[AnandTech] Nvidia G-Sync Review

Status
Not open for further replies.
Looking forward to add G-Sync to my monitor, it sounds like a game changer!
 
Knil said:
Vsync above 60 FPS still gives extra input lag.
Click to expand...
Mind explaining how that's possible?

With V-sync on and ample GPU power, you're delivering a frame once every 16.67ms.
The maximum rate at which a 60Hz monitor can update is once every 16.67ms.

If you disable V-Sync you allow the graphics card to render frames faster, but you'll still only get a screen-full of new data once every 16.67ms (and plenty of tearing to go along with it).
 
Unknown-One said:
Mind explaining how that's possible?

With V-sync on and ample GPU power, you're delivering a frame once every 16.67ms.
The maximum rate at which a 60Hz monitor can update is once every 16.67ms.

If you disable V-Sync you allow the graphics card to render frames faster, but you'll still only get a screen-full of new data once every 16.67ms (and plenty of tearing to go along with it).
Click to expand...

Not every game tears with vsync off nor is everyone as sensitive to such tearing too. I didn't enjoy vsync on with bf4 stock settings, I can tell you that much.
 
Unknown-One said:
Mind explaining how that's possible?

With V-sync on and ample GPU power, you're delivering a frame once every 16.67ms.
The maximum rate at which a 60Hz monitor can update is once every 16.67ms.

If you disable V-Sync you allow the graphics card to render frames faster, but you'll still only get a screen-full of new data once every 16.67ms (and plenty of tearing to go along with it).
Click to expand...

Try a competitive shooter like Quake Live that caps at 125 fps with Vsync,..have fun getting your ass kicked.
 
Venomous said:
Not every game tears with vsync off
Click to expand...
If there's no tearing with v-sync off... then the card is (purely by chance) completing frames at exactly the right moment that they coincide with a display refresh.

V-Sync simply forces this behavior to occur all the time.

Feellia said:
Try a competitive shooter like Quake Live that caps at 125 fps with Vsync,..have fun getting your ass kicked.
Click to expand...
Again, why? If you have a 60Hz monitor, the minimum time between display redraws is 16.67ms no matter what you do.

Unless we're talking about some quake-engine specific bug (like jump-height being tied to framerate due to an improper physics tickrate implementation in Quake 3).

As long as you're using triple-buffering, your graphics card is still free to render as fast as it can internally.
- The GPU will continually overwrite the backbuffers (alternating back and forth between them so that a completed frame is always available in one of the buffers).
- When a display refresh hits, the backbuffer with the most-recently-completed frame is re-addressed as the front-buffer and is read out to the display.
- The previous front-buffer is re-addressed as a back-buffer and is then overwritten with new data as the GPU continues to alternate overwriting the dual backbuffers.
- Process repeats

You're always getting the most recent frame your GPU was capable of completing, so where the heck is this latency hit you're talking about?
 
Last edited:
I just down loaded the Vid and basically if you can hold 60fps Vsync then there is no visual difference besides input lag, but Vsync at 45fps is really juddery but with GSync it did look smooth but 45fps for me is a real rarity.

Its defiantly a plus for people who can't hold 60fps, but i would of liked to see varying fps with Gsync on and not a fixed 45fps.
 
Final8ty said:
I just down loaded the Vid and basically if you can hold 60fps Vsync then there is no visual difference besides input lag, but Vsync at 45fps is really juddery but with GSync it did look smooth but 45fps for me is a real rarity.

Its defiantly a plus for people who can't hold 60fps, but i would of liked to see varying fps with Gsync on and not a fixed 45fps.
Click to expand...

Maybe Mantle will change things, but it's very stupidly rare to be able to hold a particular FPS rate. Further, if you're not hitting your refresh rate *exactly*, you're getting tearing.

G-Sync is a revolution in that it fixes all of these issues at the same time.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Maybe Mantle will change things, but it's very stupidly rare to be able to hold a particular FPS rate. Further, if you're not hitting your refresh rate *exactly*, you're getting tearing.

G-Sync is a revolution in that it fixes all of these issues at the same time.
Click to expand...

Except the root cause of how LCD's process/display the image.
 
LordEC911 said:
Except the root cause of how LCD's process/display the image.
Click to expand...

G-Sync won't fix LCDs- shining a light through an array of prisms is never going to produce 'perfect' output- but it is a needed standard that will see relevance in everything from smart watches to theater projectors.
 
Non-isochronous display updates will eventually become standardized, but G-Sync won't be that standard. G-Sync is a stepping stone to that, and a way for NVIDIA to make a few clams in the interim.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
As a brand, no- but the technology to properly sync rendering circuitry with display circuitry is, and that's G-Sync.
Click to expand...

It is still using/relying on an outmoded display technology/interface.
Obviously it is still far too early to tell how well G-Sync will do.

There are already other solutions in the works right now that won't require a proprietary add-on.
 
Last edited:
IdiotInCharge said:
Maybe Mantle will change things, but it's very stupidly rare to be able to hold a particular FPS rate. Further, if you're not hitting your refresh rate *exactly*, you're getting tearing.

G-Sync is a revolution in that it fixes all of these issues at the same time.
Click to expand...

I did say with Vsync so no there is no tearing.
 
Final8ty said:
I did say with Vsync so no there is no tearing.
Click to expand...

Obviously not everyone can maintain 60 in every AAA game. Not unless your GPUs are pretty hefty and/or you're not playing a super demanding game. Furthermore, vsync introduces input lag. Vsync doesn't do what g-sync does, because vsync is a lesser of two evils type of approach; if you drop below 60 fps you will see stutter and tearing, whereas even if you're pinned at 60 fps you get input lag. It's not an ideal solution either way. I'll also add that even *IF* you're pinned at 60 fps, which most gamers won't be in super demanding games - you can simply up the image quality to higher levels and still play a game at sub 60 fps with complete smoothness.

G-sync provides smoothness even at sub 60 fps (which, let's be realistic - not all gamers have dual GPUs that can run BF4 or Crysis 3 maxed out at 60 fps solid), and will work in all games assuming you buy into the ecosystem with a g-sync monitor. It also eliminates input lag. I fail to see anything that isn't great about g-sync, except the fact that more monitors need it. That is something nvidia is apparently working on. I'd personally like to see a few IPS panels with a g-sync module, i'd imagine viewsonic will be working on something along those lines (they signed on to produce g-sync monitors).
 
Last edited:
Yeah and by the looks of it, it will keep you loyal to Nvidia since it will be something no one would want to give up in gaming respects. I'm not sure how this will play out for AMD.
 
xoleras said:
Obviously not everyone can maintain 60 in every AAA game. Not unless your GPUs are pretty hefty and/or you're not playing a super demanding game. Furthermore, vsync introduces input lag. Vsync doesn't do what g-sync does, because vsync is a lesser of two evils type of approach; if you drop below 60 fps you will see stutter and tearing, whereas even if you're pinned at 60 fps you get input lag. It's not an ideal solution either way.

G-sync provides smoothness even at sub 60 fps (which, let's be realistic - not all gamers have dual GPUs that can run BF4 or Crysis 3 maxed out at 60 fps solid), and will work in all games assuming you buy into the ecosystem with a g-sync monitor. It also eliminates input lag. I fail to see anything that isn't great about g-sync, except the fact that more monitors need it. That is something nvidia is apparently working on.
Click to expand...

Yes i know everything that you said already and i already said that Vsync gives input lag and for me personally that is the only obvious benefit for me but im not going to pay extra for it .
 
Venomous said:
Yeah and by the looks of it, it will keep you loyal to Nvidia since it will be something no one would want to give up in gaming respects. I'm not sure how this will play out for AMD.
Click to expand...

If it catches on, hopefully VESA would introduce some sort of industry standard that could be widely adopted. I can't blame nvidia for keeping g-sync close to their ecosystem, because they invested millions of dollars into the R+D for it. So it's their baby, can't blame them. That said, an industry standard would be great and I would be 100% for that. I just don't expect nvidia to do that because it isn't in their interest as a publicly traded company - they want to sell nvidia products (GPUs) and the best way to do that is.....keeping g-sync proprietary. I would love for this to be adopted in some form or fashion on a wide scale for everything, though, and not just for PC games. The only BAD thing about industry standards is that they take years to finalize and complete as all players argue and debate how to implement it. This is practically how VESA operates, everything takes years to complete in terms of standards; it could happen down the road but it will be a while yet. Or perhaps AMD could make their own version? I don't know.
 
Final8ty said:
Yes i know everything that you said already and i already said that Vsync gives input lag and for me personally that is the only obvious benefit for me but im not going to pay extra for it .
Click to expand...

A list for the challenged:

Naked, no V-Sync or G-Sync: you get tearing, because your GPU will never be in sync with your monitor, rendering both at the same rate and refreshing at the same time

V-Sync: no more tearing, but introduces stuttering and (perceived) input lag due to waiting for the next monitor refresh when missed

G-Sync: monitor refreshes when GPU sends a completed frame, meaning no tearing, no stuttering from V-Sync (no effect on rendering engines etc.), and no input lag


I know it's not easy to understand, but it really is that simple.

And as for AMD- support will probably coming sooner rather than later, given that G-Sync operates within the DisplayPort standard. Whether there are licensing issues involved and how difficult it will be for AMD (or anyone else) to implement the G-Sync protocol remains to be seen, but AMD could very likely include support in their next generation of cards if they can't/won't implement support in their current lineup.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
V-Sync: no more tearing, but introduces stuttering and (perceived) input lag due to waiting for the next monitor refresh when missed
Click to expand...

So as i said no tearing.
Also watched the other Video explaining the Vsync 1, 2 pause=same image twice, 3, which happens IF the buffer misses the 16ms window because it took longer to draw in the buffer which the higher up the GPU scale you go the less that is going to happen as long as you have more than enough GPU grunt for the the resolutions and settings being played at and that's not taking into account Multi GPU which is even less likely to miss the 16ms window.
 
Final8ty said:
So as i said no tearing.
Also watched the other Video explaining the Vsync 1, 2 pause=same image twice, 3, which happens IF the buffer misses the 16ms window because it took longer to draw in the buffer which the higher up the GPU scale you go the less that is going to happen as long as you more than enough GPU grunt for the the resolutions and settings being played at and that's not taking into account Multi GPU which is even less likely to miss the 16ms window.
Click to expand...

Then turn it on and enjoy it!


/s
 
But It could be said that Gsync negates the need for a beefy setup.
But while Gsync gets rid of tearing without the Input lag, it does not get around the inherent fact of low FPS will be less responses than higher FPS.
 
Last edited:
Final8ty said:
But It could be said that Gsync negates the need for a beefy setup.
But while Gsync gets rid of tearing without the Input lag, it does not get around the inherent fact of low FPS will be less responses than higher FPS.
Click to expand...


That's true- but there's no other way to get rid of the tearing AND the input lag, and that means a whole lot regardless of how fast the game is running, which can be influenced by various settings, meaning that G-Sync brings with it a greater 'margin' for customizing the quality level of games, given that framerates vary significantly in strenuous games.

Of course, Mantle-like technology might make games run a whole lot smoother, too; ideally, we would be able to get both at the same time :).
 
Venomous said:
Yeah and by the looks of it, it will keep you loyal to Nvidia since it will be something no one would want to give up in gaming respects. I'm not sure how this will play out for AMD.
Click to expand...
The prevailing opinion seems to be that AMD and Intel may have an opportunity to interface their hardware with G-Sync in the same way NVIDIA is doing. The module itself appears to be isolated from anything vendor-specific, as it's reportedly just responding to packets. That doesn't necessarily preclude any weird obfuscation NVIDIA is doing, but it seems as though there's at least a door there.

Final8ty said:
But It could be said that Gsync negates the need for a beefy setup.
But while Gsync gets rid of tearing without the Input lag, it does not get around the inherent fact of low FPS will be less responses than higher FPS.
Click to expand...
Less responsive and less smooth, yes. G-Sync 'solves' the smoothness equation on the output side, but unless you have reasonable consistency on the rasterization side — which you're only likely to get from consistently low frame times via beefy hardware — you've only really solved half of the problem.
 
xoleras said:
Vsync doesn't do what g-sync does, because vsync is a lesser of two evils type of approach; if you drop below 60 fps you will see stutter and tearing
Click to expand...
Incorrect, v-sync prevents tearing at ALL times.

Nvidia's special "Adaptive v-sync" implementation does what you described, though. It disables v-sync when your GPU can't maintain 60 FPS, giving you additional smoothness at the expense of tearing.

xoleras said:
whereas even if you're pinned at 60 fps you get input lag.
Click to expand...
I'm still not sure where this idea is coming from. I even went over the entire (triple-buffered) v-sync process flow in this thread... if your GPU is maintaining a framerate in excess of your refresh rate at all times, there should be no additional input lag :confused:
 
Spazturtle said:
Phys-X, you mean that thing NVIDA loses money on? They have to pay developers to use it, Phys-X is one of the slowest physics engines out their, even running on NVIDIA GPUs their are faster phys engines.
Click to expand...

Wow, didn't realize we had an NV executive on the boards?!?! I mean to know the exact financials of NV and the affects PhysX has had on the bottom line must mean you are pretty high up in the company....OR....you don't know WTF you are talking about and are just making an assumption.

If you indeed do not work for NV the only other reasoning for your statement could be you read Richard Huddy's BS interview (Thinq) a few years back in which Huddy couldn't even back up his comments with facts and no devs came forward to support him.

It is obvious PhysX was a worthy investment if NV and devs are continuing to support it. It must make them money in the long run if they continue to market the technology and use it as a selling point of the cards. If PhysX was the money pit you obviously have first hand knowledge it is and can confirm it then why would NV push it to the next gen consoles?

PhysX is obviously not as gimped as you claim it is in terms of performance since devs (games/hardware) keep using it.

Spazturtle said:
They have to pay developers to use it
Click to expand...

Hey pot, kettle called! What do you think AMD did with EA/DICE on Battlefield 4?

Spazturtle said:
Why would people buy a monitor that only works with one brand of GPU?
Click to expand...

Considering NV had 64% market share (JPR) of discrete graphics in Q3 that is a huge amount of end users that would be interested in G-sync. Since G-Sync is obviously targeted at enthusiasts or those willing to add $100-200 premium to gain the benefits of G-Sync the market must be there.

Also have yet to read confirmation the G-Sync enabled monitors lock out other GPU's. G-Sync will only work on the NV cards so if you are dumb enough to buy a G-Sync enabled monitor and run an AMD card then you have bigger problems and probably should wear a helmet.

Spazturtle said:
G-Sync is nothing like Mantel, Mantel is an API that allows devs to better optimise apps for the GCN arch.
Click to expand...

Mantle is exactly like G-Sync. It is a proprietary tech by a GPU manufacturer that "promises" smoother game play and/or better performance. While you are correct they are different types of technology (hardware vs software) they are both identical in the fact they will be used by their creators to sell GPU's. How you don't understand that is amazing!
 
Cr4ckm0nk3y said:
Mantle is exactly like G-Sync. It is a proprietary tech by a GPU manufacturer that "promises" smoother game play and/or better performance. While you are correct they are different types of technology (hardware vs software) they are both identical in the fact they will be used by their creators to sell GPU's. How you don't understand that is amazing!
Click to expand...
I think his point is that G-Sync doesn't actually do anything propriety from the controller side. It's all 100% within the DisplayPort spec. There are already tablets that use on-the-fly variable refresh rates over embedded DisplayPort as a power-saving feature.

Basically, any video card can manipulate v-blank timing over DisplayPort and control a G-Sync monitor.
 
Last edited:
Havin not read this, I use a 144hz monitor and never ever have vsync on. I don't really notice screen tearing in the games i play. Does g-sync benefit me at all ?
 
Brownstone said:
Havin not read this, I use a 144hz monitor and never ever have vsync on. I don't really notice screen tearing in the games i play. Does g-sync benefit me at all ?
Click to expand...
Only if you get a new monitor that supports g-sync...

If you have a monitor that supports g-sync, enabling it certainly wont hurt anything. It'll just get rid of all tearing (with none of v-sync's potential side-effects).
 
A good solution now is preferable to a perfect solution later, assuming the good-now solution doesn't preclude the possibility of the perfect-later solution, which G-Sync doesn't.
 
Why would you care about wide market support ?

All you need is one good monitor with g-sync that fits your preferences and you are set for next few years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top