How so? It's extremely worthwhile. Having a silly marketing name doesn't make having access to actual triple buffering again, finally, in all games, any less useful.This went from cool to worthless real fast.
If your framerate is close to the refresh rate you could get worse framepacing.Are there any negatives when using it vs traditional vsync ?
So is there any point of enabling this if I already use G-SYNC?
OP please don't post bad info while using the DF guy's avatar, you had me completely fooled for a while -.-
That's because for some reason he calls 3 buffer queues "triple buffering". They are not. Actual triple buffering, as described in many textbooks going all the way back to the 90s, is exactly what he describes as "fastsync".Huh?
Anyway, people keep saying this is triple buffering, Tom clearly states it is not because of how the pipeline is handle, triple buffering causes backpressure, FAST sync does not! There is a large difference in input lag between FAST sync and triple buffering.
Huh?
Anyway, people keep saying this is triple buffering, Tom clearly states it is not because of how the pipeline is handle, triple buffering causes backpressure, FAST sync does not! There is a large difference in input lag between FAST sync and triple buffering.
Huh?
That's because for some reason he calls 3 buffer queues "triple buffering". They are not. Actual triple buffering, as described in many textbooks going all the way back to the 90s, is exactly what he describes as "fastsync".
Let's take the following 60Hz Monitor scenario:
Adaptive Vsync vs. FastSync in games like GTA maxed which from time to time can go under 60 (grass).
Yes, you can go grass medium/high, change a few opther options and stay above 60fps all time but for comparison's sake. Which one would be better?
Why does adaptive vsync not work that often and you get tearing? Is it engine dependant (frametimes)?
Let's take the following 60Hz Monitor scenario:
Adaptive Vsync vs. FastSync in games like GTA maxed which from time to time can go under 60 (grass).
Yes, you can go grass medium/high, change a few opther options and stay above 60fps all time but for comparison's sake. Which one would be better?
Why does adaptive vsync not work that often and you get tearing? Is it engine dependant (frametimes)?
No thanks, according to the explenation it makes the flow of time inconsistent ingame, which is incredibly distracting and offputting.
60 fps is not a reasonable treshold where that is no longer noticable, as nvidia themselves said it's for when you have 200+ fps
At which point tearing is no longer noticable anyhow
Niche halfbacked 'solution' for the tiny percentage of people who can still notice tearing at 200 fps (quite amazing as the offset from the tear will be very small) in the small percentage of games where you can get these kinds of framerates.
So, it gives you one of the advantages of borderless fullscreen for games that don't support it?
That's because for some reason he calls 3 buffer queues "triple buffering". They are not. Actual triple buffering, as described in many textbooks going all the way back to the 90s, is exactly what he describes as "fastsync".
A friend of mine who's not a member wanted me to post this here:
So what's your takeaway of the distinction between it and triple buffering?
The screen tear elimination aspect, but not the quick task switching. For nvidia on the driver level, you can already force triple buffering.
Please keep in mind that Gsync is for under 60fps gaming and fast sync is for over 60fps gaming and does not require a special tv, monitor or input!!
You did it again Blackvette94, I was tricked into thinking you're dark10x.
Isn't this only really an use for games that would run over 120fps?
On a 60 Hz screen tearing is visible regardless of FPS. The tear line will be visible for 16.6 ms even at 5000 FPS.No thanks, according to the explenation it makes the flow of time inconsistent ingame, which is incredibly distracting and offputting.
60 fps is not a reasonable treshold where that is no longer noticable, as nvidia themselves said it's for when you have 200+ fps
At which point tearing is no longer noticable anyhow
Niche halfbacked 'solution' for the tiny percentage of people who can still notice tearing at 200 fps (quite amazing as the offset from the tear will be very small) in the small percentage of games where you can get these kinds of framerates.
Fastsync isn't in any way comparable to gsync. Fastsync is still at the mercy of the scan rate of the monitor. Gsync will always scan out at your monitors highest refresh rate (generally 144hz) even if you are running under 30 fps. Fastsync still has to sync with your monitors refresh rate and really doesn't have tremendous benefits until you have extremely high in game frame rates. If you are internally rendering at 64fps and scanning out at 60 hz, then you will be unlikely to have any improvement over triple buffering. In fact if anything it seems like it's just driver level triple buffering, and you will have to have at least two times the frames as your refresh rate before you see 100% up time with fastsync. In other words the more your frame rate exceeds your refresh rate, the greater the impact of fastsync..
I am confused....are you saying that with for example a 100Hz G-sync display, if I run a game and it drops from say, 100 frames all the way down to 30 frames or so, I will not notice a difference? Will it continue to look just as smooth, even at 30fps? Really? Because if so I'm getting a G-sync monitor.
I am confused....are you saying that with for example a 100Hz G-sync display, if I run a game and it drops from say, 100 frames all the way down to 30 frames or so, I will not notice a difference? Will it continue to look just as smooth, even at 30fps? Really? Because if so I'm getting a G-sync monitor.
You can see a simulation of how G-Sync helps on this website. Obviously this is not a perfect representation, but it's pretty accurate for people who haven't seen it working in person.
Does it work in borderless window mode?
This is so much better than Gsync holy shit
I wouldn't use it for CS:GO but I would use it for every other game. Vsync forced off is a PC gaming staple for me.
Doesn't borderless window basically force vsync because of the shitty new Windows Aero you can't turn off?
Better than GSYNC? Not even close. Fast Sync isn't worth using in most cases, while GSYNC/FreeSync is pretty much always worth it. You're saying that you'll use it for every other game than CSGO. You have to be able to run the game at 2-3x your monitor's refresh rate for it to be working well. It will be worse than Vsync for games you run at or around your monitor's refresh rate.