SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I gotta roll without vsync, due to input lag. I imagine gsync looks better in that scenario.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
G-SYNC Do-It-Yourself Kits available in NA for $199 - Link to Youtube Guide inside
- Thread starter copelandmaster
- Start date
Lostconfused
Member
Yeah input lag doesn't bother me too much I guess.
I'll try to get some soon.
Well here are some quick ones. Have to disable g-sync in driver control panel first so it doesn't override ULMB when running games. Otherwise it's an easy button press toggle.
ULMB feels noticeably less smooth when you aren't running the game at a locked frame rate. Otherwise it seems to do a good job of reducing motion blur without screwing up the colors. The picture becomes less bright overall obviously but you can try and profile the monitor to offset that I guess.
I don't have that many games to test out ULMB with though. The effect is a lot less noticeable for me in 3D games and I would imagine this would be a lot more important for sprite based games. I'll take any suggestions you have for those.
copelandmaster
Member
There is something very specific you could test.
With ToastyX Lightboost, there is a specific effect that is evident in games that are locked at a maximum 60fps but still support a 120hz refresh rate. Games like:
Dark Souls DsFix (Minimal)
Sonic Generations (Very noticeable during 2D sections when boosting)
Super Smash Bros Brawl (Minimal)
Each has a phenomenon where there is a Double image/solid afterimage of the previous frame. This effect seems to be heavily tied with lots of camera movement.
I don't believe this is a detrimental effect, just a byproduct of strobbing high refresh rates on games locked at half the fps of the refresh rate. A much more extreme, yet analogous effect can be observed in the PC version of Halo: CE (60hz refresh rate, 30fps game animations)
This effect only works in fullscreen mode in games that support higher refresh rates than 60hz, hence it not working games like vanilla dark souls and Metal Gear Rising, unless you are in windowed/borderless fullscreen. Regular PC games like Battlefield 3 don't seem to have a very pronounced version of this effect.
Does this effect occur using Nvidia's solution?
EDIT: Oh yeah, I totally forgot that testufo shows the same effect. Thanks!
With ToastyX Lightboost, there is a specific effect that is evident in games that are locked at a maximum 60fps but still support a 120hz refresh rate. Games like:
Dark Souls DsFix (Minimal)
Sonic Generations (Very noticeable during 2D sections when boosting)
Super Smash Bros Brawl (Minimal)
Each has a phenomenon where there is a Double image/solid afterimage of the previous frame. This effect seems to be heavily tied with lots of camera movement.
I don't believe this is a detrimental effect, just a byproduct of strobbing high refresh rates on games locked at half the fps of the refresh rate. A much more extreme, yet analogous effect can be observed in the PC version of Halo: CE (60hz refresh rate, 30fps game animations)
This effect only works in fullscreen mode in games that support higher refresh rates than 60hz, hence it not working games like vanilla dark souls and Metal Gear Rising, unless you are in windowed/borderless fullscreen. Regular PC games like Battlefield 3 don't seem to have a very pronounced version of this effect.
Does this effect occur using Nvidia's solution?
EDIT: Oh yeah, I totally forgot that testufo shows the same effect. Thanks!
Lostconfused
Member
I don't have any of those games installed at the moment. I can tell you that the double image effect can be observed when running testufo.com
I haven't really had time to test anything really, but I noticed my monitor shows up as a generic pnp monitor now after successfully installing the kit. Well, it shows up as that in the windows display properties, it shows up in the nvidia properties as 'nvidia g-sync 241910 (g-sync capable). Did you need to reinstall your display drivers? I was using the 331.82 drivers. Haven't yet installed the just released whql ones.
Fried Food
Banned
Kit arrives tomorrow. Gonna play BF4 first.
Lostconfused
Member
I had the latest drivers installed before connecting the monitor. Had to restart the system after enabling G-sync though. For whatever reason 3D applications kept crashing due to driver error.
Lostconfused
Member
I ordered friday and had it on tuesday in Ontario. Picked the express shipping option though since it was only $5 more.
mdrejhon
Member
Unless you do framerate matching refreshrate matching stroberate.
Then it looks amazing. Simultaneously stutterfree/tearfree/blurfree during VSYNC ON+ULMB if you do not get any frame drops.
Games look as smooth as TestUFO when you do that.
As a compromise for input lag, you can use VSYNC OFF combined with an fps_max, to get really close.
Yes, it does. All flicker/strobing technology (CRT, plasma, LightBoost, ULMB, etc) produce a double image effect during half-framerate motions. And triple-image effect at third-framerates, etc. It's an unavoidable phenomenon, and behaves as a law of physics: (copies of image) = (refreshrate) / (framerate)
For the point of perfect motion, you ideally want framerate == refreshrate == stroberate
ULMB supports 85Hz, 100Hz and 120Hz, so the sweet spots are 85fps, 100fps and 120fps respectively.
Future PhaZe
Member
its on its way
ugh...i'm such an enthusiast now ;_;
ugh...i'm such an enthusiast now ;_;
Future PhaZe
Member
If they somehow came out with a 120 hz 60 inch OLED tv with less than 5 ms of input lag + Gsync
for 10 grand
we'd be saving 10 grand
;_;
Fried Food
Banned
I wasnt' home to sigh for the package from fedex. Try again tomorrow
Fried Food
Banned
Finished installation. Now to download the lastest geforce driver!
Tell us everything after doing some tests.
Since G-sync is targeting high framerate monitors, IPS wouldn't be a very ideal choice. IPS panels and 144hz refresh rates don't mix well. The latency is still too high.
Not really. I have a GTX 570 and I still have to choose between laggy vsync and screen tearing in Quake. Throwing a faster GPU at the tearing/vsync problem doesn't solve it.
I read that exact section and that confirms I have to get one. Only not until the end of this year... Need 27".... That solves everything for me & can postpone future upgrades.
For now I just upgraded from standard 60hz to a AsusVG278h after reading a guys thread on here a while back about 3d gaming... That and 120hz should keep my sli 770s working. Gsync though will be fantastic in terms of not updating for a long time and the hunt for smooth.
The45 fps being smoother than 75fos example would be roughly equal to sli titan vs single titan it may be higher fps though smoothness wins at a lower fps
fantastic! So upgrading to a 2nd sli titan for example or buying the Gsync, the Gsync may have better results... Not apples to apples comparison though it's definitely a nice looking path & solution/factor with pc power & upgrades.BlurBuster said:
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Does 30fps locked look any better with gsync? I'm kicking myself now for not trying that out.
Fried Food
Banned
I've played around with it for a bit. The add on allows for the VG24QE monitor to be run in GSYNC mode or ULMB mode or Ultra Low Motion Blur (basically lightboost 2.0).
I've played with both on BF4. I started with the GSYNC mode
GSYNC produces a very clean image is the best way to describe it. Motion blur is still present, but it is a very consistent or should I say constant blur. Lightboost 1.0 produced a smoother image when run locked at a 100+ frame rate. When frames dropped during lightboost the image will still fall apart. While using GSYNC, going from 100 fps to 80 looks much cleaner than it does while using light boost. Running sub 30 frames with GSYNC produces some pretty severe slow down. Or should I say the effects of the slow down are more pronounced. It almost looks like going in slow motion (does look kinda cool in BF4 during explosions)
oh and input lag. I didn't notice any when playing BF4 and I did look for it.
Going from the GSYNC mode to the ULMB mode was shock and not in a good way. The image just looks bad, like my in game character is playing a video game versus my character being an actual being in the game world, and I'm controlling him. Ok, thats it. Pre gsync, it looked like I was viewing the game world through a monitor, after gsync it looks more like I'm looking though a window into the game world. With ULMB mode, motion is clean as long as you are running at a locked fps=monitor hz. Any divergence leads to an unstable image. In general I think lightboost 1.0 is better than ULMB mode. Probably because I haven't found a way to tinker with ULMB mode like I could with 1.0
I haven't determined the minimum frame rate that you should be able to achieve if you want to use GYSNC. I've decided to keep it at 60 fps. I can crank up the graphics (as opposed to BF4 on low running at 100+ fps) and motion blur wise is the same as though I was running at 100 fps.
All in all I can't see myself not playing games in GSYNC mode (at least until I can play games 100% locked at 100 frames on the dot, no more no less)
Since some people say they don't notice tearing, I'm sure there will be those that think they don't notice a difference. It's not an earth shattering change, but it is one that you don't go back from.
I've played with both on BF4. I started with the GSYNC mode
GSYNC produces a very clean image is the best way to describe it. Motion blur is still present, but it is a very consistent or should I say constant blur. Lightboost 1.0 produced a smoother image when run locked at a 100+ frame rate. When frames dropped during lightboost the image will still fall apart. While using GSYNC, going from 100 fps to 80 looks much cleaner than it does while using light boost. Running sub 30 frames with GSYNC produces some pretty severe slow down. Or should I say the effects of the slow down are more pronounced. It almost looks like going in slow motion (does look kinda cool in BF4 during explosions)
oh and input lag. I didn't notice any when playing BF4 and I did look for it.
Going from the GSYNC mode to the ULMB mode was shock and not in a good way. The image just looks bad, like my in game character is playing a video game versus my character being an actual being in the game world, and I'm controlling him. Ok, thats it. Pre gsync, it looked like I was viewing the game world through a monitor, after gsync it looks more like I'm looking though a window into the game world. With ULMB mode, motion is clean as long as you are running at a locked fps=monitor hz. Any divergence leads to an unstable image. In general I think lightboost 1.0 is better than ULMB mode. Probably because I haven't found a way to tinker with ULMB mode like I could with 1.0
I haven't determined the minimum frame rate that you should be able to achieve if you want to use GYSNC. I've decided to keep it at 60 fps. I can crank up the graphics (as opposed to BF4 on low running at 100+ fps) and motion blur wise is the same as though I was running at 100 fps.
All in all I can't see myself not playing games in GSYNC mode (at least until I can play games 100% locked at 100 frames on the dot, no more no less)
Since some people say they don't notice tearing, I'm sure there will be those that think they don't notice a difference. It's not an earth shattering change, but it is one that you don't go back from.
copelandmaster
Member
Thanks for your impressions, guys!
Future PhaZe
Member
Gotta say I'm pretty disappointed with G-Sync, nearly the point where I'm actually heavily considering reinstalling my old standard board into the monitor.
As someone who's been playing at 144 hz for quite some time, the effects of G-Sync were nearly invisible to me. 144hz on its own eliminated a huge degree of screen tearing for me, and this monitor already has virtually no input lag.
My main purpose of getting G-sync was delay my upgrade by a few years by making sub 60fps gameplay feel much smoother. While G-Sync did make this the case I found that most of the games that slipped below 60 regularly would occasionally hit sub 30 for maybe a second here and there.
And that's when the ceiling comes crashing down.
I had the driver literally crash occasionally when I went sub 30 for a brief second on Skyrim. For the times that it didn't crash, there would be stuttering and lag that simply wasn't a thing on my display pre G-Sync.
I found ULMB to be indistinguishable if not inferior to what was already available for my display using strobelight.
Another issue that I was unaware of: There's no other inputs available for this board. I expected HDMI, VGA, etc inputs to still be available, but simply not work with G-Sync. Instead there's only one input available, which means using this monitor for console use is basically dead.
Admittedly I haven't used G-Sync much for the games that I run at high framerates. I run BF4 on ultra at +80 FPS regularly, never dipping below 60fps, and this is the case for almost any game I play minus Skyrim, which is modded to hell and back and goes sub 30 on occasion due to exceeding my 680 SLI's 2gb VRAM, so there's the possibility that I'll love G-Sync for games that I can run comfortably, but that wasn't the selling point for G-Sync.
Also another point that I don't want to put too much emphasis on because I'm not sure if this is a result of an error during the modding process, but the colors and blacks of the monitor are hugely different from the old board, which looked quite good for a TN panel. I was shocked at seeing how crushed my blacks looked post installation, which was never a thing before. But YMMV on this.
The selling point was a smoother experience for lower frame rates, and I find the technology to be terribly inconsistent/undependable in that area.
Again, this is just an early look, but as of right now it's easily the worse purchase I've made this year.
As someone who's been playing at 144 hz for quite some time, the effects of G-Sync were nearly invisible to me. 144hz on its own eliminated a huge degree of screen tearing for me, and this monitor already has virtually no input lag.
My main purpose of getting G-sync was delay my upgrade by a few years by making sub 60fps gameplay feel much smoother. While G-Sync did make this the case I found that most of the games that slipped below 60 regularly would occasionally hit sub 30 for maybe a second here and there.
And that's when the ceiling comes crashing down.
I had the driver literally crash occasionally when I went sub 30 for a brief second on Skyrim. For the times that it didn't crash, there would be stuttering and lag that simply wasn't a thing on my display pre G-Sync.
I found ULMB to be indistinguishable if not inferior to what was already available for my display using strobelight.
Another issue that I was unaware of: There's no other inputs available for this board. I expected HDMI, VGA, etc inputs to still be available, but simply not work with G-Sync. Instead there's only one input available, which means using this monitor for console use is basically dead.
Admittedly I haven't used G-Sync much for the games that I run at high framerates. I run BF4 on ultra at +80 FPS regularly, never dipping below 60fps, and this is the case for almost any game I play minus Skyrim, which is modded to hell and back and goes sub 30 on occasion due to exceeding my 680 SLI's 2gb VRAM, so there's the possibility that I'll love G-Sync for games that I can run comfortably, but that wasn't the selling point for G-Sync.
Also another point that I don't want to put too much emphasis on because I'm not sure if this is a result of an error during the modding process, but the colors and blacks of the monitor are hugely different from the old board, which looked quite good for a TN panel. I was shocked at seeing how crushed my blacks looked post installation, which was never a thing before. But YMMV on this.
The selling point was a smoother experience for lower frame rates, and I find the technology to be terribly inconsistent/undependable in that area.
Again, this is just an early look, but as of right now it's easily the worse purchase I've made this year.
Lostconfused
Member
You have to make sure the board is installed properly and isn't causing any pressure on the display panel or twisting it in any way. Since the new display control menu has no options for calibration you have to use the program mentioned here http://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/howto-adjust-colors/
Or use something else that uses direct display/device control to calibrate the monitor.
Personally my issue with it is crushed whites and not blacks.
I'm curious what refresh rates you guys are using with the kit? I mostly set mine to 120hz and on a lot of games I'm struggling to see a difference. It may have to do with most of the games having areas where the framerate will drop and stutter so badly in areas that it just doesn't matter (I'm looking at you borderlands 2 in certain areas, GW2 and WoW).
On a side note games like these, wow in a 25 man raid for instance, when you do crash the framerate to ~30fps which is inevitable because they're cpu based and nothing on earth can save you, gsync absolutely kills your gameplay experience. Mainly because now your mouse/input flickers at 30fps and is very noticeable and impacts your gameplay in a big way.
So what refresh are you guys running? I know it's a 144hz monitor but I've heard other folks say that the system was primarily designed for 60hz, don't know if that's bs or what (or why they'd pick the VG248QE for that).
Just curious
On a side note games like these, wow in a 25 man raid for instance, when you do crash the framerate to ~30fps which is inevitable because they're cpu based and nothing on earth can save you, gsync absolutely kills your gameplay experience. Mainly because now your mouse/input flickers at 30fps and is very noticeable and impacts your gameplay in a big way.
So what refresh are you guys running? I know it's a 144hz monitor but I've heard other folks say that the system was primarily designed for 60hz, don't know if that's bs or what (or why they'd pick the VG248QE for that).
Just curious
Future PhaZe
Member
I play at 144.
As to the bolded I completely agree, almost to the point where I'm very much considering making a thread saying "stay away from G-Sync". Especially as something that's being marketed towards having a more fluid sub 60 fps experience, a single dip below 30 absolutely breaks the experience to such an extent that it makes you wonder how this product is even being sold on the market.
It's why I've said that I don't find the upgrade to be worth it. With even the slightest potential in degradation of image quality (in my case it was quite extreme), in combination with the little visible difference between 144 Hz G-Sync vs 144 Hz Non-Gsync, 200 dollars + the sweat and labor of the installation comes off as being one of the biggest net negative purchases I've had in a while.
I know I'm coming down hard on G-Sync. I want to make it clear that this is coming from the perspective of someone who's been gaming on 144hz for quite some time. If you're upgrading from a 60 Hz monitor you are going to see a stunning night and day experience in your gameplay.
I do enjoy 90% of my gameplay with G-Sync. My BF4 experience has been beyond heavenly. No tearing or any issues whatsoever. Simply put, for competitive gaming you just aren't getting any better than this minus playing on a CRT.
My 2D gameplay of stuff like Rogue Legacy has been unbelievable.
There's going to be an unbelievable amount of salt coming from purchasers when the new models come out and more people have a voice about all this. Luckily I think these issues are software based and thus potentially fixable via patches, but the state it's in now is just not acceptable.
You have officially earned your enthusiast wings by experiencing the struggle.
I still got my eye on the ROG 1440p Gsync panels. I switched yesterday from 2560x1600 back to my 120hz panel.. My performance in BF4 skyrocketed. Will probably stay here for awhile, but the ROG panel interests me because 1080p is too low for my eyes. 1440p isn't too big of a drop from 2560x1600.
I still got my eye on the ROG 1440p Gsync panels. I switched yesterday from 2560x1600 back to my 120hz panel.. My performance in BF4 skyrocketed. Will probably stay here for awhile, but the ROG panel interests me because 1080p is too low for my eyes. 1440p isn't too big of a drop from 2560x1600.
Future PhaZe
Member
I'd be super concerned about G-Sync + 1440p. The chances of hitting 30fps are going to go up significantly and the whole thing will come crashing down as a result.
Still though, I'm not complaining. Having the best gaming monitor on the planet with G-sync gives you a certain sense of comfort, especially in FPS. The battlefield experience is unmatched in terms of gameplay. All the chaos going on at high framerates with zero stutter, lag, or tearing seems like absolute voodoo.
I do think N-vidia will respond once more voices are out there. They'll find a software based solution for sub 30fps. At least I hope so.
Unless I'm misunderstanding... You are not going to get a high end card for $200, the price of Gsync.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
I just want to see some reasonably priced g-sync capable monitors. Maybe an announcement at GDC or E3?
BoosterDuck
Banned
Couldn't GSync work in windowed mode if I just focus the game and monitor syncs to it?