Support NeoGAF

[JohnnyFootball]

GSync and Freesync are standards that every gamer should be familiar with and they are amazing for keeping games smooth when framerates fall below the monitors refresh rate.

But what about when the framerate exceeds the monitors refresh rate?
Two options:
You can turn Vsync on, which caps the framerate to your monitors refresh rate or lower, this also introduces input lag. Your other option is you can leave Vsync off and have to deal with screen tearing.

I personally prefer the former over the latter. I simply cannot tolerate screen tearing in any way.

Enter Fast Sync. Fast sync gives you the benefits of Vsync and no Vsync with no screen tearing and minimal (but not nonexistent) input lag. In that fast sync sends the most recent frame to the monitor.

I'd argue it's essential for 60Hz monitors and TVs.

I can't give it justice in writing but this video tells you everything you need to know.

 

[Agent_4Seven]

I'm using RivaTuner to lock FPS + Scanline sync to 100 FPS. Works perfectly for me with no screen tearing and other issues.

 

[Ulysses 31]

GSync and Freesync are standards that every gamer should be familiar with and they are amazing for keeping games smooth when framerates fall below the monitors refresh rate.

But what about when the framerate exceeds the monitors refresh rate?
Two options:
You can turn Vsync on, which caps the framerate to your monitors refresh rate or lower, this also introduces input lag. Your other option is you can leave Vsync off and have to deal with screen tearing.

I personally prefer the former over the latter. I simply cannot tolerate screen tearing in any way.

Enter Fast Sync. Fast sync gives you the benefits of Vsync and no Vsync with no screen tearing and minimal (but not nonexistent) input lag. In that fast sync sends the most recent frame to the monitor.

I'd argue it's essential for 60Hz monitors and TVs.

I can't give it justice in writing but this video tells you everything you need to know.

Haven't watched the video yet but the title is weird, G-Sync and Fast V-sync can work fine together.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

I'm using RivaTuner to lock FPS + Scanline sync to 100 FPS. Works perfectly for me with no screen tearing and other issues.

Exactly, programs which cap your framerate are not something new...

"BUT NVIDIA DID IT! THEY'RE PIONEERS!"

 

[Shifty]

I'm using RivaTuner to lock FPS + Scanline sync to 100 FPS. Works perfectly for me with no screen tearing and other issues.

This seems like the bleeding-edge solution for low-lag gameplay on hardware without adaptive sync. Scanline sync is a disgustingly impressive technical achievement on the part of the RivaTuner devs

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Haven't watched the video yet but the title is weird, G-Sync and Fast V-sync can work fine together.

Never was implied otherwise. Gsync and Freesync keep things smooth in instances where you drop below monitor refresh rate. Fast Sync takes care for you when you go above it.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Never was implied otherwise.

I was talking about the title of the video in your OP.

 

[lukilladog]

It has gone without much attention and publicity because it´s useless and sometimes counterproductive if your frame rates don´t exceed your refresh rate by several times:

G-SYNC 101 - Blur Busters - Page 8

G-SYNC Module The G-SYNC module is a small chip that replaces the display's standard internal scaler, and contains enough onboard memory to hold and process a single frame at a time. The module exploits the vertical blanking interval (the span between the previous and next frame scan) to...

www.blurbusters.com

 

[a multicultural team of v]

Couldn't this just be solved by having the game engine internally hard cap the framerate?

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Couldn't this just be solved by having the game engine internally hard cap the framerate?

Doesnt that create the same lag issue as Vsync or no?

 

[Shifty]

Doesnt that create the same lag issue as Vsync or no?

Yes essentially, and possibly worse if it isn't properly synced to the display refresh.

 

[Tesseract]

scanline sync is better

 

[a multicultural team of v]

Yes essentially, and possibly worse if it isn't properly synced to the display refresh.

So every 60hz console game ever made has had worse input lag than vsync?

 

[Shifty]

So every 60hz console game ever made has had worse input lag than vsync?

Console games typically run with vsync on and (in the best-case scenario) tune their GPU usage to never exceed the render budget. The underlying system of prepare frame > send to display when requested is the same, there's no secret console sauce.

(Unless we're talking CRT-era consoles that scan lines out directly to the monitor in real-time, but that's a whole different ball game.)

 

[nkarafo]

Can someone explain to me how to use scanline sync? No matter that number i put i always get screen tearing.

 

[w92kp]

Can someone explain to me how to use scanline sync? No matter that number i put i always get screen tearing.

Are you using multiple monitors? If RTSS is syncing to the wrong monitor you might not get the results you're expecting. If you're only using a single monitor, it should be as simple as disabling vsync and inputting a number like -100 into the Scanline Sync field.

 

[EverydayBeast]

I don't know if this wears down your computer but its another level.

 

[nkarafo]

Are you using multiple monitors? If RTSS is syncing to the wrong monitor you might not get the results you're expecting. If you're only using a single monitor, it should be as simple as disabling vsync and inputting a number like -100 into the Scanline Sync field.

I do have two monitors so maybe this is no use for me.

Also, fast sync never worked for me either. Screen tearing all over the place in all scenarios. Maybe having two monitors screws that up as well?

I guess i'm stuck with using vsync, at least that works.

 

[Chozofication_]

When I had a 1050 ti it was awesome for games since a lot of pc games have shitty double buffer vsync and can go from 60 to 30fps in a sec.

Double buffer is actually ideal for input latency but only if the minimum fps is always above 60 like in a lot of nintendo games.

 

[Shifty]

I don't know if this wears down your computer but its another level.

 

[Tesseract]

fast sync is only good if you can maintain double your refresh rate, 60 refresh needs 120 stable frames or you will stutter

scan line through rtss is better because at 60 refresh (for example) you're eliminating tearing at a stable pace, with insignificant latency

you want to offset the buffer to something in the negatives, such that tearing happens off the screen or close to the top or bottom

-30 is probably the best for 1080p, enable sync flushing and you basically get gsync smoothness without the necessary hardware

gsync is still the best option out there tho, since the input latency is a few ms lower than scan line, but it's honestly pretty negligible

i use scan line in apex legends

both fast and scan require lots of gpu overhead tho, you'll want something like a 1080 for it to work well

 

[w92kp]

I do have two monitors so maybe this is no use for me.

Also, fast sync never worked for me either. Screen tearing all over the place in all scenarios. Maybe having two monitors screws that up as well?

I guess i'm stuck with using vsync, at least that works.

You can use scanline sync even if you have multiple monitors. You have to either tell RTSS which monitor you want to sync, or plug your monitors in such a way that your gaming monitor is the "first" monitor. I'm not sure exactly how to tell RTSS which monitor to sync to because RTSS is poorly documented when it comes to configuration beyond its UI, but you can make Windows see your gaming monitor as "first" by moving or swapping the port at the back of the gpu with the other monitor, then running reset-all with Custom Resolution Utility. You can verify the order of your monitors in Windows with the Screen Resolution dialogue.

 

[SonGoku]

What's the point of using fast sync if you already have gsync/freesync the latter features the benefits of vsync without input lag

 

[ZywyPL]

It's great in theory, but the micro stutters/judders make the games hardly playable. You need AT least 3x the frame rate of you screen's refresh rate, 180FPS on 60Hz, preferably 240FPS. Not to mention 120Hz screens and above, the frame rate should be unreal for FastSync to make a decent use of it. But still, given the nature of games performance, those FPS gaps will be "fake", as FastSync duplicates all the missing frames to match the mentioned FPS gaps, hence the frame pacing issues. So in practice, it's WAY better to manually lock the FPS to 120, and enjoy buttery smooth image and reduced input lag. Hell, locking FPS to just 60 will basically eliminate screen tearing with no extra input lag, much better option than Vsyns on or off.

 

[The_Mike]

If you have a 120 hz monitor and can maintain the fps does g sync make any difference then?

 

[nkarafo]

Hell, locking FPS to just 60 will basically eliminate screen tearing with no extra input lag, much better option than Vsyns on or off.

This never worked for me either. Still getting screen tears by locking the fps at 60 or 30 in any system i ever had. And yes, games can run much faster its not that i have any frame drops.

 

[Boss Mog]

I'm using RivaTuner to lock FPS + Scanline sync to 100 FPS. Works perfectly for me with no screen tearing and other issues.

Same. And capping framerate via RivaTuner means your GPU won't even calculate the frames over the cap, resulting in less power draw and much lower GPU temps.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

What's the point of using fast sync if you already have gsync/freesync the latter features the benefits of vsync without input lag

Dude, you have it dead wrong. This has been explained several times, even in the first post.

But for the people in the back
Gsync and Fastsync are for framerates that are BELOW the monitor's refresh rate. They do nothing for when your framerates are ABOVE the monitors refresh rate.

In normal circumstances when your framerates are higher than the refresh rate, you would get tearing due to incomplete frames being sent to the monitor.

Fast sync, just has the most recently rendered complete frame sent to the monitor in a way that eliminates tearing and minimizes input lag.

 

[SonGoku]

Dude, you have it dead wrong. This has been explained several times, even in the first post.

But for the people in the back
Gsync and Fastsync are for framerates that are BELOW the monitor's refresh rate. They do nothing for when your framerates are ABOVE the monitors refresh rate.

In normal circumstances when your framerates are higher than the refresh rate, you would get tearing due to incomplete frames being sent to the monitor.

Fast sync, just has the most recently rendered complete frame sent to the monitor in a way that eliminates tearing and minimizes input lag.

I see thx for explaining my lazy ass
Bummer there isn't a penalty free solution to deal with framerates that go above.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I see thx for explaining my lazy ass
Bummer there isn't a penalty free solution to deal with framerates that go above.

Fast Sync is very close to penalty free.

 

[metareferential]

If you still have a 60hz monitor in 2019 you're doing it wrong anyway.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

If you still have a 60hz monitor in 2019 you're doing it wrong anyway.

If you prefer 4K/HDR monitors (although most are trash HDR) 60Hz is pretty much the best you will get.

 

[Ulysses 31]

If you prefer 4K/HDR monitors (although most are trash HDR) 60Hz is pretty much the best you will get.

Cough up the dough for a PG27UQ. >.>

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Cough up the dough for a PG27UQ. >.>

That thing has an amazing feature set. No doubt.

 

[Ellis]

If you still have a 60hz monitor in 2019 you're doing it wrong anyway.

Not really. Higher refresh rates are great, and I can't wait for more TV's to start incorporating it, but I still wouldn't give up my 60hz Bravia for a PC monitor. When it comes to overall image qaulity, they are all severely lacking in comparison.

My monitor is used for playing Doom, Duke Nukem and writing up invoices. I use the TV for everything else that doesn't require a mouse.

 

[The Skull]

So it seems good for 60hrz or low refresh monitors in general? Does AMD have an equivalent? Have been more than happy with my Free-sync panel, 30-144hrz range, although some Free-sync panels have quite a bad range.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

So it seems good for 60hrz or low refresh monitors in general? Does AMD have an equivalent? Have been more than happy with my Free-sync panel, 30-144hrz range, although some Free-sync panels have quite a bad range.

AMD has Enhanced Sync and I believe it is essentially the same thing.

If you have a 144Hz display, its best to enable Gsync/freesync and aso enable fast/enhanced sync

 

[nkarafo]

Doesn't work for me on my 60hz Samsung LCD TV. I tried tons of games old or new and even emulator stuff. Getting screen tearing at all times.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Doesn't work for me on my 60hz Samsung LCD TV. I tried tons of games old or new and even emulator stuff. Getting screen tearing at all times.

It may be limited to Display Port.

 

[nkarafo]

It may be limited to Display Port.

That's important information if true. Could save a lot of time and frustration of troubleshooting.

 

[Tesseract]

just download rtss and use scan sync, it's significantly better than fast sync

 

[metareferential]

Not really. Higher refresh rates are great, and I can't wait for more TV's to start incorporating it, but I still wouldn't give up my 60hz Bravia for a PC monitor. When it comes to overall image qaulity, they are all severely lacking in comparison.

My monitor is used for playing Doom, Duke Nukem and writing up invoices. I use the TV for everything else that doesn't require a mouse.

Well of course; I still have other displays for different content. For example more cinematic, or console-exclusive games, are played on my 4k laser projector.

And I can't wait for oled to get cheaper and bigger.