Caporegime
Screen recording software does not pick up on it.
-
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.
Nvidia Explains Why Their G-Sync Display Tech Is Superior To AMD's FreeSync
- Thread starter Gregster
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Posts
- 2,419
The range though should be about right ? 60 FPS - 60HZ that both G and F screens can do ?
Soldato
is it an issue specifically tied in with Freesync? Only reason I ask, I've not been using Freesync on mine as I have 7950's which obviously do not support the tech. And I've also disabled the built in "Blur Reduction" on my monitor. When selected it makes the screen go dark, which I dislike, so I've calibrated mine accordingly. One of two things then, I've either got lucky and got a good panel, or my eyes are not as sensitive to the ghosting as others (if that's a possibility)
What would be the best and most accurate way to record what I see to give an accurate representation of my panel for others to see? So far I'm hugely impressed with this screen, it's easily deserving of the price range. Now if that price range was to come down, and I could provide the naysayers with some confidence in purchasing this monitor, you all could get a tasty bargain indeed.
What would be the best and most accurate way to record what I see to give an accurate representation of my panel for others to see? So far I'm hugely impressed with this screen, it's easily deserving of the price range. Now if that price range was to come down, and I could provide the naysayers with some confidence in purchasing this monitor, you all could get a tasty bargain indeed.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Posts
- 2,419
Wait you're not using a Freesync specific GPU ?
You're basically running a normal monitor..
I will have to dismiss your opinion about ghosting , sorry mate.
Last edited:
Well this is becoming a very interesting thread indeed. I've read through the entirety of it with a great amount of interest. I would like to add a few additional thoughts of my own on the whole 'ghosting' thing.
The advantage that G-SYNC has is that the module itself replaces the 'scaler' and other assistive electronics that are placed in a monitor to accompany the panel. This module is responsible for the pixel overdrive algorithm, whereas on FreeSync models it's up to the manufacturers own electronics to handle that. Nvidia is able to tune the pixel overdrive intensity 'on the fly' as refresh rate changes, whereas the manufacturer's solutions have only really been tuned with specific fixed refresh rates in mind (such as 144Hz).
With the FreeSync models shown in the PCPer video, you have two extremes which would be different in their pixel responsiveness regardless of FreeSync being used. The LG model uses an IPS panel - and its pixel responsiveness is slower. The BenQ uses very aggressive pixel overdrive and can be expected to suffer from a degree of inverse ghosting. I would expect some other FreeSync models (like the upcoming MG279Q) to offer a better balance with the pixel responsiveness, even if it is just tuned with a single refresh rate in mind. It may not be necessary to tune it to perfection for a huge range of refresh rates if it is already tightly tuned to offer rapid acceleration without noticeable overshoot at 144Hz.
What is crucially important in all of this is that these artificial tests (including capturing static frames with a high speed camera) are not a good representation of what the eye sees when observing motion on a monitor. It is the movement of your eyes rather than the pixel response behaviour of a modern 'sample and hold' monitor that is the most significant contributor to motion blur. When you're talking about variable refresh rates, the degree to which the eye moves changes alongside refresh rate. You could have an absolutely perfectly tuned pixel overdrive algorithm for a given refresh rate - it doesn't change the fact that there is more motion blur (a greater degree of eye movement) at lower refresh rates. By the same token, this motion blur can quite easily mask a lot of the pixel response behaviour of the monitor.
So whilst I do feel that Nvidia has an advantage in their ability to tightly control the acceleration of the monitor to reflect changing refresh rates, this isn't really as important in the real world as marketing or misrepresentation in videos would lead you to believe.
Nice one bud and I was hoping you could clear some things up
Well this is becoming a very interesting thread indeed. I've read through the entirety of it with a great amount of interest. I would like to add a few additional thoughts of my own on the whole 'ghosting' thing.
The advantage that G-SYNC has is that the module itself replaces the 'scaler' and other assistive electronics that are placed in a monitor to accompany the panel. This module is responsible for the pixel overdrive algorithm, whereas on FreeSync models it's up to the manufacturers own electronics to handle that. Nvidia is able to tune the pixel overdrive intensity 'on the fly' as refresh rate changes, whereas the manufacturer's solutions have only really been tuned with specific fixed refresh rates in mind (such as 144Hz).
With the FreeSync models shown in the PCPer video, you have two extremes which would be different in their pixel responsiveness regardless of FreeSync being used. The LG model uses an IPS panel - and its pixel responsiveness is slower. The BenQ uses very aggressive pixel overdrive and can be expected to suffer from a degree of inverse ghosting. I would expect some other FreeSync models (like the upcoming MG279Q) to offer a better balance with the pixel responsiveness, even if it is just tuned with a single refresh rate in mind. It may not be necessary to tune it to perfection for a huge range of refresh rates if it is already tightly tuned to offer rapid acceleration without noticeable overshoot at 144Hz.
What is crucially important in all of this is that these artificial tests (including capturing static frames with a high speed camera) are not a good representation of what the eye sees when observing motion on a monitor. It is the movement of your eyes rather than the pixel response behaviour of a modern 'sample and hold' monitor that is the most significant contributor to motion blur. When you're talking about variable refresh rates, the degree to which the eye moves changes alongside refresh rate. You could have an absolutely perfectly tuned pixel overdrive algorithm for a given refresh rate - it doesn't change the fact that there is more motion blur (a greater degree of eye movement) at lower refresh rates. By the same token, this motion blur can quite easily mask a lot of the pixel response behaviour of the monitor.
So whilst I do feel that Nvidia has an advantage in their ability to tightly control the acceleration of the monitor to reflect changing refresh rates, this isn't really as important in the real world as marketing or misrepresentation in videos would lead you to believe.
Quoted again partly because it shouldn't go unread. Also wanted to ask, did you manage to get a hold of a Freesync GPU in the end and can we look forward to one or more adaptive-sync monitor reviews in the near future?
So an important concept to continue to understand is that monitors (adaptive-sync capable or not) should be selected on the monitors merits as you would any monitor purchase anyway, rather than any old thing with a spec sticker on it.
Soldato
Soldato
Nope, intentions are to get a 390x if they ever surface lol. This is why I asked if this is tied into a freesync issue? Because running the monitor as is at 144hz and frames, I don't get any ghosting. Just trying to give info on my config and findings.
Soldato
Older vid from ces but looks as if the samsung 4k freesync has that wobbly stand still, goes down to 40hz though, one other monitor in the vid goes down to 30hz. 4k only has a 20hz range apparently
So is he saying that with FreeSync that if you enable VSync you get all the downsides of VSync if your framerate goes outside of the monitors range?
Also, if you don't enable VSync that you get tearing when you render FPS outside of the monitors range?
You have the option of having vsync kick in or not from what ive seen in the reviews. So tearing with no input lag, or no tearing and input lag. Its the same scenario with gsync if the games refresh goes higher or lower than supported.
Soldato
If you use just Freesync - frame rate can go over refresh rate of 144hz = screen tear.
Freesync plus vsync will stop frame rate going over refresh rate but if it drops below range 40hz in my case you get vsync stutter or input lag.
The best thing that I have done is to use msi afterburner and lock frame rate down to say 144 or I use 140fps. Then you don't need vsync.
But if you drop below 40fps you get screen tear.
Soldato
Right, surely it's when the FPS goes over that of the monitors refresh range that tends to cause most tearing? And this is when GSync/FreeSync don't work?
Since most of my games run faster than 60Hz it seems like this would be pointless for me unless the monitor has a 120/144Hz refresh rate (which I'm not sure they do @ 4K yet).
Really not sure what the selling point of GSync/Freesync is if it doesn't work with high refresh rates...
tearing is only a problem sub 100-120 fps from my personal experience. What i mean is that if you have tearing happening about 100-120+ fps its so tightly packed that you dont notice it that much on a high refresh rate monitor (120hz+). Again this is my experience.. Some may be having a worse experience than me in this regard
Soldato
I do agree! the higher the FPS plus the Higher the Refresh rate the harder it is to see screen tear..
The thing Freesync does for me is how it smoother out the frame rate, how its sent to the display.. It looks and feels so good, even when the frame rate drops it just continues to play sweet.
Soldato
Well this is becoming a very interesting thread indeed. I've read through the entirety of it with a great amount of interest. I would like to add a few additional thoughts of my own on the whole 'ghosting' thing.
The advantage that G-SYNC has is that the module itself replaces the 'scaler' and other assistive electronics that are placed in a monitor to accompany the panel. This module is responsible for the pixel overdrive algorithm, whereas on FreeSync models it's up to the manufacturers own electronics to handle that. Nvidia is able to tune the pixel overdrive intensity 'on the fly' as refresh rate changes, whereas the manufacturer's solutions have only really been tuned with specific fixed refresh rates in mind (such as 144Hz).
With the FreeSync models shown in the PCPer video, you have two extremes which would be different in their pixel responsiveness regardless of FreeSync being used. The LG model uses an IPS panel - and its pixel responsiveness is slower. The BenQ uses very aggressive pixel overdrive and can be expected to suffer from a degree of inverse ghosting. I would expect some other FreeSync models (like the upcoming MG279Q) to offer a better balance with the pixel responsiveness, even if it is just tuned with a single refresh rate in mind. It may not be necessary to tune it to perfection for a huge range of refresh rates if it is already tightly tuned to offer rapid acceleration without noticeable overshoot at 144Hz.
What is crucially important in all of this is that these artificial tests (including capturing static frames with a high speed camera) are not a good representation of what the eye sees when observing motion on a monitor. It is the movement of your eyes rather than the pixel response behaviour of a modern 'sample and hold' monitor that is the most significant contributor to motion blur. When you're talking about variable refresh rates, the degree to which the eye moves changes alongside refresh rate. You could have an absolutely perfectly tuned pixel overdrive algorithm for a given refresh rate - it doesn't change the fact that there is more motion blur (a greater degree of eye movement) at lower refresh rates. By the same token, this motion blur can quite easily mask a lot of the pixel response behaviour of the monitor.
So whilst I do feel that Nvidia has an advantage in their ability to tightly control the acceleration of the monitor to reflect changing refresh rates, this isn't really as important in the real world as marketing or misrepresentation in videos would lead you to believe.
Great read and should help clear up some confusion.
You should try crysis 3 with enough bells and whistles to drag frame rates down to around a 50 avg. It's one of the games that blew me away with gsync. Frame counter says 50, game feels like 100+
Soldato
You should try crysis 3 with enough bells and whistles to drag frame rates down to around a 50 avg. It's one of the games that blew me away with gsync. Frame counter says 50, game feels like 100+
Will after give Crysis 3 ago still not even completed that game..
Pc per latest podcast basically explains the differences between freesync and gsync.
Gsync gets around the frame tearing at lower refresh rates by duplicating frames so stuttering and tearing dosnt get introduced. So basically gsync doesn't really have a window on the low end where it stops working.
45 minute mark they talk about it.
Gsync gets around the frame tearing at lower refresh rates by duplicating frames so stuttering and tearing dosnt get introduced. So basically gsync doesn't really have a window on the low end where it stops working.
45 minute mark they talk about it.
Soldato
duplicating frames will just add more input lag.. Same reason Vsync adds input lag.. Would take screen tear over input lag any day.
Edit
I don't fully know if it will add more input lag doing what Gsync does, but I sure would like some tests run.
Anyways I can see what the saying and why some FreeSync monitors VRR is abit strange. But a that's why I went with 144hz with 40hz bottom i'll never go below that 40hz. I would sooner drop settings or switch Freesync off if that was the case.
Last edited: