Support NeoGAF

[Protein]

I'm running a:

EVGA Geforce GTX 1070
Intel i5-6600k @ 3.50Hz
8GB

with a 60Hz 1080p monitor...



I'm caught between:

Asus VG248QE (no gsync)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00B2HH7G0/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Dell (Gsync)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0149QBOF0/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Acer Pred (Gsync)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01C05C1OK/?tag=neogaf0e-20




I'm not sure if my rig is capable of handling 1440p 60FPS+ gaming, but my major question is: is G-Sync worth biting? I gladly pay for a non G-Sync monitor if there isn't a huge difference between 144hz w/gsync and 144hz w/out. How huge would you say is the difference between the two?

 

[epmode]

If you're getting a 100% steady 144 FPS, G-Sync isn't all that useful.

However, you're going to be below the cap with tons of games. If you're sensitive to framerate dips, tearing and/or microstutter, G-Sync will save you a lot of headaches. It Just Works.

 

[120v]

unless you plan on upgrading your GPU every year you'll want g-sync (and even then it has its benefits). it's not like you're looking at a massive spending difference anyway

 

[Tain]

G-Sync is vital if you

1) emulate

or

2) don't hit your monitor's refresh rate 100% of the time

 

[NIN90]

Coming from a 120hz non-Gsync monitor, I'm personally not impressed with my newish 144hz G-Sync monitor. Games like Hitman still stutter like garbage and below 60 fps still very much feels like it used to.

 

[metareferential]

If you're getting a 100% steady 144 FPS, G-Sync isn't all that useful.

Sure, but no one is always getting a 100% steady 144fps (especially so if you like good image quality).

The only reason not to buy a gsync monitor is money.

If money isn't an issue, there are no downsides to g-sync. Games that don't need it won't really use it.

But when you get games that maxed out are fluctuating, than gsync is a godsend.

Coming from a 120hz non-Gsync monitor, I'm personally not impressed with my newish 144hz G-Sync monitor. Games like Hitman still stutter like garbage and below 60 fps still very much feels like it used to.

Frame pacing problems cannot be solved by a display. If it stutters on gsync, it means it was stuttering even before. And no, below 60 fps it doesn't "feel" like on normal displays (especially so if you use v-sync on your games). And a single scenario isn't really indicative of anything either.

 

[epmode]

G-Sync is vital if you

1) emulate

or

2) don't hit your monitor's refresh rate 100% of the time

Yes, this. Arcade emulation was annoying because it tends to run just below 60hz,forcing you to choose between several lousy options if you wanted accuracy. G-Sync runs that stuff perfectly.

Sure, but no one is always getting a 100% steady 144fps (especially so if you like good image quality).

I agree! G-Sync is lovely.

 

[ss_lemonade]

The VG248QE has terrible color quality IMO. Things get much worse too once you try using the lightboost trick for zero blur gaming. You end up with this weird dithered color situation, something which I've never seen mentioned anywhere.

 

[styl3s]

Is there a 27" gsync monitor for $500 or less?

 

[metareferential]

Is there a 27" gsync monitor for $500 or less?

You can get a 27" freesync (AMD only) monitor for that much. Doesn't work as good as gsync, but it works anyway.

Cheapest gsync monitors are 1080p 24".

But you can get the asus ROG Swift (27, TN, 1440p gsync) discounted almost for that.

 

[diablos991]

The VG248QE has terrible color quality IMO. Things get much worse too once you try using the lightboost trick for zero blur gaming. You end up with this weird dithered color situation, something which I've never seen mentioned anywhere.

Colors don't seem bad to me. Light boost only makes things more dim and limits to 120hz. But I'm not crazy on saturated colors like some seem to be and don't use my PC for creating professional illustrations.

I just stick to Gsync mode and 144hz and the colors look great (I installed the diy kit). There are calibration profiles that one can load easily with a quick Google search.

 

[Krappadizzle]

With. Without a doubt. Worth it. 1070 is comparable to my 980ti and it has no problems whatsoever running games at max settings at 1440p.

 

[DrBaalzamon]

I was actually looking for a 1440p 27inch-ish monitor 60hz or higher without gsync or freesync and I couldnt find anything with an IPS panel in it. Looks like you HAVE to get it.

 

[metareferential]

I was actually looking for a 1440p 27inch-ish monitor 60hz or higher without gsync or freesync and I couldnt find anything with an IPS panel in it. Looks like you HAVE to get it.

That's because it's soooo good (not really, it's for money xD).

But buying a new monitor avoiding one the single greatest upgrades to ever grace display tech is just stupid.

I mean, on such a crucial, crucial upgrade like a monitor there's no point in trying to save money this way.

And I know I sound like a shill, but if you can't see the benefits of gsync/freesync, than just don't bother upgrading altogether. xD

 

[NIN90]

Frame pacing problems cannot be solved by a display. If it stutters on gsync, it means it was stuttering even before. And no, below 60 fps it doesn't "feel" like on normal displays (especially so if you use v-sync on your games). And a single scenario isn't really indicative of anything either.

I've always heard that G-Sync "just works". That it will save me a lot of headaches.

Somehow the games I've tried so far where I have drops (Hitman, The Witcher 3, Insurgency, Black Mesa, Red Orchestra 2) have all been duds. Maybe Mankind Divided will be the one.

I'm really not trying to shit on the technology. But so far I feel like a fool shelling out this kind of money and seeing little gain from it when I still have a perfectly capable 120hz display around. Maybe my G-Sync doesn't work? I don't know. It's enabled in the control panel, it shows up when I enable the on-screen indicator and it's selectable in the G-Sync pendulum demo.

 

[jdstorm]

Another Positive benefit of getting a G-Sync display is it allows you to take advantage of downsampling on games that don't need the full 144fps.

Run single player experiences at 2K or even 4K at an acceptibly low FPS and it will still need smooth due to the G-sync display

 

[Vipu]

Im also with no gsync, im sure most people who say ITS AMAZING just say because they come from 60 -> 144hz, not because of gsync.
Sure I would have gsync in my screen if it was free BUT its 200€ extra usually for really small extra.

 

[Protein]

Leaning more towards the Acer Predator. Can anyone vouch for it?

 

[Rizific]

I'm running a:

EVGA Geforce GTX 1070
Intel i5-6600k @ 3.50Hz
8GB

with a 60Hz 1080p monitor...



I'm caught between:

Asus VG248QE (no gsync)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00B2HH7G0/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Dell (Gsync)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0149QBOF0/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Acer Pred (Gsync)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01C05C1OK/?tag=neogaf0e-20




I'm not sure if my rig is capable of handling 1440p 60FPS+ gaming, but my major question is: is G-Sync worth biting? I gladly pay for a non G-Sync monitor if there isn't a huge difference between 144hz w/gsync and 144hz w/out. How huge would you say is the difference between the two?

i had the asus monitor and just recently got the dell monitor in your post. also paired with a 1070. to answer the bolded, it most definitely is. i just got done playing through RotTR and my min fps would hit 60 but mostly hovering at about 80+. i literally have a 6600k skylake build sitting on my floor right now waiting for my ram to get here any minute so we'll have the same specs sans the ram. my 1070 was paired with a 4ghz 2500k so ive yet to see how itll be with the 6600k. your rig is very capable at 1440p and gsync will be there to save the day once the 1070 starts to struggle in the future. im VERY happy with the Dell s2716DG, its has a very simple and clean aesthetic. the predator's looks are cringe worthy imo, i dont want that on my desk. i got the Dell on sale at $450 a few weeks ago from best buy but ive heard you can frequently catch it at around $470.

 

[K.Jack]

The only reason to skip G-Sync, is if you can't afford it. Otherwise it's a no-brainer.

 

[metareferential]

I've always heard that G-Sync "just works". That it will save me a lot of headaches.

Somehow the games I've tried so far where I have drops (Hitman, The Witcher 3, Insurgency, Black Mesa, Red Orchestra 2) have all been duds. Maybe Mankind Divided will be the one.

I'm really not trying to shit on the technology. But so far I feel like a fool shelling out this kind of money and seeing little gain from it when I still have a perfectly capable 120hz display around. Maybe my G-Sync doesn't work? I don't know. It's enabled in the control panel, it shows up when I enable the on-screen indicator and it's selectable in the G-Sync pendulum demo.

You have to let it control games, though. If in-game you choose the wrong setting (like v-sync and the likes), it doesn't work. Best way to see if it's really working (if you can't notice it already) is using an fps counter.

I don't have any of the game you listed so I can't check, but on my end, I wouldn't be able to play without it.

Last game it saved is No Man's Sky: aside from the many technical issues the game currently has (including frame pacing), playing it with a variable refresh ranging from 60 to 120+ is only doable because of gsync. On a traditional display (even with 120+hz) I would have something barely playable.

I mean, those same games on a non variable display can't run better. It's physically impossible, if everything works correctly (that is, non vsynced, uncapped framerate).

 

[Corpekata]

If you're going non-sync you're better off going 120. 60 and 30 locked games will feel better at 120 than at 144 (and realistically, even if they aren't locked at 60, a lot of AAA games will be hard to cap at either 120 or 144 so might be better off being force capped in a program like RTSS.

 

[Corpekata]

I've always heard that G-Sync "just works". That it will save me a lot of headaches.

Somehow the games I've tried so far where I have drops (Hitman, The Witcher 3, Insurgency, Black Mesa, Red Orchestra 2) have all been duds. Maybe Mankind Divided will be the one.

I'm really not trying to shit on the technology. But so far I feel like a fool shelling out this kind of money and seeing little gain from it when I still have a perfectly capable 120hz display around. Maybe my G-Sync doesn't work? I don't know. It's enabled in the control panel, it shows up when I enable the on-screen indicator and it's selectable in the G-Sync pendulum demo.

What sort of drops are you experiencing?

 

[NIN90]

What sort of drops are you experiencing?

Framerate drops. Mostly going from 100+ FPS to 50-70 FPS. Very noticeable to me when playing a shooter with MKB.
Hitman likes to go down to the 40s in specific scenes but that game is a special case to be honest.

 

[TrounceX]

The VG248QE has terrible color quality IMO. Things get much worse too once you try using the lightboost trick for zero blur gaming. You end up with this weird dithered color situation, something which I've never seen mentioned anywhere.

You know what's crazy is that I had an older VG248QE that was exactly like that. I even downloaded some color profiles and spent time calibrating it. Especially with lightboost the colors looked horrible.

Then a couple months ago I went to a friends place who had one and it looked nothing like mine. I was so impressed I went out and bought a brand new one. I'm using it right now and I'm telling you, the colors are fantastic. Mine is flanked on both sides by 23in IPS Acers and the colors are nearly the same. Lightboost hurts the colors a bit but nothing like my old one. My old one was so washed out I couldn't believe nobody was talking about it on the internet.

So I have no idea if this is actually a thing or not, but yes, I know exactly what you mean. Maybe it's a manufacturer defect thing, or something that was fixed with the newer models?

 

[ALLseeingEYE]

I'm running a:

EVGA Geforce GTX 1070
Intel i5-6600k @ 3.50Hz
8GB

with a 60Hz 1080p monitor...



I'm caught between:

Asus VG248QE (no gsync)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00B2HH7G0/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Dell (Gsync)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0149QBOF0/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Acer Pred (Gsync)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01C05C1OK/?tag=neogaf0e-20




I'm not sure if my rig is capable of handling 1440p 60FPS+ gaming, but my major question is: is G-Sync worth biting? I gladly pay for a non G-Sync monitor if there isn't a huge difference between 144hz w/gsync and 144hz w/out. How huge would you say is the difference between the two?

Hey OP, I'll be frank.
Your rig will absolutely destroy pretty much any game at 1440p 60fps. Though with you setup, you are more likely to be CPU bound, and in turn, framerate limited due to only having an i5, rather than an i7 (hence, you may never really hit 144hz, unless you really crank the settings down, but you will almost always have great resolution and visual fidelity, so higher resolutions are great for your rig),

I would personally forgo all those options, and go straight for the 28" ASUS 4K Display, as it's the same price as that 1440p display you listed.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KJGY3TO/?tag=neogaf0e-20


These things are awesome, and your machine will kick some 4K ass (likely 30-40fps at Ultra). And hell, if you don't like turning down the settings, and want a smoother framerate, just crank down the resolution to something between 1440p and 4k, and your rig will kill it.

 

[Lemmi]

You know what's crazy is that I had an older VG248QE that was exactly like that. I even downloaded some color profiles and spent time calibrating it. Especially with lightboost the colors looked horrible.

Then a couple months ago I went to a friends place who had one and it looked nothing like mine. I was so impressed I went out and bought a brand new one. I'm using it right now and I'm telling you, the colors are fantastic. Mine is flanked on both sides by 23in IPS Acers and the colors are nearly the same. Lightboost hurts the colors a bit but nothing like my old one. My old one was so washed out I couldn't believe nobody was talking about it on the internet.

So I have no idea if this is actually a thing or not, but yes, I know exactly what you mean. Maybe it's a manufacturer defect thing, or something that was fixed with the newer models?

Can I ask what on-screen display settings you're using with this monitor? I just bought one and have been messing around with the settings.

 

[Arkanius]

Gsync definitely
Kill tearing once and for all. It's a god send.

Also, ULMB is AMAZING for that CRT like experience.

 

[Aeana]

Gsync literally changed my gaming life. I'm pretty susceptible to motion sickness in games and I don't get it with PC games very often anymore thanks to gsync. I'll never buy a monitor without it again.

 

[Ferrio]

G-sync has by far been the best upgrade I've done to my PC in a long time. Just the fact you don't have to spend 30+ minutes trying to get a stable framerate before you even start playing the game is well worth it.

 

[LProtag]

I've got that Dell, but I came from using a laptop and playing PS4, so it was eye opening for me. I hear people who are super picky about color vividness are meh on it for being TN.

 

[King_Moc]

Gsync is amazing if you aren't hitting your monitors refresh rate all the time. And at 144hz and 1440p. you won't be. The FPS can jump all over the place, but it's still silky smooth (unless you start dropping well under 50fps).

 

[Protein]

The g-sync hype from the thread is killing me. That 1440p Dell is looking even more delicious now. What's the return policy with Amazon in case I get a bad apple?

 

[Renekton]

Coming from a 120hz non-Gsync monitor, I'm personally not impressed with my newish 144hz G-Sync monitor. Games like Hitman still stutter like garbage and below 60 fps still very much feels like it used to.

Yeah I was disappointed it does not remove sub-60 stutter as much as hoped.

 

[Iced_Eagle]

If you're going non-sync you're better off going 120. 60 and 30 locked games will feel better at 120 than at 144 (and realistically, even if they aren't locked at 60, a lot of AAA games will be hard to cap at either 120 or 144 so might be better off being force capped in a program like RTSS.

More often than not you won't have that problem. However, if it is a common problem, you can always just tell your 144Hz monitor to refresh at 120Hz in Windows anyway and problem solved. Unless you want to save money and get the 120hz maximum panel, it's nice to have the higher frame rate option. Granted, the difference between the two is fairly negligible to begin with so it's not a big deal IMO.

OP, I highly recommend GSync. Next to an SSD, it's the best all-around upgrade to my PC I've made. No more tearing and I don't have games stutter on me unless the framerate really tanks (in which case, or if the game itself has frame pacing issues. However, the downside is that your monitor's best feature is locked to a GPU manufacturer which is shitty but isn't an issue short-term. I have the Asus PG279Q which is 1440p, 144Hz and GSync and I'm a fan of it. Many new games I crank the settings quite a bit so I tend to be in the 40-60fps range. For games like Dota, CS:GO or Rainbow Six which are pretty well optimized I tend to be in the 70-144Hz range which is great even though I'm on a 780Ti still.

Without Gsync you pretty much end up in a situation where you need to choose between stuttering (Vsync on) or tearing (Vsync off), neither of which is pleasant. GSync specifically tackles that problem and I think it is very much worth it.

 

[Corpekata]

The g-sync hype from the thread is killing me. That 1440p Dell is looking even more delicious now. What's the return policy with Amazon in case I get a bad apple?

Usually pretty lenient provided you're Prime.

With expensive stuff sometimes they'll want it back first or put a hold on your card for the second monitor's value until they receive the dud.

 

[RenegadeXV8]

Well, I feel like a lot of the praise for G-Sync come from the perspective of people playing with V-Sync on and sensitive to tearing, but if you usually play with V-Sync off and don't care about tearing, then G-Sync is absolutely not worth the money.

 

[PGamer]

I posted this in the G-Sync thread but didn't get much feedback there. Does anyone here have any experience with this:

Is a 120/144 Hz monitor without G-Sync worth it if you don't have a graphics card that can handle a locked frame rate at those speeds? I'm in the market for a new monitor and I'm interested in high refresh rate displays but my GPU doesn't support G-Sync and is probably too old to hit 120 FPS in many modern games.

 

[NIN90]

Well, I feel like a lot of the praise for G-Sync come from the perspective of people playing with V-Sync on and sensitive to tearing, but if you usually play with V-Sync off and don't care about tearing, then G-Sync is absolutely not worth the money.

This is me. Always played with V-Sync off and barely noticed any tearing in my games.

 

[ss_lemonade]

Colors don't seem bad to me. Light boost only makes things more dim and limits to 120hz. But I'm not crazy on saturated colors like some seem to be and don't use my PC for creating professional illustrations.

I just stick to Gsync mode and 144hz and the colors look great (I installed the diy kit). There are calibration profiles that one can load easily with a quick Google search.

So I have no idea if this is actually a thing or not, but yes, I know exactly what you mean. Maybe it's a manufacturer defect thing, or something that was fixed with the newer models?

Strange, maybe it is a problem with older models? There's an old hardocp thread from someone with the same problem. It's exactly what I get too with lightboost engaged

http://imgur.com/a/9CuAC

Almost like colors are at a lower bit depth (or like colors are running at a lower resolution, if such a thing was even possible). The dotted look goes away when disabling lightboost but colors are still pretty bad.

 

[TrounceX]

Can I ask what on-screen display settings you're using with this monitor? I just bought one and have been messing around with the settings.

I followed this guide from Reddit, including installing the .icc profile. The profile is the piece that really makes a big difference imo.

I would also recommend looking up the lightboost app by toasty and getting that working. Lightboost made just as much of a difference to me as the jump to 144hz.

 

[coolasj19]

Since I built my first desktop with a G-Sync monitor, I can't really say too much. But I will say, I have not once, not a singular time. Ever had tearing. Ever. I haven't even really noticed when the Witcher likes to dip from 120fps to 90fps and all over the goddamn place. There's none of that nasty random sluggishness. I want to tell you to go for it. Because if you don't do it now, it's going to be a significantly more expensive upgrade later.

 

[Protein]

How is playing 1080p on a 1440p monitor?

 

[TrounceX]

Strange, maybe it is a problem with older models? There's an old hardocp thread from someone with the same problem. It's exactly what I get too with lightboost engaged

http://imgur.com/a/9CuAC

Almost like colors are at a lower bit depth (or like colors are running at a lower resolution, if such a thing was even possible). The dotted look goes away when disabling lightboost but colors are still pretty bad.

Yep, that's it! My old Asus was just like that with the lightboost enabled. It was basically unplayable. I have no idea what's going on with it though.

My new one is nothing like that btw. Very weird.

 

[metareferential]

Well, I feel like a lot of the praise for G-Sync come from the perspective of people playing with V-Sync on and sensitive to tearing, but if you usually play with V-Sync off and don't care about tearing, then G-Sync is absolutely not worth the money.

It doesn't just eliminate tearing, it has other benefits in image stability and quality (coupled with a high refresh rate).

But yes, if you don't care / are not sensitive to such artifacts, no need for it.

In fact, you don't even need high performance. You can just crank everything to the max and play whatever framerate blob comes out of the gpu.

 

[Lemmi]

I followed this guide from Reddit, including installing the .icc profile. The profile is the piece that really makes a big difference imo.

I would also recommend looking up the lightboost app by toasty and getting that working. Lightboost made just as much of a difference to me as the jump to 144hz.

Cheers! I'll try this.

 

[120v]

How is playing 1080p on a 1440p monitor?

personally, i hate it. i switch back to 1440p every time, no matter the performance cost

 

[ss_lemonade]

I followed this guide from Reddit, including installing the .icc profile. The profile is the piece that really makes a big difference imo.

I would also recommend looking up the lightboost app by toasty and getting that working. Lightboost made just as much of a difference to me as the jump to 144hz.

Don't profiles not work in certain instances, like when gaming in exclusive fullscreen?

 

[Arulan]

Until we get to the point where refresh rates are so high that the steps between the intervals (e.g. 120, 60, 40, 30, 20, and 15 on a 120Hz display) are incredibly small, then variable refresh rate technologies such as G-sync will be incredibly useful.

For a 144Hz display it's incredibly useful because the distance between the first step 144 and the second 72 is significant, and a range you'd likely find yourself in in terms of real-world gaming performance. I would most certainly buy a high refresh rate display with G-sync.

 

[Krappadizzle]

The g-sync hype from the thread is killing me. That 1440p Dell is looking even more delicious now. What's the return policy with Amazon in case I get a bad apple?

Contact them, pack it back up, ship it back. Amazon's been great with returns for me in regards to faulty products. If you are unsure, just contact them and ask about the monitor is question.