however it can sometimes result in varying amounts of stutter depending on exact circumstances.
 
Last edited:
Definitely beware of FreeSync ranges. I use 57-144 Hz and can notice immediately if Borderlands 2 dips below 57 FPS - it becomes a little "slow looking" due to each frame being shown twice. In other games this isn't noticeable so maybe it's game-specific or genre-specific, plus I'm very sensitive to this kind of stuff. I have never used GSync so can't comment if it handles low frame rates any better.
 
Ah well, agreed to sell it on gumtree to a guy for 180, got it for 340. But sold it due to graduating soon and need to focus on looking for work lol. I've just been suggested rebuilding when I do so with ryzen /rx580 and that only works with freesync.
 
FreeSync recently had an update to better support windowed type modes - from my experience G-Sync still has a bit better support though for that kind of stuff - depending a bit on what OS you run as Windows 10 seems to handle it a little better probably due to updates to WDDM or whatever.
 
Undesirable said:
I read somewhere that GSync is meant to work in windowed mode whereas freesync doesn't, and there's a lot to be said for borderless window mode on PCs IMO.
Click to expand...

FreeSync works just fine in Windowed mode, support was added a while back.

Just check the range before you purchase. If you will be dropping outside the range frequently while gaming, pick up a display with features LFC.

LFC inserts frames where needed once you fall outside the range to avoid judder, same as what other adaptive sync tech does.
https://www.amd.com/Documents/freesync-lfc.pdf

Make no mistake though, whatever tech you use 30FPS or lower is still 30FPS or lower, it won't feel good compared to higher framerates.
 
AMDMatt said:
Make no mistake though, whatever tech you use 30FPS or lower is still 30FPS or lower, it won't feel good compared to higher framerates.
Click to expand...
Yep. Some people go on like as if 30fps using Freesync or G-Sync feels like 60fps and talk about the tech as if it is some miracle. It is no different then how the game would feel like with v-sync off minus the tearing for god sakes.

As there are no 4K monitors with LFC I got this monitor (see sig) which as 40-60. I figure I can play 99% of my steam library fine in this range so it should be fine until they release a decently priced OLED monitor with a better range. Just need to wait for Vega now and hope it bring the performance :)
 
TNA said:
Yep. Some people go on like as if 30fps using Freesync or G-Sync feels like 60fps and talk about the tech as if it is some miracle. It is no different then how the game would feel like with v-sync off minus the tearing for god sakes.

As there are no 4K monitors with LFC I got this monitor (see sig) which as 40-60. I figure I can play 99% of my steam library fine in this range so it should be fine until they release a decently priced OLED monitor with a better range. Just need to wait for Vega now and hope it bring the performance :)
Click to expand...

It's better than not having it for sure, but it's no magic cure.
 
Read g-sync is superior.
But g-sync costs a hell of a lot more, and you have less choice in the monitors as well.

I reckon TV's will eventually have sync features, and my bet it'll be "free" version of the sync
 
hornetstinger said:
Read g-sync is superior.
But g-sync costs a hell of a lot more, and you have less choice in the monitors as well.

I reckon TV's will eventually have sync features, and my bet it'll be "free" version of the sync
Click to expand...

My subjective opinion says otherwise(as in they are equal in experience) having owned and run both gsync and freesync systems and experienced both tech first hand.
 
AMDMatt said:
FreeSync works just fine in Windowed mode, support was added a while back.

Just check the range before you purchase. If you will be dropping outside the range frequently while gaming, pick up a display with features LFC.

LFC inserts frames where needed once you fall outside the range to avoid judder, same as what other adaptive sync tech does.
https://www.amd.com/Documents/freesync-lfc.pdf

Make no mistake though, whatever tech you use 30FPS or lower is still 30FPS or lower, it won't feel good compared to higher framerates.
Click to expand...
Just to point out, a display that "features LFC" just means a display with a maximum FreeSync frequency at least 2.5x its lowest frequency (e.g. 30-90 Hz or 45-120 Hz or 57-144 Hz).

TNA said:
Yep. Some people go on like as if 30fps using Freesync or G-Sync feels like 60fps and talk about the tech as if it is some miracle. It is no different then how the game would feel like with v-sync off minus the tearing for god sakes.

As there are no 4K monitors with LFC I got this monitor (see sig) which as 40-60. I figure I can play 99% of my steam library fine in this range so it should be fine until they release a decently priced OLED monitor with a better range. Just need to wait for Vega now and hope it bring the performance :)
Click to expand...
Agreed but it does make occasional dips below 60 FPS much more tolerable, and no tearing is also a huge plus (for me anyway). I actually notice very quickly if my FreeSync has suddenly stopped working even though tearing is much less visible at 144 Hz (it happened once after a driver update and another time when I disconnected and reconnected my monitor - both were fixed with reboots). Some people will be happy with 144 Hz no FreeSync/G-Sync but for me the difference in smoothness is very noticeable.

hornetstinger said:
Read g-sync is superior.
But g-sync costs a hell of a lot more, and you have less choice in the monitors as well.

I reckon TV's will eventually have sync features, and my bet it'll be "free" version of the sync
Click to expand...
Of course, it's a VESA standard. As for G-Sync being superior,when they were both first released it definitely was. Now, not so much.
 
TNA said:
Yep. Some people go on like as if 30fps using Freesync or G-Sync feels like 60fps and talk about the tech as if it is some miracle. It is no different then how the game would feel like with v-sync off minus the tearing for god sakes.

As there are no 4K monitors with LFC I got this monitor (see sig) which as 40-60. I figure I can play 99% of my steam library fine in this range so it should be fine until they release a decently priced OLED monitor with a better range. Just need to wait for Vega now and hope it bring the performance :)
Click to expand...

30 fps is 30 fps but adaptive sync makes 30-60fps so much more playable - no more having to make a compromise of either the horrendous v-sync lag if you are dropping into that range or dealing with the nasty tearing with v-sync off (generally very high framerates reduce how much you perceive tearing).
 
Rroff said:
30 fps is 30 fps but adaptive sync makes 30-60fps so much more playable - no more having to make a compromise of either the horrendous v-sync lag if you are dropping into that range or dealing with the nasty tearing with v-sync off (generally very high framerates reduce how much you perceive tearing).
Click to expand...
Yeah I get that. The point I was making is it feels no better than having v-sync off. The only difference is tearing. But people make it sound like it magically gives you fps. lol. It just removes tearing without needing to use v-sync.
 
To me it is magical :p before I couldn't stand playing games where the framerate dropped below ~80fps - now with G-Sync for single player stuff I can live with the odd dips, etc. with everything ramped up visually.
 
TNA said:
Yeah I get that. The point I was making is it feels no better than having v-sync off. The only difference is tearing. But people make it sound like it magically gives you fps. lol. It just removes tearing without needing to use v-sync.
Click to expand...
Tearing is a big difference though, it's essentially a form of stutter because different parts of the screen aren't even in sync.
 
I ended up trying to avoid the pitfalls of low frame rates by getting the XF270HU. That way you're covered from 30-144Hz with Freesync.

Downsides: well I hope I never have to deal with Acer CS - as they're reportedly awful, there's a dreadful panel lottery although I seem to have gotten one with acceptable bleed and no pixel issues, and the fact that i'm locked into AMD/ATI until nVidia decide to stop trying to push GSync and just accept defeat.

But overall it was well worth the money. Doom was glorious at circa 100FPS with Vulkan and Freesync. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom