Nvidia G-SYNC

I guess there must be tearing with V-Sync off when you dip below the Freesync threshold. To me, the take-home message is that you really don't want a Freesync display with a high threshold. And I would even argue that AMD screwed up by making Freesync such a free label without strict requirements, and without tiers.

I don't know why they don't make a "Freesync Gold" label with guarantees on proper overdrive and a wide range of frequencies.

That and why in the world would you ever want to have a game that consistently dips down below 40 FPS? The GTA V example above would be unplayable to me. Yes, it wouldn't have tearing, but the control response will still be that of a game fluctuating between 28 and 51 FPS on the Gsync setup.

Personally, I'd want to make sure that the majority of frames were at or near 60 FPS and adjust visuals accordingly (gameplay > graphics) in which case, it'd be unlikely for the Freesync system to offer a significantly different experience from the Gsync system, assuming a similar level of performance.

At any (to me) playable setting the experience would be the same or similar. Scott Wasson made a similar observation when he tested out both. That yes, below the threshold Freesync wasn't great, but he'd never actually play a game that went below the threshold. PCPer made a similar observation with the el cheapo Korean brands that can only be imported. Tune the game for near constant 60 fps, then with either Gsync or Freesync, you'll have tear free and responsive gaming. And that was with a 40 hz cutoff.

Obviously doesn't work well if you are happy gaming at 30 FPS, but tuned for 30 FPS a game will likely dip below the Gsync cutoff as well. And for adaptive-sync, this may not always be the case as the spec allows for variable refresh rates far lower than anything currently seen. It'll all depend on whether a monitor chip manufacturer wants to go to the trouble of implementing it.

Regards,
SB
 
That amounts to buying high end or powerful hardware and/or upgrading it all the time.
I bet most people would be very happy to have a PC that runs Valve and Blizzard multiplayer games at 100 fps but drops down do 30 fps in GTA V or Crysis..
 
The really interesting bit there was that even though G-sync was preferred, most of the people there, 89.3%, aren't willing to pay the G-sync price premium (most of the respondents were either up to 100 USD, 57.1%, or 100-200 USD more, 32.1%).

Regards,
SB
The cost difference is nowhere over $200 -- since in that test the G-Sync system is equipped with a card that is $80 cheaper (and yet still being preferred by majority of test subjects.)

Given that people usually stick with their monitors through two or more generation of video cards, the total cost of ownership disparity between G-Sync and Free-Sync could eventually diminish -- if not completely reversed -- while the former giving better experience all along.
 
Acer Announces 35in Predator Z35 with G-sync and 200Hz

Like that model, the native refresh rate of the panel from AU Optronics is 144Hz, but Acer state in their press release that this can be overclocked to 200Hz.The Acer Predator Z35 will support NVIDIA G-sync technology, which is presumably where the 200Hz refresh rate max comes in, probably only supported when using G-sync although again that's to be confirmed. The resolution is relatively low, only offering 2560 x 1080 maximum, as opposed to the 3440 x 1440 we've seen from some 34" ultra-wide screens.

  • The Predator Z35 touts a 35-inch 21:9 UltraWide Full HD (2560x1080) panel with a curvature of 2000R for an immersive, dynamic and wraparound gaming experience
  • The Predator XB1 Series includes 27-inch and 28-inch models that give gamers a competitive edge with incredibly detailed images and superbly smooth visuals

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/acer-announces-35in-predator-z35-with-g-sync-and-200hz.html
 
I have the Acer 27" 144Hz IPS G-sync monitor and while I love it, I have a minor annoyance: if the monitor is turned off with the button while the computer is on (that is, the display has not by itself gone into power-saving mode), somehow the display tells the driver/OS the resolution of my desktop has changed to some low number, like 800x600 or something. That means all the windows I had open are resized to this fake low resolution and moved up into the top left corner.

I think it is an artifact of the G-sync module because I have never experienced this before. Have anyone else experienced this?
 
Shit like this has happened a lot to me after moving to windows 10. My Radeon R290X refuses to put my monitor into power save for whatever reason, so I must turn it off with the power button. Frequently I come back to a desktop that has had windows moved around on it.
 
Win8 and Win7 will do the same thing. It's an issue with how Windows handles having 0 monitors.
So my venerable HP ZR24w is a special monitor or can it be because of the interface? DVI is more resilient and DP isn't?
 
Happens with my basement HTPC in Kodi after TV is turned off. My living room HTPC has a HDMI Detective which basically means the PC always thinks there's something attached and giving signals.
 
Back
Top