• 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 G-Sync Q&A with Tom Peterson

Gregster

Gregster

Gregster

Caporegime
Joined
24 Sep 2008
Posts
38,284
Location
Essex innit!

I caught most of this yesterday and will give it another watch later on. Some interesting parts I picked up on were latency times being non existent and the costing.
 
Lolz at Peterson squirming at the Metro fail.

Gregster said:
Some interesting parts I picked up on were latency times being non existent
Click to expand...

What you think Nvidia are saying isn't what Nvidia are saying.

Nvidia are advertising Gsync as having 'less lag'.

oGgsJSe.png


Before I get jumped on, that wasn't a slur on Gsync btw, I have been assured by a relative(knowing that he has zero affiliation with gpu vendors) that Gsync is very, very good.
 
andybird123 said:
Yep, i've seen more thanone person quote the CSGO results out of context to "prove" that gsync adds 40ms of lag, when every other game tested it adds 1-2ms (e.g. Statistically insignificant as the difference between runs is bigger)
Click to expand...

The reason that the latency issue was picked up on CSGO is that it seems to be introduced where the frame rate meets or exceeds the highest refresh rate a monitor can do. It isn't some flaw with the game engine and wouldn't be isolated to that particular title. It's simply that only that title ran at >144fps on Mark's setup.

I am more interested to know how G-SYNC behaves in terms of latency at 144fps across a range of titles. A lot of further work has gone into the technology since the early implementation into the VG248QE that was reviewed there. I'm hoping this polling behaviour at 144fps has been improved as Nvidia seems to have hinted at, but I haven't seen any concrete evidence that it has.
 
When they talk about no lag, they mean in comparison with vsync off, with vsync off the situation you posted would result in a tear, with gsync you get no additional lag AND no tear

You can never have 0 lag because you can never have a gpu that takes 0ms to render a scene
 
Last edited:
Asus make some good quality gear, but some of the aesthetics don't do much for me at all.

Nice, thin bezels, though.
 
Last edited:
Can't speak for CS:GO but L4D2 feels the same with Gsync vs Vsync on (locked to 144FPS). One game I do need to try again is Payday 2, I remember vsync off on in that having the worst tearing I've seen in a game - made it unplayable so I suffered the input lagat 60 FPS (didn't vsync to 120 for some reason).
 
Deceptor said:
Can't speak for CS:GO but L4D2 feels the same with Gsync vs Vsync on (locked to 144FPS). One game I do need to try again is Payday 2, I remember vsync off on in that having the worst tearing I've seen in a game - made it unplayable so I suffered the input lagat 60 FPS (didn't vsync to 120 for some reason).
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I'm interested in and so are others. The same latency penalty that some users hate with VSync seems to exist with G-SYNC if the frame rate reaches the monitor's native refresh rate. Personally I can't stand tearing, can't stand stuttering and prefer lower latency but don't find it essential.

Unfortunately accurately measuring G-SYNC latency is difficult. Blurbusters did a great job, but that isn't the end of the story.

Edit: 27:00 into the video he confirms that latency does indeed approach VSync on levels at such frame rates. I just wonder how this will 'feel' to sensitive users when their frame rate exceeds 144fps. Personally I feel the benefits of G-SYNC still outweighs either alternative but I do wonder how sensitive users will find it in that scenario.
 
Last edited:
Well there's 2 ways Gsync can add latency:

1) Another link in the chain, could be adding that 1-2ms vs vsync off?
2) If your game dips to 60 FPS, then you drop to 16.6ms latency

The trade off of course is stutter free and zero tearing, even helps micro stutter which I noticed mostly int he valley benchmark.

Combating latency is simply a case of a higher refresh rate, and apparently gsync is only bound by lower ranges to prevent things looking like crap (which I get), but it'd also depend on if the module could handle something like 240Hz.
 
PCM2 said:
The reason that the latency issue was picked up on CSGO is that it seems to be introduced where the frame rate meets or exceeds the highest refresh rate a monitor can do. It isn't some flaw with the game engine and wouldn't be isolated to that particular title. It's simply that only that title ran at >144fps on Mark's setup.

I am more interested to know how G-SYNC behaves in terms of latency at 144fps across a range of titles. A lot of further work has gone into the technology since the early implementation into the VG248QE that was reviewed there. I'm hoping this polling behaviour at 144fps has been improved as Nvidia seems to have hinted at, but I haven't seen any concrete evidence that it has.
Click to expand...

Even that being the case, I would have no problem with limiting fps to 135 in every game to avoid input lag
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom